Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes
October 23, 2001
SC 117
3:00 - 3:50 p.m.
Attendance: Christa Albrecht-Crane, Genan Anderson, Luis Arzola, Leeann Asay, Lyn Baadsgaard, John Balden, Brian Barthel, Brian Birch, Cris Boggess, Mark Bracken, Lona Broadhead, Denza Bruss, Michael Bunds, Karen Dodwell, Bryan Eldredge, Diana Fallis, Lowell Glenn, Phil Gordon, Eldon Greenhalgh, Gamini Gunawardena, Ron Hammond, George Hickman, Larry Holt, Cameron John, Eric Linfield, Robert Loveridge, Deb Marrott, Rick McDonald, Steve McKay, Anita Musto, Tom Paskett, Connie Reynolds, Kerry Romesburg, Mike Shively, Joe Strange, Carole Sullivan, Doris Trujillo, Renee VanBuren, Stacy Waddoups, Darren Wiberg
Absent: Kathryn Andrist, Damon Bahr, Paul Bean, Janet Bennion, Eddie Cadet, Karin Davidson, Curtis Fillmore, Terry Hill, Masoud Kazemzadeh, Tony LaTurner, Dennis Lisonbee, Gary Noll, Hugh Rode
Excused: Diane Hartman
Call to order: Ron called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.
Presentation of 10/9/01 Senate Meeting Minutes: The minutes were presented and accepted without changes.
Announcements: Karen Dodwell announced that there will be a Faculty Appreciation Night on January 19, 2002. Vouchers will be given to faculty and their families to attend the Homecoming Basketball game. More details to come. She also announced that James Arrington has set aside the dates of November 19th & November 29th for Faculty Night at the theater to see "The Odd Couple." Connie Reynolds asked for help with donations of door prizes for the Holiday Social that will be held on December 17th. She will need sporting goods items.
Discussion of Post-Tenure Review: Ron let the senators know that Kirk Rasmussen is revising the Post Tenure Review policy draft to reflect suggested changes made by faculty. He asked Ron to get more input from the senate so that he can look over the suggestions and then make changes to the policy draft. He will then come to one of the next Faculty Senate meetings to discuss changes. Connie Reynolds said that maybe the annual review shouldn't be as extensive for post-tenure as it is for tenure. Renee Van Buren wondered if annual post-tenure review is redundant. Rick McDonald said that it isn't redundant; a review is already done that can also be counted as a post tenure review. Steven McKay had concerns that the draft policy was unclear about the college's power and responsibility in the process, specifically related to 1E3. He thought the wording might be changed. Robert Loveridge thought that the College Tenure Board of Review should check that each area is addressed (departmentally governed). He wondered why there was an annual review instead of tri-annual as required. He suggested that review should be triggered by two out of three consecutive negative evaluations to avoid having a good evaluation one year and a bad one the next year, followed by another good evaluation the next year. Brian said there was too much ambiguity regarding the formation of the school committee. The way the policy is worded suggests that maybe the Dean could be in charge of forming the committee. It was suggested that there be explicit language that states specifically who is in charge of forming the committee. Larry Holt thought it would be more expedient to have a history and philosophy of proposed policies when the senators take them to their respective departments, thus speeding up the process of understanding the document.
Introduction to questionnaire produced by Ad Hoc Committee for Evaluating Standing Committees - Mike Shively said that his committee is in the process of constructing a questionnaire for all members of the various committees to answer and return to him. This will assist his committee in determining what changes, if any, need to be made. Mike also mentioned that there is not fair representation on each committee from every school. Deb Marrott asked if the senators could vote on the possibility of equal representation on committees. This will be added as an information item for the next Senate meeting.
Tracking alternates on standing committees - Karen Dodwell let the senators know that the Bylaws are unclear regarding how long alternates are supposed to serve. Some senators thought it was three years, others thought one. Some senators thought that alternates should just serve one year so they can serve on other committees if they would like. Joe Strange wanted to know what should be done about members that don't ever attend the committee meetings. Eldon pointed out that Section XI A in the bylaws sets forth the rules.
Action Items:
Policy C-4.7 (priority 2) Phil Gordon made a motion that "the Senate approve policy C-4.7: Staff Education Fund with the stipulation that section 'II. C' be changed to allow for reimbursement of funding to an employee if a grade of 'C' or better is obtained (as opposed to the requirement of a minimum grade of 'B')." Luis Arzola seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously.
Policy C-2.9 (priority 1) Phil Gordon made a motion that "the senate approve policy C-2.9: Filling Vacancies (Waiver of Posting), with the stipulation that the criterion of 'dual career' as a potential justification of such a waiver be expanded to recognize domestic partners as well as spouses." Anita Musto seconded the motion and it passed 19 for, 8 against.
Policy C-2.7 (priority 2) Phil Gordon made a motion that the policy be approved without amendment. Joe Strange seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.
Phil briefly summarized the status of the Faculty Spousal Hiring Policy. He has drafted another version of the policy that takes Nancy Bartlett's concerns into account. He will be meeting with her again this week. He is hoping the policy will be ready to be voted on in the next senate meeting. It was suggested that #2 in the procedures be changed to say "two business days" rather than 48 hours. There was also a typo on #3; it should read "will" instead of "with".
Adjournment of meeting: A motion was made to adjourn the meeting at 3:50 p.m. The motion was seconded and the meeting adjourned.