|
|
FACULTY SENATE
|
MINUTES
FACULTY SENATE
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA®
Once approved, these
minutes may be accessed electronically at:
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/senate/minutes.htm|
Visit the faculty governance webpage at:
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/senate/
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Mitchell at 3:03 p.m. in the College of Law, Room 146.
Present: Senators Burd, Conway, Cuello, Cusanovich, Dahlgran, deWinter, Estrada, Garcia, Green, Gruener, Hammann, Hildebrand, Howell, Jenkins, Jones, Marchalonis, Mitchell, Mitchneck, Mountford, Mutchler, Pintozzi, Ruiz, San Martin, Sarid, Silverman, Smith, Spece, St. John, Sterling, Strittmatter, Tatman, Thorn, Ulreich, Ulrich, Wheeland, Willerton, and Witte. Parliamentarian Sankey was absent.
Absent: Senators Asia, Baca, Bernsen, Carrell, Chandler, Christenson, Cromwell, D. Davis, G. Davis, Jackson, Joens, Kiefer, Likins, Nolan, Primeau, Record, Songer, Weinand, and Zizza.
2. OPEN SESSION
Senator Silverman reported on the annual meeting of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA) that he attended last weekend in Pullman, Washington. COIA is an alliance of Division IA-faculty senates, including six from the PAC-10, that has become a faculty voice in the national debate over college athletic issues. COIA’s goal is to preserve and enhance the contributions athletics can make to academic life by addressing longstanding problems in college sports that undermine those contributions. The Coalition is now working with the NCAA Presidential Task Force on the Future of Division I athletics, which happens to be co-chaired by UA’s President Likins, and which is focusing on such difficult issues as financial responsibility and overcommercialization. COIA spent the December meeting preparing a position paper but there won’t be time for the Faculty Senate to review and vote on this response before the NCAA Presidential Task Force needs it in early January.
Viet Mai, Director of the International Student Association (ISA) asked faculty to submit nominations by December 16, 2005 for ISA’s "International Hall of Fame," a program that aims to help international students with their transition into a new culture as well as to promote interaction between international and domestic students. Since most international students are far from their families and do not receive the constant appreciation and encouragement that other students might enjoy, this is an event organized by ISA with the intention of recognizing international students for their accomplishments while they have been at the University of Arizona. The awards will be presented on February 21, 2006.
3. REPORTS
3A. ASUA President Cade Bernsen
No report because President Bernsen was absent.
GPSC President Ulrich reported that the GPSC’s Research and Policy Director has been surveying our peer institutions’ student health insurance benefits and costs and is now drafting a survey of UA students’ needs and how well the current provider is meeting those needs. The results of both surveys will be presented in the spring. Last week, 624 graduate students voted in a poll to determine how the GPSC president should be elected and how the GPSC representative to the Arizona Students Association (ASA) should be selected. The GPSC president is currently elected by the GPS Council and the graduate student representative to ASA is currently selected and appointed by ASUA. Fifty-four percent voted to have the GPSC President elected at large and eighty-six percent voted that the GPSC president or his/her designee should be the ASA representative. GPSC will work with ASUA to try to bring about this change.
No report.
Vice Chair Mitchell announced that both President Likins and Provost Davis are out of town today. In the interest of efficient use of time, the faculty officers are considering combining their reports. Hopefully a crisis has been averted regarding the Faculty Center building, which was threatened with demolition but has been recommended for preservation by the College of Architecture’s Director of Preservation Studies, so it is hoped that Campus Space Management and Planning will allow the building to remain. At the ABOR meeting last week, ASU’s request for dining facility renovation was approved, but the Regents did not approve funds for renovation to be tied to a mandatory meal plan. ABOR also heard from NCAA President Myles Brand regarding academic progress requirements and sanctions to be imposed for violations, which include loss of scholarships, forbidden team competition in post-season games, and sanctions imposed on all teams for a particular college or University. The Tuition Study workgroup reported its recommendations on differential tuition, which continues to be a very sensitive issue. There is a split among the Regents, particularly regarding undergraduate, in-state tuition.
Chair Howell reported that today’s Forum on Faculty Compensation was well attended with about 100 faculty members. The panelists’ remarks represented wide diversity of points of view, including some well-reasoned, logical statements and some rather emotional. Chair Howell will provide a summary and a transcript of the remarks on the Faculty Governance website. She may follow up with another forum in the spring semester, because constant vigilance about this issue must be applied. Chair Howell composed the panel from names she received from the Senate Executive Committee. She has received some feedback that the panel’s composition was not diverse enough so she will take steps to improve the next panel’s composition. Chair Howell has received an invitation from the Texas Faculty Association (TFA) to be a primary speaker at their conference in February 2006. Shared governance has become a matter of considerable interest among Texas faculty ever since the president of Texas A&M University-Kingsville dissolved the faculty senate in October 2005. Although shared governance may not be highly visible on our own campus, the TFA considers UA to be a model of shared governance and has asked Chair Howell to speak about how shared governance has become part of the culture at UA and how this was accomplished. Chair Howell said that both the Senate and the administration can share credit for this recognition.
4. QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD FOR AGENDA ITEM 3
Senator Silverman commented that Myles Brand, a former faculty member and dean at UA, is the first academic to be President of the NCAA and that he was the first choice of the university presidents for this position.
Senator deWinter commented that the graduate tuition is increasing at an even higher rate than in-state undergraduate tuition and that graduate students without tuition waivers will be affected. Vice Chair Mitchell responded that much of the Regents’ stand on tuition issues are driven by the state legislature’s concerns.
Senator Estrada remarked that a 30% cap on out-of-state undergraduate enrollment at UA was proposed at the ABOR meeting. According to Enrollment Management’s (EM) projection, such a cap would send UA’s revenue spiraling downward. UA’s out-of-state enrollment is currently at 29% and it was EM’s intent to increase to 35%.
5. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 7, 2005
The minutes of November 7, 2005 were approved with two corrections, to change the amount of $15,000 in prizes for Student Showcase to read $12,000, and that the revised name of Appointed Personnel Organization (APOC) is now the Appointed Professional Advisory Council (APAC).
6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEM FORWARDED AS A SECONDED MOTION FROM THE INSTRUCTION AND CURRICULUM POLICY COMMITTEE (attachment)
Senator Burd requested that the first [Motion 2005/06-21], and fourth items [Motion 2005/06-24], be removed from consent agenda and Senator Garcia asked to remove the third item [Motion 2005/06-23]. The consent agenda items numbered 2 [Motion 2005/06-22] and 5-9 [Motions 2005/06-25 to 2005/06-29], as forwarded by the ICPC and detailed at the end of these minutes were approved unanimously.
Concerning item one [Motion 2005/06-21], the proposed revision to the Second Bachelor’s Degree policy in the General Catalog, the amendment would begin at the end of the first paragraph and would read: “If the degrees are completed concurrently, the 30 units are added to the degree with the higher unit requirement. For Sequential degrees, students must complete at least 50 percent of all course work required in the major of the second degree after the conferral of the first degree. Students may apply for a simultaneous or sequential second degree only if the degree title and major differ from the first. Students pursuing another academic program that would lead to the same degree title as the primary program must declare that program as an additional major, not a second degree. Two or more majors may be completed within one academic degree program as long as these majors lead to the same degree title. However, once the first degree is awarded, another major cannot be added. Students may instead pursue a post-baccalaureate certificate or graduate degree.” Senator Burd commented that the amendment is not clear about whether or not a student can actually apply for a second degree. ICPC Chair Willerton recognized Celeste Pardee from the Curriculum Office who responded that what this amendment denies is adding a second major to the first degree after it is awarded. In order to add a second major after the first degree is already awarded, a student would need to return for a second degree. Senator Burd stated that she has no objection but requested that the language be clarified. Vice Chair Mitchell asked ICPC to bring this item back with clarified language to the January meeting. Motion 2005/06-21 was not acted upon.
7. FIRST READING AND POSSIBLE ACTION: VISITORS IN THE WORKPLACE POLICY (attachment)
Academic Personnel Policy Committee Chair Larry Aleamoni explained that APPC had discussed this policy at two meetings with representatives from Human Resources and brought it forward as a seconded motion [Motion 2005/06-30]. The Committee was initially concerned about the tenor of the policy not being family-friendly or providing enough latitude for faculty and staff to bring children into the workplace in the case of emergencies. Human Resources concerns are driven by liability. HR has received reports of faculty or staff bringing babies and toddlers into inappropriate workplace environments and wants to discourage daily regular visits that are disruptive. Senators’ questions and comments included: 1) What is the University policy about minors riding in University vehicles? Steve Holland from Risk Management responded that anyone riding in a University vehicle must have an official purpose to be in that vehicle. If a faculty member’s teenaged children are accompanying a geology field trip, those children must perform a volunteer service for the field trip. The Fleet Safety Policy that was approved in the Faculty Senate last spring explains that the University’s liability for passengers is the same for a student or a child; they are not covered by workman’s compensation. 2) What about students who have children and bring them to campus for meetings or class? Senator Aleamoni and Cathy Nicholson from Human Resources responded that this is an employee policy and is intended to discourage regular daily visits that are disruptive. Furthermore, the General Catalog states that only registered students are allowed to be in classes. 3) What is the definition of “disruptive?” Graduate teaching and research assistants with children often share large cubicle spaces with others. 4) Some research programs sponsor children to come to campus. What is the explicit definition of minor children? C. Nicholson responded that minor children are under the age of 18. APPC Chair Larry Aleamoni said that if the safety of minors can be assured, and if the activity is coordinated and approved by the department and that the faculty member(s) are available for the time and date, that such visits are generally welcomed and encouraged. 5) It continues to be shocking and amazing that UA still doesn’t have a childcare facility on campus where children could be dropped off in emergency. 6) Departments may implement short-term policies for visits. 7) This policy should not discourage the College of Science’s regular program for underage high school students who are paid to work in laboratories. 8) This policy is faculty friendly, rather than family friendly. Graduate students and staff often don’t enjoy private office spaces like faculty. A campus childcare facility for children of faculty, staff, undergraduate and graduate students is desperately needed. 9) This policy reflects the real dangers and liability the University assumes. What if an “approved” minor child is injured? 10) The Senate needs to address the issue of campus childcare and take a stand. The childcare-on-campus issue has been around for over 30 years and UA is far behind its aspirational peers on this matter. Vice Chair Mitchell agreed to bring this issue to the attention of the Senate Executive Committee. S. Holland offered that this might be a very good time for the Senate to be involved because Dean of Students Melissa Vito is convening an ad hoc committee with ASUA, CPSC, and the Association of Women Faculty to talk about this issue. Vice Chair Mitchell asked for a vote and the motion to approve the policy passed with two abstentions.
8. FIRST READING AND POSSIBLE ACTION: CHEMICAL HYGIENE POLICY (email attachment)
Research Policy Committee Chair Michael Cusanovich referred Senators to the “Chemical Hygiene Policy” that was sent via email attachment and is coming from the Research Policy Committee as a seconded motion [Motion 2005/06-31]. The Chemical Hygiene Committee and the Office of Risk Management worked together to review, evaluate and revise the University's Chemical Hygiene Plan (CHP) as required by the OSHA Laboratory Standard. The policy deals with a variety of federal and state safety requirements that are important to have in place in a research institution in this day and age. A revised policy was then forwarded to the RPC, which has met several times with members from the Chemical Safety Committee and from the Office of Risk Management to offer suggestions for changes to the policy. A healthy dialogue ensued and the RPC is satisfied with the policy before the Senate today. Senators’ comments and questions included: 1) What were the RPC’s concerns? Chair Cusanovich said most of the RPC’s concerns centered on making the policy clear and understandable and with appropriate and proper implementation and monitoring. 2) Is this a major shift of the previous policy? Chair Cusanovich responded that this is simply codifying good laboratory practices for legal reasons and it will be a learning document as parts will be posted in labs and used as part of the educational process. S. Holland of Risk Management added that the OSHA has always required a policy called a chemical hygiene plan, and UA has always had one, but last year the Vice President for Research asked the Chemical Safety Committee to review and revise if needed and then to bring it through the shared governance process in the hope that this document will be more widely read, understood and utilized. 3) This is an important document but the word “hygiene” in the title should be changed to “safety” to more accurately convey the meaning. S. Holland agreed to make this change. Motion passed unanimously.
9. FIRST READING AND POSSIBLE ACTION: SCHOLARLY INFORMATION ACCESS RESOLUTION (attachment)
Research Policy Committee Chair Michael Cusanovich referred Senators to the draft Scholarly Access Resolution that was forwarded from the library and is intended to encourage faculty to work with their professional societies and journals to encourage open access and help minimize the horrendous rise in publication costs. A number of other institutions such as Cornell and the University of Kansas have passed similar resolutions and RPC believes this is a reasonable way to look to the future and so recommends it as a seconded motion [Motion 2005/06-32]. Senators’ questions and comments included: 1) While faculty can be sympathetic to pressuring journals to keep costs reasonable, the third paragraph from the end suggests that salaries and promotion and tenure be tied to publishing in open access journals. Chair Cusanovich responded that there is no requirement nor would one be appropriate for P&T or merit decisions. 2) The guidelines are fuzzy but attribution of appropriate credit is a good thing that admittedly will not happen overnight. Some open access journals may turn out to be very good. 3) Trying to get scholarly societies to change will not happen overnight. 4) There is a difference between peer-reviewed and open access publishing, and as long as vigorous peer review is maintained, there shouldn’t be any worry about open access. 4) This third paragraph from the end may confuse assistant professors. 5) This is simply a list of recommendations, not a mandate. Chair Cusanovich reminded the Senate that faculty used to receive no credit for acquiring a patent, but now a great deal of credit is given to faculty who obtain patents. 6) Professional journals are often essential to the existence to professional societies. 7) Regarding the most prestigious journals, the Chronicle of Higher Education has published a very relevant article on “impact factor” for journals. It explains that many of the highest impact journals which are commercial have fewer original articles but contain many review and technical articles because these articles will receive large numbers of citations. As this is an evolving situation, we may find the quality of public access journals will rise while the quality of the commercial journals declines. Senator Gruener suggested that that the Faculty Senate endorse the spirit of this resolution. He moved [Motion 2005/06-33] to change the name of the document to read “Scholarly Information Access Endorsement.” Motion was seconded and passed 15-12. Motion to approve “Scholarly Information Access Resolution” as amended passed with one abstention.
10. DISCUSSION ON UA FACULTY VISION PRINCIPLES (attachment)
Chair of the Faculty Howell thanked the Senate for the individual comments and feedback that she has received to date. She reminded the Senate that her goal is to present this information as a resolution from the Faculty Senate to the presidential candidates and directed Senators’ attention to the draft resolution in the packet. ABOR has published an official list of characteristics but this list will be far more inclusive of the faculty voice. She was pleased that the second item on ABOR list was a shared governance style of decision-making. Another attribute in “experience/background” is a demonstrated commitment to shared governance. While most faculty want the next president to be an academic with a strong record of scholarship, Chair Howell asked whether administrators should be just like faculty. Traditionally most university presidents have come from the academy, but a recent Chronicle of Higher Education article suggests it might be time to rethink this idea. Chair Howell asked senators to think about what will be important to faculty in 5 or 10 years. After polling the college representatives during today’s meeting, Chair Howell will compile and distribute another list and ask the Senate to rank the top five or seven items that are most important to faculty. It is critical to complete this process by early January for distribution to the short list of candidates in late January/February. She wants the candidates to know what is important to the faculty. While many of these items are not specific to UA, how the faculty prioritize this list will be specific. Senators’ responses included the following: 1) CALA: Senator San Martin responded that his college wants to maintain the existing relationships and outreach with the communities, cities and state. 2) CALS: Senator Cuello would like to have the Senate respond to the Arizona Daily Star’s list of characteristics. The college also expressed concerns about the exodus of faculty, particularly the brain drain from UA to ASU. Senator Sterling added that he received a strong response that the next president should be strong academic with a passion for excellence in education and research, shared governance, and an appreciation for collaborative research, in particular the Graduate Interdisciplinary Programs (GIDPs) which are relatively unique to UA. 3) CFA: Secretary Jenkins said the college hopes for a president who understands the value of the arts in a university. 4) COH: Senator Ulreich responded that the college would like to be certain that the candidates’ self-presentations are matched by their records and that they have a commitment to shared governance, an appreciation for the tradition of the liberal arts as central to a great research institution, a commitment to the mission of the land grant institution, an inclusive vision for the recruitment and retention of diverse students, staff and faculty, support for graduate education with an understanding of how central graduate education is to a research university, support for the GIDPs and support for international collaboration. Senator Mountford added that support, more than respect, is needed for the humanities and fine arts, and to make sure that any definition of excellence applies equally to department and colleges that don’t generate research dollars. Senator deWinter added support for General Education Tiers I and II. 5) COE: Senator Smith said the college faculty value shared governance, support for faculty in research and a user-friendly work environment, an efficient and effective administrative environment, and support for border/international efforts and research. 6) COM: Senator Witte said the faculty value recognition of the importance and impact of the college of Medicine expansion in Phoenix, and considerable knowledge of biomedical and health care issues. She added that a real test of a commitment to shared governance is whether a president is willing to be evaluated periodically by the faculty. Senator Marchalonis added that recognition of the COM’s national stature of achievement and the candidates’ fundraising capabilities are also important to a financially troubled institution. 7) LAW: Senator Silverman said the candidates should be able to communicate with legislators and business leaders, be a great fundraiser, and do the job for less than $1M a year. He suggested adding “and internationally” to number 2 of the draft resolution, and to combine “the role of shared governance” from number 7 into number 1, and to make diversity a separate item. 8) SBS: Senator Willerton reported that he received about two dozen responses and will provide those in written form. The faculty suggested strengthening numbers 3, 5 and 7 on the draft, and that numbers 8 and 9 seem to be in conflict. 9) COS: Senator Garcia said the faculty value fiscal conservation and a commitment to scholarly excellence. 10) Speaking for the non-college, Senator Pintozzi surveyed the constituents and will provide a written list or their priorities, some of which included promoting the University in the legislature, community, nationally and internationally, ideas focused on budgeting and financial issues, and ideas about how to move the UA ahead of ASU. Chair Howell will contact the absent representatives and thanked the Senators for their responses.
11. STRATEGIC PLANNING AND BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT (attachment)
Senator and SPBAC Chair Tony Estrada distributed a Fall Semester Report from SPBAC. Noting the lateness of the hour, Senator Strittmatter moved [Motion 2005/06-34] to postpone the report until the January meeting, when the Senate can receive and discuss fully the content of the report. Motion was seconded. Senator Estrada agreed. Motion was not acted upon.
12. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.
Jennifer L. Jenkins, Secretary of the Faculty
Pamela S. Bridgmon, Recording Secretary
1. Consent Agenda forwarded from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee
2. Proposed Human Resources Policy “Visitors in the Workplace DRAFT,” dated November 2005
3. Chemical Hygiene Policy (electronic attachment)
4. November 17, 2005 memorandum from Vice Chair of the Faculty Robert Mitchell and attached Scholarly Information Access Resolution
5. November 14, 2005 memorandum to all Senators from Chair of the Faculty Wanda Howell re: Draft Faculty Senate resolution about presidential leadership commitments
6. SPBAC Fall Semester Report from Antonio Estrada, Chair, SPBAC
*Copies of materials listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.
Motion 2005/06-21
Seconded
motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the
proposed amendment to the Second Bachelor’s Degree policy in the General
Catalog: Motion not acted upon.
Motion 2005/06-22
Seconded motion
from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the proposal to
clarify three academic policies with slight wording changes for Academic
Renewal, calculation of the Cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) , and Grade
Replacement Opportunity (GRO). Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-25 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the Museum Studies Graduate Certificate. Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-26 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the Women’s Studies Graduate Certificate. Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-27 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy to approve to split the existing M.S. and Ph.D. in Microbiology and Immunology into two separate programs with two separate reporting academic units, so that the major title for the M.S. and Ph.D. programs in the College of Medicine is renamed “Immunobiology,” and that the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences is authorized to implement M.S. and Ph.D. programs in “Microbiology.” Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-28 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve renaming the Department of Microbiology and Immunology in the College of Medicine to the Department of Immunobiology. Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-29 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve implementation of the transfer of the M.S. and Ph.D. in Statistics from the College of Science to the Graduate Interdisciplinary Programs in the Office of the Vice President for Research, and reactivate the M.S. and Ph.D. with a major in Statistics as Graduate Interdisciplinary Programs. Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-30 Seconded motion from the Academic Personnel Policy Committee to approve the “Visitors in the Workplace” DRAFT Policy from Human Resources. Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-31 Seconded motion from the Research Policy Committee to approve the “Chemical Hygiene Policy” that was sent via email attachment and is coming from the Research Policy Committee as a seconded motion. Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-32 Seconded motion from the Research Policy Committee to approve the “Scholarly Information Access Resolution.” Motion was amended and carried as amended in Motion 2005/06-33.
Motion 2005/06-33 Seconded motion to change the name of the “Scholarly Information Access Resolution” to “Scholarly Information Access Endorsement.” Motion carried.
Motion 2005/06-34 Seconded motion to postpone the Fall Semester Report from SPBAC. Motion not acted upon.
The University of Arizona Faculty Center
facsen@u.arizona.edu
last updated
01/31/06