Minutes of the University Senate Meeting January 12, 2005
Present: C. Cherry, D. Eisert, A. Emami, G. Epps, S. Eyster, L. Feldman, L. Freinkel, S. Gary, P. Gilkey, S. Haynes, L. Huaxin, N. Hudson, J. Hurwit, J. Jablonski, K. Kennedy, P. Keyes, L. Lindstrom, S. Maier, W. A. Marcus, A. Mathas, J. McCole, A. McLucas, C. McNelly, L. Moses, M. Pangburn, G. Psaki, M. Raymer, L. Robare, G. Sayre, E. Scott, A. Shaw-Phillips, K. Sheehan, E. Singer, D. Sinha, S. Stoll, J. Wagenknecht, L. Wellman, R. Yang
Excused: C. Lachman, K. McPherson, P. Swangard
Absent: E. Chan, L. Nelson, P. Scher, S. Simmons, S. Wells
Remarks on the Senate Agenda for the remainder of the academic year. Senate
President W. Andrew Marcus welcomed guest OUS Chancellor George Pernsteiner to the meeting and briefly outlined several agenda items for the remaining winter and spring meetings. There will be reports on restructuring of the administration, the administrative response on the recommendations of the Task Force on Athletics, and a state of athletics report from Athletics Director Bill Moos. In addition, Greg Vincent, vice provost for institutional equity and diversity, will speak about the process for improving the diversity climate of the university. In March, he anticipates a panel discussion framed by the work of the Non-Tenure Track Instructional Faculty (NTTIF) committee, and in spring term, possibly a report from the Student Conduct Code Committee regarding progress made toward revising the conduct code.
Remarks for Senior Vice President and Provost John Moseley. Provost Moseley commented briefly about Winter term enrollment, saying it has held-up strongly, slightly exceeding original predictions. Overall, such enrollment strength makes the budget situation look a little better. He added that the university has received approval from the Emergency Board for the bonding to purchase the Williams Bakery Site, with hopes to finalize that agreement in February. Also, the UO Foundation has made an offer to purchase the old Romania Chevrolet site on Franklin Boulevard, which also figures into the campus long-range plans. If it goes through, the UO Foundation would purchase it now, and when the university needs the site it would be able to acquire it from the foundation.
The provost commented that further analysis of the governor’s proposed budget indicated that higher education was treated very well compared to other agencies, and even other sectors of education. He indicated that higher education will be a target in the legislature, but that we will protect our position within the budget as best we can. Further, if the UO can get the governor’s budget and the tuition increases that are implied, we should be able to manage next year without any budget cuts, which was not the case for the last two years. Adequate budget increases are not likely, but the goal is to be able to fund a modest salary increase along with increases in PEBB and PERS.
In a similar vein, the provost said he met with the Senate Budget Committee (SBC) and commented that they had discussed all of these issues in more detail. The budget committee also discussed the library budget and determined that it was somewhat disadvantaged to the sum of approximately $200,000 to $300,000. The SBC is working on adjustments to the library’s budget to see what improvements can be made.
During a question and answer session Mr. Nathan Tublitz, biology, asked if the arena purchase and construction would have the same process for review as the upgrading of Autzen Stadium. Provost Moseley replied that he expected it to be the same process, that is, the Senate Budget Committee will do an analysis and report to the Senate.
Report from Interinstitutional Faculty Senate (IFS) on OUS activities – IFS Senator
Jeanne Wagenknecht, finance, reported that the Oregon Transfer Module (OTM) was passed by IFS and has been endorsed by at least three OUS campuses at this point. When asked if the campus votes were unanimous, Senator Peter Gilkey, mathematics, said it was unanimous with one abstention at Portland State University, and unanimous at both Southern Oregon University and Oregon Institute of Technology.
A member of the community suggested that students, faculty, and staff become involved with fund raising from outside university sources, to help with tsunami relief in Southeast Asia.
President Marcus took a moment to recognize and commend Senator Gilkey, who is just finishing his term as president of the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate, for outstanding efforts and accomplishments in creating a process for faculty voices throughout the Oregon University System to be heard, especially in reference to the Oregon Transfer Module this past year. He remarked that the UO owes him a debt of gratitude for going far beyond his expected duties, and presented him with a copy of Atlas of Oregon signed by members of the senate.
Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Incomplete Grades Policy Implementation Process. Mr. Herb Chereck, Registrar, provided an overview of the procedures that will be implemented to make sure faculty and students understand the new policy of assigning undergraduate students an “F” grade for course work not completed within one year of the incomplete (See US04/05-1 and implementation http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/ dirsen045/IncompleteGradesPolicy.html).
During the fifth week of this term, there will be an email sent to all teaching faculty informing them of the definition for incompletes. There will be a reminder sent out that if not the course is not completed within the year, the grade will be converted to an “F.” In week ten, faculty will receive another email regarding the new policy. Faculty will be encouraged to develop contracts with the students who have incomplete grades and keep the contracts on file in the departmental office in the event the faculty member leaves or is on sabbatical, so there is record of what needs to be done.
Mr. Chereck explained that students will be apprised of the new incomplete grade policy via an email notice the second week of the term after they received an incomplete grade. Also, students applying for graduation will be notified of the new incomplete policy if they have incomplete grades. The new policy begins with incompletes awarded winter 2005. Registrar Chereck said his office will work with departments to generate reports (using the Banner system) to monitor incomplete grades. Finally, if a student’s incomplete is converted to an “F”, a notice will be sent to the student to let them know of the changed grade. The registrar’s office will continue these procedures for the next calendar year.
During a question and answer session Senator Michael Raymer, physics, asked if faculty are required to sign the grade completion contracts with students. Mr. Chereck replied there was some discussion, but there was not overwhelming consensus to require a signed contract. When questioned whether a convert to “F” grade means a student would be ineligible for a degree, Mr. Chereck said certain students whose G.P.A. may drop below 2.0 may need to be reviewed. Thirty days following graduation the registrar’s office seals the transcripts and no further changes are made. Students are not officially awarded their diplomas until thirty days after commencement. Mr. Chereck noted that incomplete grades prior to Winter 2005 would remain as incomplete grades.
Nominations and election of a senator and alternate representative for Interinstitutional Faculty Senate (IFS)—President Marcus asked if there were any nominations from the floor to replace Peter Gilkey who has resigned from the IFS. Senator Gilkey nominated Paul Engelking, chemistry, for the IFS replacement position. Mr. Engelking was elected by acclamation. No nominations were put forward for the IFS alternate representative.
Motion US 04/05 –4 Oregon Transfer Module. Senator Gilkey reported that the Undergraduate Council voted in support of the Oregon Transfer Module (OTM) at its December meeting. Thus, on behalf of the council, he stated that:
The University of Oregon Undergraduate Council (a) approves the Oregon Transfer Module, as endorsed by the Joint Boards Articulation Commission on November 19, 2004, and (b) moves that the University of Oregon University Senate approve the Oregon Transfer Module, as endorsed by the Joint Boards Articulation Commission on November 19, 2004, pending final approval by the Joint Boards of Education.
Senator Gilkey commented this motion gives credit to a student to take courses for one year at a community college and then be able to transfer the general education credits. It specifically reserves each one of the individual universities the right to “top-up” their general education requirement. He continued by stating that passing the motion would improve standards (currently a “D” grade or better is acceptable; the new module requires a grade of “C-“ or better). Senator Gilkey suggested the module would be especially helpful for a community college student who is unfocussed or unclear of what academic avenue to pursue – it provides focus for the first year of course work. He noted that good advising is the key element and is an enormous benefit for students. Lastly, Senator Gilkey that the motion has a political dimension because the Oregon legislature and governor are looking at higher education issues regarding student transfer and articulation simplicity.
President Marcus opened the floor for discussion. Several questions were raised regarding how the module differs from the current practice, how other schools’ course compare to ours, and whether all the module courses count toward the university’s general education requirement. Senator Gilkey explained that the module is only 1 year of course work whereas the current AA/OT transfer degree is two years of course work, and we have not had problems with the quality of course work from students transferring in with that degree. Further, the module course all count toward the UO’s general education requirement but we can add to the requirement as appropriate.
With the discussion completed Motion US 04/05-4 to endorse the Oregon Transfer Module pending final approval by the Board of Education was brought to a voice vote and passed unanimously.
Motion US 04/05 – 2 Communications between University Athletics and the University Senate. President Marcus stated both of following motions arise from recommendations from the President’s Task Force on Athletics initialized in 2001 and from small group meetings between the task force and senators. The task force released its final report and recommendations in May 2004. Two of recommendations are especially relevant to the senate: one relates to reporting activities, the other to the charge of the Intercollegiate Athletic Committee (IAC).
IAC Senate Representative, Kim Sheehan, journalism, introduced the motion on reporting activities by saying that one of the key findings of the task force was that ongoing dialog is essential in order for all parts of the UO to work together in a common cause in pursuit of excellence in both academic and athletics. The IAC supports Motion US04/05-2 as a means for enhanced communication between the Athletics Department, the IAC, the faculty athletics representative, and the university community. It specifically requires three reports during an academic year: (1) from the athletics representative in the fall, (2) from the director of athletics during winter term, and (3) from the IAC chair during spring term. The text of the motion provides a range of topics that can be covered. These reports are designed to provide information from the report giver to the senate, but also allows senate members and the university committee the opportunity to ask questions of the person giving the report with the purpose of further deepening understanding. Text of the motion follows.
Whereas, the President’s Special Task Force on Athletics has made several recommendations regarding the relationship between the UO athletics department and academic programs, and;
Whereas, they have made recommendations to the President about steps that could be taken to further enhance that relationship;
Therefore, be it resolved by the University of Oregon University Senate that the university athletics director, the chair of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC), and the faculty athletics representative should be invited annually to report to the University Senate.
(1) The athletics director shall provide a “State of the Athletics Department” report at the beginning of each winter term. This report should include information on:
a) issues related to student athlete welfare;
b) priorities for the athletics department (and the relation of these priorities to the university mission);
c) the financial status of the athletics department;
d) planned expansion, remodeling or removal of athletics facilities;
e) changes in the status of sports teams;
f) changes in facilities management that might affect the university community;
g) any major violations by the athletics department, and their resolutions;
h) possible roles for faculty governing bodies to assure that academic policies and practices are consistent with supporting the intellectual growth and academic success of student athletes and the viability of athletics as an integral part of campus life;
i) any others topics the athletics director deems relevant to the university community.
(2) The chair of the IAC shall provide an annual report to the University Senate during spring term. This report should cover IAC involvement on the issues stated above and an assessment of the consistency of athletic policies and practices with the academic mission of the university.
(3) The faculty athletics representative shall report to the University Senate during fall term. This report should serve to keep the senate informed on local and national changes in athletics and should also discuss key topics identified by the faculty athletics representative, the senate president, and the IAC chair.
(4) Each report should be followed by an open question and answer session.
(5) Additionally, all reports should be posted at the Senate website and made available to all interested members of the university community.
Senator Gina Psaki, romance languages, suggested that these types of reports be made available a few days before the senate meetings so that senators could come to the meeting better informed to engage in dialog about the report contents. She moved to amend item (5) to insert the words after web site to say “48 hours prior to the senate meeting” The amendment to the motion reads as follows, “Additionally, all reports should be posted at the senate website 48 hours prior to a senate meeting and made available to all interested members of the university community.”
Discussion on the amendment to the motion ranged on whether oral reports were sufficient, whether reports should be finalized after their presentation on the senate, and how detailed the written report (posted ahead of the meeting) would need to be, and that perhaps an outline of the report might suffice. Mr. Jim Isenberg, chair, IAC said he preferred to give the report orally, take questions, then have the chance to include thoughtful answers to those questions in written report. Senator Psaki responded that although the thoughtful answers would be incorporated into the record of the report, she felt there would be more informative input from the senators if there was at least a preview of what the report contains. Other senators agreed. It was pointed out that these reports come once a year from three different sources, thus the extra burden of a written report prior to the meeting did not seem excessive, and the purpose of the reporting was to give rise to informed discussion.
The question to amend item (5) was called and passed by voice vote. Item (5) was amended to read:
(5) Additionally, all reports should be posted at the Senate website 48 hours prior to the senate meeting and made available to all interested members of the university community.
The main motion was again on the floor, as amended. With no further discussion, Motion US04/05-2 regarding communications between the senate and athletics department passed unanimously by voice vote.
Motion US 04/05 – 3- Revision of Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC) Charge and Responsibilities. Mr. Jim Isenberg, chair of the IAC, commented that his committee found that the athletics department is doing a very good job at the UO, and that the recommendations suggested by this motion are to monitor and help athletics continue to do a good job. The key feature of the revised charge and responsibilities is to provide faculty consultation to the athletic department in a number of areas, for example, whether to add or subtract sports, develop new facilities, hire new coaches, and revisions of the games schedules. He noted much of this consultation is already occurring and seems to be working. The motion simply puts ongoing activities in writing; he urged the senate to vote in favor of this motion. Text of Motion US04/05-3 follows:
Whereas, the President’s Special Task Force on Athletics has made several recommendations on the role of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC), the University Senate adopts the following as the charge and responsibilities of the IAC to replace in its entirety the previous charge and responsibilities (all additions to the previous charge and responsibilities are in italics; there are no deletions).
CHARGE & RESPONSIBILITIES
The Intercollegiate Athletics Committee shall:
1. Represent the academic standards of the university as embodied in the University of Oregon Mission Statement in all decisions;
2. Advise the administration, the senate, and the athletics director on any athletics department policy or program, including the athletics department budget;
3. Promote and safeguard opportunities for student athletes to excel in academics and protect and ensure the academic integrity of student athletes; and,
4. Promote greater understanding, for the university community, of intercollegiate athletics and the relationship between academics and athletics.
As part of its function and in order to carry out its governance function, the IAC shall be consulted by:
1. The athletics department on:
a. any proposed changes in departmental recruiting policies, academic advising, expectations regarding student schedules, or any other practice that could affect the academic or financial standing of students who are athletes. The IAC need not to be informed of all changes mandated by the NCAA for student athletes, which fall under the purview of the faculty athletics representative, although the IAC should be notified of any major changes.
b. any decisions, large donations, or commercial offers that potentially change the financial landscape of athletics or might influence university finances outside the athletics department;
c. any decisions that potentially affect the campus environment, including construction, removal, or remodeling of facilities, changes in the timing of facilities use, or changes in permitted uses of facilities;
d. scheduling of athletic events, including scheduling changes made to accommodate other universities or the media except for Saturday football start times;
e. addition or termination of sport teams, or changes in the status of sport teams;
f. the appointment of head coaches for all intercollegiate athletics teams. In cases where an open search process is conducted for head coaching positions, an Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC) faculty member shall be included on the search committee. When the search is abbreviated, the athletics director shall consult with the chair of the IAC.
2. The athletics director, or designee, via the chair of the IAC to determine if changes in athletics department procedures, policies, or activities reach a threshold deserving of attention by the full committee.
3. The faculty athletics representative about all ongoing investigations and major violations.
The Intercollegiate Athletics Committee shall have one subcommittee, an executive committee, consisting of the committee chair, one faculty member, one student and the faculty athletics representative. The executive committee shall be charged with maintaining close and timely communications with the athletics department, through the athletics director or designee. The executive committee shall set the agenda and venue for IAC meetings. The executive committee shall be empowered to call extraordinary meetings of the IAC. The chair of the IAC shall be elected at the final regularly scheduled spring meeting and must be a returning member. The chair of the IAC shall be responsible for forming the executive committee. It is expected that the executive committee shall have regular contact with the athletics department during the summer.
To better educate its committee members to the complexities of university athletics, the IAC shall hold a once yearly retreat prior to the academic year. The retreat shall provide a forum for new members to learn about the role of the IAC in supporting the Mission Statement of the University of Oregon, to learn about administration of campus athletics, and to be informed on issues potentially requiring IAC attention in the year ahead.
Membership of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee is fixed and consists of eighteen (18) voting members, eleven (11) teaching faculty, two (2) classified staff, and five (5) students. Eight (8) teaching faculty members -- four (4) from the College of Arts and Sciences and four (4) from other areas -- and two (2) classified staff shall be elected to the committee by the teaching faculty, and classified staff, respectively. Faculty and staff committee members may serve up to three consecutive two-year terms. After three terms, faculty and staff members must be off the committee for two years before being eligible for re-election or re-appointment. The University Senate shall appoint two (2) faculty members to the IAC for two-year terms. The faculty athletics representative shall be an ex-officio member of the committee with full membership privileges. The five students shall be appointed through the ASUO and the president's office. At least one student member shall be a varsity student athlete. Students shall serve one-year terms and may serve up to three consecutive terms. The athletics director and his designees on the IAC shall be ex-officio non-voting members. No member of the IAC may receive benefits from the Department of Athletics beyond what she or he would otherwise be entitled to if she or he were not a member of the IAC.
The Intercollegiate Athletics Committee shall report to the University Senate. At a minimum this report shall be in the form of an annual written report submitted by the committee chair to the secretary of the University Senate no later than the final University Senate meeting in May. The committee shall also make additional written or oral reports to the senate as necessary. The IAC executive committee shall maintain communication with the senate through the IAC's senate appointees (who are eligible to serve on the executive committee). The executive committee shall meet with the senate president and the vice president for academic affairs at the beginning of the academic year.
During a question and answer session Senator Jon Jablonski, library asked about the consulting function of the IAC. Mr. Isenberg used a search for a new coach as an consulting example; IAC member is included on the search committee. There was a question to clarify the necessity of a yearly retreat, to which Mr. Isenberg said that it simply was a yearly meeting usually lasting two to four hours. Such meetings are for new members of the committee to become familiar with the athletics department and its operation. He felt this type of meeting was very useful. Hearing no further discussion, President brought Motion US04/05-3 to revise the charge of the IAC to a voice vote, which passed unanimously.
With no other business at hand, President Marcus adjourned the meeting at 4:25 p.m.
Secretary of the Faculty
|Web page spun on 6 May 2005 by Peter B Gilkey 202 Deady Hall, Department of Mathematics at the University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1222, U.S.A. Phone 1-541-346-4717 Email:firstname.lastname@example.org of Deady Spider Enterprises|