|
FACULTY SENATE
|
MINUTES
FACULTY SENATE
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA®
February 3, 2003
These minutes may be accessed
electronically at:
http://fp.arizona.edu/senate/minutes.htm
Visit the faculty governance webpage at:
http://fp.arizona.edu/senate
CORRECTED
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair and Presiding Officer Wanda Howell at 3:05
p.m. in the College of Law, Room 146. She noted a change in the order of agenda items to
complete the discussion and action on the Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative, And
Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct.
Present: Senators Bales, Borden, Burd, Caldwell, Chandler, Dahlgran, D. Davis, G. Davis, Erickson, Esparza, Farney, Garcia, Hancock, Hartz, Heinrich, Howell, Jenkins, Joens, Jones, Kiefer, Likins, Mitchell, Morris, O'Brien, Oxnam, Pintozzi, Powell, Rainer, Schlager, Silverman, Songer, Spece, Swanson, Szilagyi, Tatman, Timmermann, Vierling, Warburton, Warnock, Weinand, Willerton, E. Wright, S. Wright, Wysocki, and Zwolinski. Nick Green substituted for Marci Holmes, and Jani Radebaugh substituted for Karen Sweazea. Robert Sankey served as Parliamentarian.
Absent: Senators Arabyan, Bixby, Flores, Holmes, Impey, Larson, Lynch, Miesfeld, Mishra, Sweazea, and Witte.
2. OPEN SESSION
Dr. Marv Waterstone – Dr. Waterstone of the Department of Geography and Regional
Development spoke about two decades of declining budgets, which he attributes to state and
University administrative failures. He also spoke against the affront to faculty
governance represented by "focused excellence." He concluded by calling for
faculty to organize to reject the current management model of the University.
3. INFORMATION ITEM: STATEWIDE HEALTH BENEFITS
Pr. Jacqueline Sharkey, who serves on the health care committees of both the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) and the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA), reported that the state will probably not be able to implement self-insurance this year. Right now the state employee health insurance issues involve three major elements: 1) a Spring 2002 legislative mandate that all health and dental programs be self-insured by October 1, 2003; 2) a projected CIGNA rate increase to take effect October 1, 2003 if we do not self insure; and 3) plan design and contribution strategies. Four problems with the mandate to self-insure quickly became apparent to the committees: 1) the timeline was too short and no data existed to determine whether self insurance is even appropriate for the Arizona state employee and retiree population, 2) the state legislature had failed to reserve the $85M necessary for claims; 3) that legislation would have to be written ensuring that this reserve could not be raided in times of tight budgets; and 4) the lack of data indicating any potential savings realized by self-insurance. The legislation voted on January 30, 2003 to rescind the self-insurance mandate. As a result six Requests for Proposals that were hastily conceived and written last fall and submitted in December of 2002, have now been suspended, angering some vendors. The state is now in negotiations to renew the contract with CIGNA for the coming year with a possibility of a significantly higher premium to be announced at the end of February. There is a great range among legislators about what amount of funds to set aside for the rate increase, so it may be that the state agencies and individuals will have to absorb that cost. Furthermore, the committees hired a consulting firm to analyze the data and determined that Arizona’s plan is not in sync with market trends among other states or private organizations with similar numbers of employees. The ABOR and ADOA committees will continue to study the idea of self-insurance. Senator’s questions and Pr. Sharkey’s responses included: 1) Are the university employees better off with CIGNA than we would have been with another provider? Yes -- that’s how bad health care increases are, nationally. Also, of the four original responses to the RFP’s two years ago, only CIGNA’s was legal, would cover people outside of Pima and Maricopa counties, had the fewest complaints, and was financially healthy. The way the ADOA and the legislature has designed the health insurance financing, basing the state’s contribution on the lowest cost HMO available, requires a change. 2) What does the legislature’s action to rescind the self-insurance mandate mean? It’s off the table in a legal sense, but we should and will continue to explore the options and the experiences and data from other states. Professor Sharkey’s email is sharkey@u.arizona.edu. She provided copies of her remarks and information contact lists for legislators.
4. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: RPC SECONDED MOTION RE: POLICY ON ETHICS IN SCHOLARLY, CREATIVE, AND RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR INVESTIGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT (attachments)
Research Policy Committee (RPC) Chair C. Pintozzi opened the floor for continued discussion on the revised draft of the Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative, and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct. Presiding Officer Howell called for a second to Senator Spece’s motion [Motion 2002/03-21] to amend Section I.C.4. of the Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct, by adding a last line: "No person shall be subject to a sanction not required by the federal government unless the allegation is proven by clear and convincing evidence." Motion died for lack of a second. Senator Spece moved to amend Section I.C.4. to read: "If we can obtain the permission of the Federal Government, we would include a provision stating, "No person shall be subject to a sanction not required by the federal government unless the allegation is proven by clear and convincing evidence." Motion died for lack of a second. Presiding Officer Howell called for the vote to approve the Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative, and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct [Motion 2002/03-16]. Motion passed with one abstention. Senator Powell moved [Motion 2002/03-22] to change the title of the policy to read "Policy and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct in Scholarly, Creative, and Research Activities." Since in December the Senate had voted to remove the phrase, "or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the relevant research and scholarly community," Senator Powell explained that removing the phrase, "on Ethics" from this title would more appropriately describe what is actually in the policy. Senator’s questions and concerns included: The Senate should understand that this change to the policy’s title does not alter the charge to the University Committee on Ethics and Commitment; that committee has a broader mandate to look into matters of ethical issues, and this policy only deals with issues of misconduct. Misconduct falls within that committee’s purview but is not its total purview. Motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
5. REPORTS
5A. ASUA President Doug Hartz
ASUA President Doug Hartz reported that the Arizona Students Association (ASA) agreed that the state budget proposal by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) is completely unacceptable and is a huge injustice to the citizens of the state of Arizona. ASA and ASUA is organizing a legislative drive to inform and communicate with legislators, the students’ support for the alternative proposals, particularly those that support more protection for higher education and K-12. This week, ASUA is also participating in the AzCats Pride Night and will be scheduling a Legislative Forum on February 25 at the capitol with students and legislators. Activities will include workshops, guest speakers, student performances and events, to try to inform the legislature about how important it is that the quality of work at UA is preserved. President Likins’ tuition increase proposal was released today, and most students generally recognize the need for more tuition revenues coupled with greater financial aid, but feel that the state’s shortfalls are being passed on to the students, noting that resident students are accumulating more debt that non-resident students, by about $1K. Students’ sincerely fear that the quality of the institution is at stake and that without sacrifices, the institution will suffer and the value of degrees will deteriorate. ASUA’s primary concerns are to preserve as much of the institution’s accessibility and public mission as possible. Undergraduate students’ paramount needs are for increased funding for retention of and access to national-caliber faculty and for class availability. ASUA will host two Town Halls on tuition, one this Wednesday, Feb 5, with Regents Jewett and Meaker, and another on Feb 17. The ASUA election process has begun and will continue through March.
5B. GPSC President Peter Morris
GPSC President Peter Morris reported that the Arizona Coalition of Graduate Students was recently formed to lobby on behalf of graduate students based on the statistics that about 60% stay in Arizona following graduation. There simply isn’t enough support for the graduate student population in terms of diversity and financial need. GPSC’s childcare survey reveals that 20-25% of graduate students are supporting families. Childcare stipends remain inadequate to meet the needs of the estimated 1000 graduate students who are parents. GPSC would like to see need-based financial aid for 600 graduate students added back into President Likins’ tuition proposal. GPSC is aligned with ASUA on issues of class availability and class size, particularly with respect to Graduate Teaching Assistants’ workloads and net stipends. GPSC is still not convinced that the proposed elimination of the graduate college dean position won’t harm graduate students, while reorganization and tuition increases will most probably cause an increase in the dropout and transfer rates among graduate students as well as further reducing their quality of life or increasing their debt.
5C. Vice Chair of the Faculty Wanda Howell
Vice Chair of the Faculty Wanda Howell announced that petitions for the General Faculty Primary Election are due February 14 and that online voting will begin at 8:00 AM on February 21, 2003 through 5:00 PM on March 7, 2003.
5D. Secretary of the Faculty Robert Mitchell
Secretary Mitchell reported that the Honorary Degrees Committee is following the Senate’s process for nominees and he expects that process involving faculty voting will be followed throughout. The Honorary Degrees Committee has encountered a concern about some unwritten traditions about who is eligible for an honorary degree that are not included in the written criteria that accompany the call for nominations. These include whether we honor our own faculty, and whether a state of Arizona or a University of Arizona connection must be established for the nominee. Secretary Mitchell may bring this issue to the Senate for guidance at a future time.
5E. Chair of the Faculty Jory Hancock
Chair of the Faculty Jory Hancock reported that faculty gifts in the UA Cares Campaign are currently between the $170-180K range in just two months, and that this level of faculty giving remains consistent with faculty donations over the past seven years despite recent severe budget cuts. He described the Senate’s role in the reorganization procedure and distributed a flowchart drawn up by members of the Shared Governance Review Committee as well as former chairs of the faculty Hogle and Schwarz. The flowchart describes the review processes for program and degree changes and for changes involving movement of faculty from one academic unit to another. Any corrections to the flowchart should be reported to Chair Hancock. If all the affected faculty members agree with a proposal, no review is required, but if some do not agree, an Advisory Review Committee will review the proposal and then bring it before the Senate. Chair Hancock asked for Senate volunteers to serve on the Advisory Review Committees, noting that he has already identified volunteers from SPBAC, ASUA, SAC, APOC and GPSC. He expects to need 3-5 committees. The reorganization proposals will be coming forward at staggered times, and a few may not be ready for ABOR consideration by June 2003. The Senate Executive Committee has scheduled two additional Senate meetings, March 10 and April 14, 2003 from 3:00-5:00 p.m., to handle the reorganization proposals this term.
5F. Provost George Davis
Provost Davis described a timeline from 2001 through 2004, and reviewed events dating back to 2001, when the University’s base budget from the state’s General Fund was $347M. At this time, efforts were taking place to implement changes that would have allowed for reductions in GTA workloads, increases in GTA net stipends via 25% tuition waivers for half time GTA’s, and discussions were underway about managing GRA stipends in a way that was parallel to GTA stipends. Students at this time were championing a 0% tuition increase, which resulted in the 6-5 vote against the President Likins recommended tuition increase. During this same time, the University experienced a legislative delay of a $3.7M salary package and a legislative reduction of $16.5M, so that by the end of FY02, the University’s General Fund allotment was reduced to $327M. Also in 2002, the Regents extended authority to the universities to manage tuition waivers and financial aid. FY03 began with the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) retreat on "Changing Directions," during which the presidents had an opportunity to articulate distinctive roles and missions. President Likins captured the language of "focused excellence" for UA’s direction. ABOR also came to understand that tuition increases are closely tied to affordability and social justice as the universities demonstrated that they are prepared and able to address the financial need through the new dollars. Meetings with GPSC leadership and Dean Pivo have initiated progress toward 50% waivers for half-time GTA’s (25% for one-third or quarter-time TA’s) and 25% for GRA’s for next year. This year a legislative reduction of $8.1M and a legislative special session reduction of $17.1M has resulted in our present level of General Fund allocation of $316M, a $30M net loss over two years. The JLBC proposes to further reduce that amount to $296M although the governor recommends no new cuts to universities.
5G. President Peter Likins
President Likins described the four simultaneous changes that are currently ongoing, involving the short-term issue of the budget, the three longer-term issues of programmatic focus strategy, tuition/financial aid structure, and admissions policies. He believes the JLBC proposed budget would be catastrophic but that the legislature probably can’t act fast enough to implement any draconian cuts by FY03, so the University’s greater vulnerability lies in FY04. President Likins’ administration is trying to reposition the university among the nation’s institutions in both the tuition and financial aid models, by changing pricing policies and introducing programmatic fees while protecting our most needy undergraduate students and our graduate teaching assistants and some research assistants. Even if every full time student paid full tuition, that would total $34.5M but after the above-noted accommodations, only $13.9M would remain as tuition revenues. The focused excellence strategy has been released in a series of bulletins during the past month, and these issues are part of a broader strategy to improve the pricing, financial aid, and admissions policies. In general, ABOR has been experiencing a radical shift in attitude away from the old regulatory mentality, and has been delegating more authority to the institutions to manage enrollments, tuition waivers, and admissions. The universities hope that the Regents’ will adopt an admissions policy that begins with a broad, overarching statement that a certain population (roughly the top 25%) will be assured admission to any of the three state universities (although not to a specific program). This population might be described as "Regents’ Graduates" and the three universities would then be allowed to formulate and manage their admissions. At this point, ASU and NAU would probably not make any changes in their admissions policies for students from Arizona high schools, but the UA, which has more physical and strategic constraints, would probably begin to slowly modify its admission policies and the incoming classes at the UA over the next ten years. President Likins reiterated that diversity is an essential element of excellence.
6. QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD
Senator Burd asked Chair Hancock how faculty may volunteer to serve on review committees involving the areas with potential for reorganizations in the Life Sciences and Health Sciences. Chair Hancock explained that there are many cases that don’t fit the description of the Reorganization Procedure that was passed in the Senate. Provost Davis explained that the composition of the study teams and evaluation teams will be extraordinarily important and essential to lay out the academic charge, frame the objectives, and gain input from the university community. Provost Davis said he is receiving a lot of emails regarding nominations and volunteers for these evaluative committees. He expects to charge individuals, who are highly regarded in terms of their knowledge base and integrity, with a mandate to carry out the focus group discussions, to conduct the national inquiry of other experts, to meet with graduate and undergraduate students, deans, and heads, in a really close and inclusive way.
Senator Silverman noted that some of the proposals, such as Extended University, fall outside of the reorganization procedure. Because some of those proposals do affect faculty and other people in our campus community, he asked whether the President and Provost would, in the spirit of shared governance, consider handling these proposals in a similar fashion as those requiring advisory review committees. President Likins responded that yes, his administration’s responsibility is to reach beyond the constraints of the Senate’s procedure to solicit broader campus input on some although not all such proposals.
Senator Garcia inquired whether the proposed 50% tuition remission plan coupled with the graduate student minimum enrollment of 9 credits is still being considered. Provost Davis responded that the plan is not being considered at this time because of the complexity created by the uncertainty regarding the projected tuition increase, GTA workload issues that aren’t fully addressed, and the impending April deadline. He does expect this dialogue to continue. Senator Morris added that the major problems GPSC expressed were the timing of the proposal and the inability of the administration to guarantee that GTA workload and costs would not increase. He also noted that none of the 50% remission plans will elevate GTA stipends, but will merely guarantee that they remain at the top of the bottom third. Provost Davis acknowledged that our graduate students are absolutely essential to the University.
7. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2, 2002
The minutes of December 2, 2002 were approved with the following correction: replace "as" with "shortly before" in the following sentence under item 3G, to read: "But shortly before President Likins came to office, there began a dialogue with the Regents that resulted in a Post-Tenure Review procedure and a relationship that is mutually respectful." Minutes were approved as corrected.
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FORWARDED AS A SECONDED MOTION FROM INSTRUCTION AND CURRICULUM POLICY COMMITTEE (attachment)
The consent agenda items detailed at the end of these minutes were unanimously approved [Motions 2002/03-23, 24, 25, 26].
9. SECOND READING AND ACTION: REVISED PROPOSED POLICY ON ADMINISTRATIVE DROP WITH PREJUDICE (attachment)
Undergraduate Council (UGC) Chair
Jennifer Jenkins presented two revisions to the policy that was initially drafted in the
Undergraduate Council as a response to ensure faculty and staff safety following the
murders of three colleagues at the College of Nursing. The word "will" has been
changed to "may" in the following sentence: "Once a student has been
administratively dropped with prejudice twice, the student will may be
expelled from the University." UGC also added the following line to the end of the
document: "A total of two such documented actions, whether administrative drop with
prejudice or administrative notation, may be sufficient to initiate expulsion
proceedings." This change clarifies that it doesn’t take two of one kind
of documented action, but merely a total of two documented actions. This revised
version also includes the Student Code of Conduct Complaint form as part of the policy.
Senator’s questions and Senator Jenkins responses included, 1) Does the Student Code
of Conduct reference provide for a student to appeal or contest the charge? Yes, that is
the procedure initiated by the Student Code of Conduct Complaint form. 2) Are there any
inconsistencies between this and the Student Affairs Office’s advisory
committees’ policies? No, although there may be some overlap. After speaking with
Saunie Taylor at length, we agreed that, at this point it would be better to have too much
rather than too little, and as time passes and we see how these policies are working, we
can remove the parts that are redundant. There is also no conflict with the latest Human
Resources policy on Workplace Violence. 3) The College of Nursing faculty said that the
message they get from this is that one can beat up a faculty member twice and still may
not be expelled. Senator Jenkins noted that the language did change from "will be
expelled" to "may be expelled" but that anyone can certainly offer an
amendment. President Likins also responded that if the seriousness of the affront is great
enough, there should not be a need for a repeat of the affront before a student is
expelled. Since he didn’t know what Saunie Taylor’s group has developed, he
couldn’t make a precise comparison, but he believes there is a capacity to expel on
the basis of a single grievous offense. If Saunie’s document has more severe
sanctions than this document, those will prevail. Senator Garcia moved [Motion 2002/03-27]
approval of the policy. Motion was seconded and passed with one opposed.
10. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Robert L. Mitchell, Secretary
Appendix*
1. Open session remarks to the UA Faculty Senate from Dr. Marv Waterstone.
2. "State Employee Health Insurance Issues Fiscal Year 2002-03" from Jacqueline Sharkey.
3. Arizona State Legislature committee rosters and legislators’ contact information from Jacqueline Sharkey.
4. Revised Draft 11/20/02 Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct.
5. RPC Responses to Proposed Amendments, Comments, Questions regarding proposed Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct.
6. "Secretary of the Faculty’s Report, February 3, 2002"
7. Consent Agenda items forwarded from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee.
8. Undergraduate Council’s revised proposed policy for Administrative Drop with Prejudice.
9. Senate Reorganization Procedure flowchart dated 1-31-03 v.2. from the Shared Governance Review Committee.
10."Reorganization Procedures at the University of Arizona Approved by the Faculty Senate September 9, 2002 and Approved by President Likins January 13, 2003."
*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.
Motions of the Meeting of February 3, 2003
Motion 2002/03-16 Seconded motion (continued) from the Research Policy Committee to approve the Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct. Motion passed.
Motion 2002/03-21 Motion to amend Section I.C.4. of the Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct, by adding a last line: "No person shall be subject to a sanction not required by the federal government unless the allegation is proven by clear and convincing evidence." Motion died for lack of a second.
Motion 2002/03-22 Seconded motion to amend the title of the RPC’s "Policy on Ethics in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct" to be "Policy and Procedures for Investigations of Misconduct in Scholarly, Creative and Research Activities." Motion passed.
Motion 2002/03-23 Seconded Motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve a joint degree program allowing a student to earn a Master of Public Administration (MPA) and Master of Arts degree in Latin American Studies (MA) in three years, as detailed in the proposal dated 8/10/02. Motion passed.
Motion 2002/03-24 Seconded Motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve a name change of the major and minor of the BS in Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering to the BS in Biosystems Engineering as detailed in the proposal dated 8/01/02. Motion passed.
Motion 2002/03-25 Seconded Motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve a name change for the BS and MS in Biochemistry to Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics as detailed in the proposal dated 6-25-02. Motion passed.
Motion 2002/03-26 Seconded Motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve a new academic first professional degree program for audiologists, the Doctor of Audiology (AU.D.), in the Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, College of Science as detailed in the proposal dated 9-5-02. Motion passed.
Motion 2002/03-27 Seconded Motion to approve the Revised Proposed Policy on Administrative Drop with Prejudice policy. Motion passed.
This site maintained by The University of Arizona Faculty Center