Interinstitutional Faculty Senate Meeting

Shared WOU’s “Harassment Allegations and Policies” because of the recent WOU harassment lawsuit against a WOU faculty member by a former adult student, which was settled for $65,000. President Conn fought for the suit to go to court to ensure an open process, but the Department of Justice requested a settlement process.
Shared that assault and theft can be dealt with clearly. It is much more difficult to deal with sexual harassment issues because of consensual issues, campus governance, and litigation.
Shared WOU policy on discrimination and harassment (last revised on January 4, 2005).
Discussed WOU policy on consensual relationships (last revised on January 28, 2005). There is a lot of gray territory. Some schools say employees can have no relationships with students. Some schools say that it is at the discretion of the students and employees. Our policy is more moderate.
Mentioned that all campuses are providing reports related to their sexual harassment details at the June Board Meeting.
Shared that WOU relies on a three-part policy process involving the faculty senate, staff senate, and student senate.
Stated that in addition to policy that these issues should be handled by peer pressure. There has been a shift in public acceptability (not accepted by the public today).
Noted that the cash settlements have resulted in other suits coming forward (the cash is a motivator). Some people are opportunistic. It is difficult to determine legitimate claims from frivolous ones.
Mentioned that student groups oppose (for philosophical reasons) a policy that allows no student/faculty relationships.
Discussed as IFS peers that harassment goes both ways (students can harass faculty). In terms of the power equation it is shifting toward students simply because the student can make a claim. The pressure would be to settle. Also, reporting can become a weapon. For example, if a third party could report it for reasons that are not noble. Because of this and other complications, blanket policies are not a good idea.
Shared a memo appointing a “task force for consideration of policies and practices regarding sexual harassment and consensual relationships.” This action is part of the response to Chancellor Pernsteiner’s request for: 1 ) a compendium of your current policies and procedures and those which they so recently replaced; 2) an assessment of their efficacy; 3) an assessment of campus practices and beliefs surrounding these matters; and 4) recommendations for additional or changed policies.
Closed that there is no one size fits all answer. Three things are important to do: 1) let faculty and staff know that there is an approach to dealing with complaints; 2) use faculty peer influence and peer pressure; and 3) have policies that can be understood—clear and comprehensible.
Followed with discussion. One IFS member mentioned that we need a black and white policy (no tolerance) because of the power differential. Another stated that we need a clear and known process.

III. Gretchen Schuette, President of Chemeketa Community College, OUS Board Member, and OUS Chair of the Excellence and Delivery Committee (More, Better, Faster)

Began by discussing Senate Bill 342 (which started as common course numbering and has changed significantly in the process). Explained her vision of the outcome-based framework for articulation and transfer--section 2 (c) of the amendment, which states “Oregon community colleges and state universities of higher education shall develop an outcomes-based framework for articulation and transfer that is derived from a common understanding of the criteria for General Education curricula.”
Responded with “no” when asked if community colleges have a parallel group to the OUS IFS group. We should have a conversation that would encourage community colleges to identify individuals for discussing curricular issues with OUS.
Discussed the challenge of a community college organization like IFS because every community college is local, and we do not have an overall governance structure. Chemeketa has no faculty senate. We have a faculty union. It is different at every community college, so it would take time and thought to determine how to bring the faculty into a discussion. It could be housed in curriculum. An IFS member mentioned that individual programs have shining examples of articulation.
Discussed as a group how the erosion of the quality of education in the state seems to be an after thought. We are focused on saving money. We are not keeping our eye on the ball. We are focusing on the budget. If we simply focus on the budget, we will hurt ourselves. “We are in a sorry state.” [laughs] It is the multi-biennium disinvestment.
Mentioned that we have been silent about the national crisis in education. Everyone is saying we are in a sustained crisis for funding for post-secondary education. Where is the leadership that is asking us to address this? We need to do something differently because we will not have the resources. As we look at the projections for finances, we must figure out a different approach.
Discussed as a group UO Professor David Conley’s presentation from the morning’s Board meeting. It would be nice to articulate what we expect as outcomes. However, the approach has some flaws such as the idea that all students fit into one box and that the end products will be imposed from the top down. Two flaws to Conley’s approach: 1) all students fit into one box; 2) he is proposing assessment tools that will come down to faculty to do. Teaching to a test does not improve teaching. These issues need to be thought about before one buys into his ideas. [Bob] The methods to getting to these end products have been imposed from the top down. It could give us something to gather around.
An IFS member mentioned that there is a larger crisis in higher education. Our greatest mission is to find the bridge between the crisis in higher education and the crisis in our lives. We have lost sight of the “for the common good.” It is a much larger crisis.

IV. Ed Watson, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Linn-Benton Community College and Chair, Joints Boards Articulation Commission (JBAC)

A. Discussed the work being done with the OTM. This includes the following key points: 1) academic advising is an essential element of OTM implementation and 2) general education should be offered within an outcome-based framework.

B. Mentioned that it might be time to rethink the AAOT. It’s a compromise degree that incorporates some but not all of the general education requirements of all our institutions. It is a good vehicle for students who start at community colleges or move around a lot.

C. Stated that the JBAC vision is to have faculty from the universities and community colleges identify common outcomes for subject areas. Are you talking about revisiting the AAOT to more model the OTM? Yes, but we never defined common criteria for the AAOT.

D. Discussed as a group how courses that look the same on paper can be very different depending on if an experienced faculty member or a graduate student is teaching the class. Quality is important. How do we ensure quality?

E. Discussed as a group how the AAOT would not work with a chemical engineering degree at OSU (with calculus based physics). The AAOT does not work without advising. Some students get plugged into the AAOT and do not think about their major until their junior year. This is where students run into issues within a major. We need to find a way to let students know that if you want one type of degree, then it will work, but if you expect that it will jump start you on a biology degree, it will not happen. It will take you 4 years of science to complete a biology degree.

V. George Pernsteiner, Interim Chancellor, OUS

Stated that JBAC has received a recommendation to put a faculty member on the commission and asked us to forward a name or names of people.
Responded (IFS members) that we would appreciate two faculty members on the commission: one from the big universities and one from the regional schools. We need to be involved when the curriculum is articulated.
Asked to provide his staff with the names of people we would like to speak at round two of the Ways and Means public meetings on April 28. The house co-chair removed the faculty salary increase from the budget, so we need to make sure we get this back on the radar screen. The May revenue forecast will come out May 13 and the hope is that it will be higher than the March forecast.
Discussed OUS files reviewed since 1979 that show all sexual harassment complaints as being relatively few in numbers. It is still a campus climate issue, so how do the campuses address this? I care about a clear and safe process for complaints. Focus on the complaint process, so we understand what we are supposed to do. I am looking to presidents for statement of policy, complaint process, and how information is communicated.

VI. Jem Spectar, Provost, WOU

Began by mentioning that Senate Bill 3154 tells us much about the times we live in. Through this bill, the people of Oregon want the State Board to develop reasonable standards of behavior for faculty and to develop sanctions if faculty don’t follow these standards. This tells us about the times we live in. We see the academy as a place where talented people who have given up material awards dedicate themselves to a noble task. It has been a self-regulating body throughout its history. Many rules govern our behavior. These are rooted in canons that are internal to the academy and this internal pressure is more meaningful than outside regulations. The person proposing the bill does not understand our profession. There is much that is praiseworthy about what is happening in the academy. The evidence speaks for itself. What we are doing has worked and is working. So when I look at the state—these demands for accountability—the tone—they point to a climate of mistrust. The mistrust points to a deficit of goodwill. Goodwill is in short supply when we see a bill like this.
Eloquently explained that it is important to let legislators know that if we expand access it will affect faculty work and faculty. Over 45% of my entering students are composed of first-generation students. The task of generating first-generation students is a noble task. If one generation gets out of poverty, it helps the next generation. However, if we expand access, there are actual costs to the academy. There are transaction costs.
Responded to a question about how IFS can help him. You are already doing the work. It is a lot easier to be a general than to be on the front lines. As administrators we should devise more effective ways to support the faculty. Each day you touch students and you impact students in ways that are not known. Keep doing exactly what you are doing. Each day I try to reinforce your efforts. When you reach that one student and you cause a fire and this causes a brushfire, this is a special thing. In Africa, professors were elevated. These things should matter here. Above all, we should reinforce to each student that they matter. We build capacity. Everyone in the university has the capacity. What I see as the crisis is that the students don’t see that they are in charge of their lives.
Stated profoundly that in a way educators in higher education are becoming antiquated because we have these lives that cannot be well explained by the units of measures of our society.
Stated that we live in a society where what we do is not rewarded. How do you compare a $50M salary of a basketball player to a $30K salary of a professor? The academy is in danger from a society that is anti-intellectual at a time when the units of measure do not apply to what we do.
Shared that he has always said, “A sound liberal education hones the head and tempers the heart and cultivates an ethos for society.” It is a noble calling. I still believe. It is not just another job. We know the richness of an inner life…the capacity to understand your inner world. To think about your world in creative ways, this counts for something, and it counts for more than material wealth. It is still a noble calling.

Saturday, April 9, 2005, 8:00 a.m.

Present: Mina Carson (OSU), Larry Curtis (OSU), Paul Doescher (OSU), Grant Farr (PSU), Marye Hefty (OIT), Robert Mercer (PSU), Maureen Sevigny (OIT), Steve Teich (OHSU), Nathan Tublitz (UO), Bob Turner (WOU), Jeanne Wagenknecht (UO)

Absent: Lee Ayers (SOU), Scott Burns (PSU), Sarah Andrews-Collier (PSU), Paul Engelking (UO), Dick Fairley (OHSU), Peter Gilkey (UO), Solveig Holmquist (WOU), Katie Lasater (OHSU), Muriel Shaul (OHSU), Marny Rivera (SOU), Steve Tanner (EOU), Jim Tooke (EOU)

I. Provost Council Report, Maureen Sevigny

A. Reported that legislators asked provosts to provide more performance indictors for their work in the legislative session (e.g., pass rates on license exams, faculty diversity).

B. Stated that Senator Gordly asked provosts to provide information about what ethics courses their schools teach.

C. Reported that the UO registrar office will change the academic calendar for 2009-2010 because of Yom Kippur. UO will start on Tuesday in honor of this holiday.

D. Noted that because of limited space, a joint facility (Regional Library Services Center) is being discussed for library space for campuses (Orbis/Cascade).

E. Mentioned the continuing new program reviews including the SOU post-baccalaureate certificate in nonprofit management, the OIT B.S. in mechanical engineering, and the UO external review for M.A. /M.S. conflict and dispute resolution.

F. Reported lots of discussion about the proposed legislative budget cut to the chancellor’s office ($700,000 which is a 60% cut).

G. Noted that when discussed related to a tuition freeze, students want to preserve the Oregon Opportunity Grant.

H. Discussed as a group the issue of more no tenure-track instructional faculty being hired than tenure-track professors and the equality problems this causes and the impact on quality. What is in the best interest of the student? Fully qualified, tenured, committed faculty members. The percentage of tenured-track to nontenured-track instructional facility has gone from 19% to 49% in 20 years at UO. The entire academy is being shifted. Decided to put the issue on the agenda for the June meeting for possible action.

II. ATLAS—Robert Mercer

A. Reported that in the second round of the legislative session that Ways and Means is proposing ½ of the new funding from the legislature and ½ from the Chancellor’s office.

III. OUS Board Report—Bob Turner

Stated that the OSA representative wants to retain the opportunity grant (if choosing between a freeze and this).
Mentioned several legislative issues including Senate Bill 300 (Gordly’s bill) to enable high school students to take joint high school and college courses and Senate Bill 342 related to developing common course numbering. We need to interact with the community colleges to accomplish what is in here. I am concerned about the impact of the outcomes-based general education language and the cost of the online degree audit system that is in this bill; it has a financial impact.
Discussed preparing a succinct and powerful message for the April 28 legislative hearing. Nominated as a group Scott Burns to accompany Bob Turner to this.

IV. Discussion on Assembling Campus Harassment and Consensual Relationship Statements—Jeanne Wagenknecht

Reported that her research has shown that the presidents are researching this more than adequately. Each of the university presidents was asked by the Chancellor to share harassment policies at each campus.
Shared the following 1-page UO policy statement 1.000 Administrative Organization and Procedures from http://policies.uoregon.edu/ch1 affirmation.html, which reads as follows:

Title: University of Oregon Affirmation of Community Standards

Purpose: To set forth and affirm a clear and cogent statement of common community standards.

The University of Oregon community is dedicated to the advancement of knowledge and the development of integrity. In order to thrive and excel, this community must preserve the freedom of thought and expression of all its members. The University of Oregon has a long and illustrious history in the area of academic freedom and freedom of speech. A culture of respect that honors the rights, safety, dignity and worth of every individual is essential to preserve such freedom. We affirm our respect for the rights and well-being of all members.

We further affirm our commitment to:

Respect the dignity and essential worth of all individuals.

Promote a culture of respect throughout the University community.

Respect the privacy, property, and freedom of others.

Reject bigotry, discrimination, violence, or intimidation of any kind.

Practice personal and academic integrity and expect it from others.

Promote the diversity of opinions, ideas and backgrounds which is the lifeblood of the university.

Unanimously endorsed by the Faculty Advisory Council-- March 29, 2000. Endorsed on a vote of 13-3 by the UO Student Senate-- March 29, 2000. Unanimously endorsed by the University Senate--April 12, 2000. Approved by President's Small Executive Staff and Promulgated as Policy on April 13, 2000

Asked us to look at this statement and other statements “to move to the higher ground” and not provide a prescriptive statement but a statement of ethical standards.
Discussed getting corporate input from Kirby Dyess (corporate ethics statements from Nike, INTEL, and IBM) before moving forward.
Reaffirmed as a group that the IFS Standing Committee in Ethics and Harassment is led by Jeanne Wagenknecht and Nathan and the ATLAS Standing Committee is led by Robert Mercer.

V. Sick Leave and Vacation Leave Donation Issue

A. Discussed an OSU faculty senate effort to support a move to extend the ability for employees to donate unused vacation leave to a colleague for sick leave. Bob Turner explained the WOU sick leave bank. At WOU, individuals can donate their unused sick leave to a “bank” and other individuals can withdraw from the bank based on requirements. Bob Turner will contact Ben Rawlins (OUS legal counsel) about this being something we want to establish across the seven institutions.

VI. Campus Reports

Eastern Oregon University

OIT—We are starting self-study 10-year accreditation process. The Faculty Senate passed a resolution for a compensation plan this week. The IT director quit. The NAIA Basketball teams both made it to nationals.

OSU—Senate Executive is talking to athletics about consistent rules/policies. A parking structure is being built near the stadium. New dining facilities are being built, and a brew pub is being opened on campus (McMenamin’s). The provost search continues. The diversity report has come out, and it identified several areas for improvement. Assessment planning is going forward.

UO—There is a $600M capital campaign and $300M is for athletics. The track coach was fired. James Earl and Nathan Tublitz helped start a national Coalition of Intercollegiate Athletics. At this time, there are 47 university senate members. A 75-point document this body produced was approved in 47 senates. The URL for this organization is http://www.math.umd.edu/~jmc/COIA/COIA-Home.html. The UO hired a new vice president of diversity and equity and a new vice president of finance.

PSU—A large body of accreditation materials in preparation for the visit is online. The men’s basketball team won the Big Sky. PSU hired a new provost and hired a new vice president for finance and administration. A search is taking place for a new director of the library. We are looking at budget reductions (our projections are a 3 to 5 M hit because of PEBB and PERS hits). We are dedicated not to cut across the board. We are trying to make selective cuts. The administration is working directly with the faculty budget committee.

OHSU—We are in the middle of accreditation process. The waterfront river campus is making progress. There are two new construction projects 1) patient tower and 2) a research building. In the library, we have been asked to prepare 10 to 20 percent cut scenarios.

SOU Campus Report submitted April 13, 2005 by Lee Ayers

We are in the process of completing a director of security search, and our new VP of finance is fully onboard. THe Senate hosted a Faculty roles and responsibility talk/panel with Provost Potter and the discussion of how to reshape promotion and tenure continues. Scholarship seems to be a big issue. What is it? (the United States Supreme Court version, when I see it?). The departments/units have ben asked to create a blue print for their departments and the school level will over see the matrix (confused???so are many, ...there is much more to come on this).

In addition to that:
Comments from Provost Potter
a) Enrollment: Spring enrollments down 2.8% over last year. Summer enrollment is running significantly behind*more students may need to work. Fall term applications down 9.1%. Distribution of applications has shifted to Jackson/Josephine counties. Yield rate from these counties is about 60% as opposed to 34-35% for all applications.

b)Faculty calling is extremely important in securing a commitment from students to enroll at SOU. The Provost understands how many extra requests are being made of the faculty. This is a particularly challenging year; recruiting efforts will make a big impact on the SOU budget and that will benefit everyone (this has been going on for years, so it is not a new activity....just need attention).

We are also proceeding with our conversation for administrative faculty and administrators to just be known as administrators. There are some items still left in the fine print to deal with, but folks know the changes are coming and focus groups, work groups, and hours of negotiations have come to a final closing that will take effect July 1, 2005. It is my understanding that the other OUS schools have already completed this conversion.

WOU—We are looking for dean of college of liberal arts and sciences. The President is leaving. The sexual harassment story has died down a little. We are making an effort to ensure we don’t have a 30% ending fund balance. The Provost is funding learning communities. We have a new position, which is a director of assessment and grants officer. We hired a new vice president for finance.

VII. OUS Faculty nominees to JBAC

A. The motion was made and passed that we nominate Maureen Sevigny from the OUS faculty to JBAC and we request that we be allowed to nominate a second person.

VIII. Discussion of Curriculum Issue

Discussed changes in the nursing curriculum. The nursing consortium is a statewide group coordinated by people at OHSU and involving members of the community colleges. The primary goal is to create more bachelor-degree trained nurses. In the move to get more students through the system, it appears that they eliminated the chemistry and higher math to make it easier for students, and made several other changes of concern. The prerequisites have been changed so OUS has a year to do this, and then the students are admitted into OHSU. The market driving forces are enormous. This appears to be a poster child for articulation gone crazy. It is speeding up a process to get more people through the system at the expense of quality. We would like to hear a justification for why the nursing standards are being changed when the problem is a shortage of qualified nursing professors, not a shortage of qualified students applying to the nursing program. Our biggest battle is maintaining control of our curriculum. Maybe we need a statewide nursing test?
Noted that Robert Mercer is meeting with the consortium next week and will report back to us. We will look into inviting a consortium member to an IFS meeting.

IX. Miscellaneous

A. Discussed the June meeting and senator assignments to prepare.

B. Made and approved a motion to adjourn the meeting at 12:24 p.m.