Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes

March 12, 2002

SC 206 c

3:00 - 4:30 p.m.

Attendance: Ron Hammond, Mike Shively, Karen Dodwell, Dr. Stoddard, Christa Albrecht-Crane, Genan Anderson, Kathryn Andrist, Christina Veit, Lynn Baadsgaard, Damon Bahr, John Balden, Brian Barthel, Paul Bean, Brian Birch, Cris Boggess, Mark Bracken, Lona Broadhead, Denza Bruss, Mike Bunds, Karin Davidson, Bryan Eldredge, Curtis Fillmore, Phil Gordon, Eldon Greenhalgh, Gamini Gunawardena, Diane Hartman, Terry Hill, Larry Holt, Cameron John, Masoud Kazemzadeh, Eric Linfield, Dennis Lisonbee, Deb Marrott, Rick McDonald, Steve McKay, Anita Musto, Gary Noll, Tom Paskett, Connie Reynolds, Reza Senati, Joe Strange, Carole Sullivan, Renee Van Buren

Absent: Darren Wiberg, Stacy Waddoups, Hugh Rode, Robert Loveridge, Kirk Love, Donald Hendon, Lowell Glenn, Diana Fallis, Janet Bennion

Excused: President Romesburg

Call to order: Ron called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.

Presentation of February 26, 2002 Meeting Minutes: The minutes were presented and no changes made.

Report from Dr. Stoddard: Dr. Stoddard told the senators how amazed she was when she reviewed the Strategic Plan for 1999. She was very pleased with what has been accomplished.

Information Items:

Faculty Merit Bonus - Eldon Greenhalgh said 312 faculty applied for merit/bonus. He has been told that the bonus should appear on the April 16^th paycheck. The following statistics were presented to the senators: 1) SRI=s - possible: 5.00, average: 4.5226%. 2) Peer evaluation - possible: 50, average: 49.0357%. 3) Supervisor evaluation - possible: 60, average: 57.8429%. 4) Overall average - possible: 100, average: 95.65%.

Dental Benefits - John Balden told the senators that three plans have been approved: EMIA, Blue Cross and Met Life. The plans will be presented in the coming weeks. President Romesburg has indicated that there is a possibility of giving what is saved on dental benefits back to employees as a pay increase.

Lifetime Senate Award - Ron called attention to the handout for nominations for the next recipient of the Lifetime Senate Award.

Executive Secretary, senator and committee chair nominations - Cameron John asked senators to think about who they would like to nominate for the position of executive secretary as Karen Dodwell won=t run again. Karen gave the senators a brief overview of her general duties and responsibilities in this position. Cameron said that nominations can be e-mailed to him or to the Executive Committee. He asked the senators to wait for other nominations until after Mike Shively has completed his study of standing committees.

Department chair teaching loads, C-5.5, VI, Tenure, C. Probationary Period, 7 Tenure and Administrative Appointments - striking last sentence - Karin Davidson presented a handout outlining the reasons for striking out sentences in Policy C-5.5 and C-5.4. Issue: Fifty percent teaching load required by department chairs to remain on tenure track. The 50% teaching load is punitive for both chair and department when departments are large enough to justify a reduced load. The current wording of the policy is A...A faculty member in tenure track who accepts a department chair or associate dean position of less than 50 percent contract teaching load is suspended from the tenure track until resumption of a minimum 50 percent contract teaching load.@ The Tenure Committee recommends that paragraph be stricken. Current wording of policy C-5.4 II. Procedure, B. Guidelines, #4 AUntenured department chairs must teach half time to remain on tenure track.@ The Tenure Committee recommends that #4 be stricken. After some discussion, the senators asked if these suggested changes could be moved immediately to an action item. Ron read from the Constitutional Bylaws that an information item can be moved to an action item by a 2/3 vote of the senate. At that point, Damon Bahr made a motion to move the changes to an action item. Rick McDonald seconded the motion, and Joe Strange called for the question. Joe then made a motion to accept the proposed changes, and John Balden seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed. Dr. Stoddard suggested that the policy be re-written to reflect the changes and then given to the Board of Trustees.

General discussion of Tenure Policy - Brian Birch presented what he considers the main issues to be discussed regarding the revised tenure policy and suggested concentrating on them. The issues he presented were: 1) Midterm review vs. annual review. 2) teaching load of non-tenured chair. 3) six vs. seven years probationary period. 4) years toward tenure for new hires. 5) centralization issue - what goes to school, tenure board, department, etc. There was discussion on the senate floor as to what other colleges and universities recommend for probationary periods. It was felt that it would be wise to model UVSC=s probation period after a university. Dr. Stoddard felt it would be good to look like a university. Some of the pros of a six year probation period would be that if a faculty member doesn=t make tenure in six years, they will automatically have one more year to obtain tenure. In addition, a faculty member could get tenure earlier. Regarding issue #4, it was felt that the best way to recruit new hires would be to offer them tenure if they are qualified. There was discussion about having an Aengagement period@ for new faculty before they are granted tenure. In summary, the senators agreed that it is a good idea to discuss the issues and revise them point by point, make suggestions, and then let the Tenure Committee make the changes. Brian Birch made two points: 1) don=t push through a second rate document, and 2) look at equal representation on the tenure committee. Paul Bean suggested that the senators look at a clean copy of the tenure policy because it will be a lot easier to read. Karin Davidson will send Karen Dodwell a clean copy that she can e-mail to the senate. Senators were asked to come back to the next senate meeting with their recommended changes. Two senators raised the issue of language usage and the aesthetically unpleasant wording of the policy from the Tenure Committee. Joe Strange thanked the tenure committee for all their hard work.

Adjournment of meeting: A motion was made to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed, and the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.