EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Alexander, Beck, Fuller, Miller, Peterson, Shea, Spann, Whitt, Wunder
Absent: Buck, Fech, Logan-Peters
Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2004
Location: Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace
1.0 Call to Order
Wunder called the meeting to order at 3:08 p.m.
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Editorial in the Daily Nebraskan on ES/IS Proposal
Wunder stated that the editorial in the DN provided good feedback regarding the ES/IS proposal. Peterson stated that it is useful to get the students opinion on the proposed changes.
2.2 Deans and Directors Meeting
Wunder reported that he attended the Deans and Directors meeting. He stated that the Chancellor also attended the meeting and stated that President Smith was to speak with Governor Johanns on the budget. Wunder stated that the Chancellor reported that the informal word was that the university may receive a small budget cut but the legislature would not discuss the budget until late February.
Wunder reported that the Chancellor announced that UNL has been designated by AAU to collect and analyze the data on AAU institutions. Wunder stated that Rebecca Carr, formerly in Academic Affairs, is being moved to Institutional Research and Planning to work on the AAU data. Fuller asked if the campus would be receiving any funding for doing this work. Wunder stated that he did not know whether the campus would be compensated for the work.
3.0 Approval of 1/7/04 Minutes
Peterson moved and Spann seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
4.0 Unfinished Business
4.1 ES/IS Amendments
Wunder stated that the discussion at the Senate meeting on the ES/IS proposal was a good start. He noted that there seemed to be a consensus that there should be some kind of control mechanism on the programs. He pointed out that the DN editorial will hopefully help clear the way in getting the proposal approved. He reported that he volunteered to meet with the faculty members of the English department to discuss their concerns regarding the proposal.
Spann asked what the deadline date is for submitting information to the undergraduate bulletin. Peterson stated that even if the proposal is quickly approved, it would not be published in the bulletin until 2005.
Fuller stated that she would like to see information on the impact the changes could have on faculty workloads. Peterson stated that this issue has been raised. He noted that the number of courses that will need to be taught will depend on the list of courses developed by the departments. He pointed out that if the ES list remains similar to what it currently is, there shouldnt be any significant changes to a faculty members teaching load. He noted that things could be different with the IS courses. He stated that the there is concern that students might take less IS courses if a list is not available.
Whitt stated that the amount of support departments receive can depend on the number of credit hours produced. He noted that there is concern among some faculty members that the proposed changes could reduce the number of credit hours produced in some departments. Peterson pointed out that not all departments receive support based on the number of credit hours produced. He noted that the Agricultural Economics department has one of the largest credit hour productions in IANR but has received less support in recent years.
Fuller suggested that there be a panel at the next Senate meeting on the ES/IS proposal. She stated that members of the ES/IS committee could be on the panel to help answer questions and address concerns. Peterson noted that it would be very useful to have other members of the committee at the meeting to help address concerns.
Wunder stated that there are ways to preserve the goals of the IS courses. Whitt pointed out that some departments do not have IS courses and that it might take considerable time for them to develop these courses. Peterson pointed out that it is clear that the IS courses are not currently meeting the goals. Shea stated that some disciplines may not be prepared to develop IS courses. He stated that these disciplines might not be aware of other IS courses.
Shea stated that there is a fear of losing the broad perspective of education if the ES/IS programs are reduced. He noted that the university appears to be heading in the direction of providing technical degrees rather than providing a broad education. He pointed out that the ES/IS courses help to provide a broad education.
Peterson noted that many universities have a core curriculum. He stated that the ES/IS committee did not want to develop a core curriculum. He noted that the proposal does not suggest a core curriculum but a minimal set of requirements.
Wunder stated that a problem the Curriculum Committee faced in the past was that some colleges did not like the idea of the Committee regulating IS courses. He stated that these colleges felt that these courses should be kept at the college level. He noted that the Curriculum Committee would reject proposed IS courses if the Committee felt the course did not meet the IS requirements. He pointed out that the ES courses are the core level courses while the IS courses are the skills level courses.
Fuller stated that the academic program review should take care of controlling the IS course. She stated that another committee should not be needed to oversee the ES/IS courses. Peterson stated that Professor Fuess, Chair of the Curriculum Committee, feels that if the Curriculum Committee is only to rubber stamp approval of ES courses than the Committee is not needed. Peterson stated the Fuess points out that if the Curriculum Committee approves ES courses than faculty members need to understand that people outside the discipline will be making decisions on these courses. Wunder stated that he believes the ES/IS Reform package will unravel if left at the local level. He stated that there does not need to be extensive control but a general review of the programs.
4.2 Dead Week Reform Proposal
Wunder stated that he needs to contact ASUN and give them a copy of the proposal. He stated that Professor Spann has agreed to serve on a committee to review the proposal. Wunder stated that he needed names of two other faculty members to serve on the committee and he asked Exec members for recommendations.
Alexander noted that the proposal could affect the amount of material that is presented in engineering courses. Whitt pointed out that people in the hard sciences and others that have laboratory sections would probably oppose the proposal because the change in the schedule would affect the number of times the lab classes meet. Spann noted that there are different definitions of the dead week policy on the internet. He stated that it is important to get the official version of the policy.
Wunder stated that the proposal was mentioned at the Deans and Directors meeting and received strong support. He stated that the Deans and Directors want to get the finals exam schedule changed because of the problem of getting senior grades in on time for graduation. Griffin questioned whether this change would have to be university-wide or just for UNL. Wunder suggested that Spanns committee check on the length of the semesters at our peer institutions.
4.3 University Curriculum Committee Concerns
Wunder stated that Professor Fuess, in his email message about the Curriculum Committee, raises issues that are related to the ES/IS proposal. He stated that the charge of the Curriculum Committee will need to be reviewed and probably revised if the ES/IS proposal is approved. He stated that the Committee on Committees needs to be notified of this.
Wunder stated that he was surprised to see that some colleges appointed part-time instructors or those not on tenure-track lines to the Curriculum Committee. Spann noted that when he was on the Committee the members received a large stack of papers to review prior to the meeting and oftentimes members were unable to remain at the meetings until all business was concluded. Wunder pointed out that the Committee is streamlining the process of approving new courses and that this should eliminate the stacks of papers.
Peterson noted that the charge of the committee is vague. He stated that the charge needs to be rethought. He pointed out that the charge currently states that the Committee can make proposals to colleges regarding courses.
Wunder suggested that the evaluation and possible revision of the charge to the Committee should be taken up when the ES/IS proposal is approved. Peterson suggested that Fuess be notified and informed that the Committee on Committees will be reviewing the matter when the ES/IS proposal is approved.
Alexander noted that there is a lot of duplication of courses across the campus. He stated that the same information may be taught by several different departments. Peterson asked if this creates a problem. He noted that eliminating some of these courses could create a resource problem for those departments that retain the courses because they would have greater pressure to teach more students. Miller asked who should be responsible for checking on duplication of courses.
4.4 Faculty Leadership Summit
Wunder asked the Committee if they should go ahead with the planning of the summit. The Committee agreed that the summit should go forward. Wunder suggested that the summit be held on a Saturday in late February.
Wunder asked what issues the Committee feels should be discussed at the summit. Shea stated that the focus should be on core issues. The Committee agreed that the issues to discuss should be tenure and faculty governance.
Wunder noted that he has asked Professor Pratt, English, to make some opening comments regarding tenure.
5.0 New Business
5.1 Response from the Chancellor on the Resolution Calling for UNOPA and UAAD to have a Representative on the APC
Wunder distributed a copy of the Chancellors response which indicated that he would not approve the appointment of a member from UNOPA and UAAD to the APC. He asked the Committee if they want to respond to the letter. Peterson suggested that the Committee to Review Reductions in Force should make sure that representatives from UNOPA and UAAD were involved in these procedures. The Committee agreed.
5.2 Follow Up on Senate Meeting
Peterson noted that the Blue Skies panel did a good job discussing the report. He stated that the information provided by the panel was very useful.
Wunder stated that he thought it was a good meeting. He thought the reason why people were leaving early was not a reflection on what was being discussed but that people had other commitments. The Committee raised concern over the number of Senators who leave before the business of the Senate is completed. Whitt and Griffin noted that Senate meetings would often go past 5:00 in past years. Spann suggested that the lack of commitment to the Senate might be a result of people feeling that the Senate has no real power. Wunder noted that the feeling of a lack of power has become more prevalent since the budget cuts. Spann stated that many faculty members have the attitude of staying above the fray but below the radar since the budget cuts. Fuller pointed out that faculty members are being pressured and receive rewards for doing research, not service.
5.3 Hiring of Women Faculty at UNL
Wunder noted that there is not a lot of difference in the numbers reported in the Lincoln Journal Star article and what the Chancellor mentioned at the Senate meeting. Wunder stated that the important point is that there needs to be an initiative to hire more female faculty members.
Fuller stated that the faculty and administration should not be adversaries on this issue. She pointed out that the university needs more diversity in its faculty members. Peterson noted that the Chancellors comments at the Senate meeting were an attempt to clarify his statements which appeared to have been taken out of context in the article. Peterson stated that he believes the Chancellor understands and appreciates the problem. Peterson stated that the question is what needs to be done in order to hire women and people of color.
Wunder stated that the previous funds for diversity hiring were only for use as a bridge to hire faculty. The funds were not put into a departments budget permanently. Spann noted that departments in his college used some of the diversity money to initially hire people and when other faculty lines became open, the new faculty member was placed on the open line.
Beck asked if the Committee would consider appointing an ad hoc gender committee to work on getting information regarding when female faculty members are leaving in their career, the reasons why, and retention figures. She noted that some units are doing better than other units in hiring but are having a difficult time retaining women. She stated that the committee could then report back to the Senate on its findings.
Peterson stated that creating the committee would be a good idea. He asked whether the committee should address other issues of diversity as well since some of the issues are similar. Beck stated that while she believes that the diversity issue is as equally important as the womens issue, she thought it would be too much work for the committee to take on. Fuller noted that some of the issues facing female faculty members and faculty members of color can be very different.
Miller asked about the appointments to the Chancellors Commission on the Status of Women and what this committee is doing. Beck reported that it has been separated into three councils: one for faculty, one for staff, and one for students. She noted that the three councils will meet only occasionally as a whole but separately they would meet more frequently. She stated that the Commission is now more of an advisory committee to the Chancellor.
Fuller asked if the ad hoc Senate committee would duplicate the work of the Faculty Womens Caucus. Beck pointed out that the Caucus is not a formal committee. She stated that a Senate committee would have more support and meet more frequently.
Wunder noted that the College of Arts & Sciences is committed to hiring people of color and they are working with Professor Jones who was recently appointed by the Chancellor to help units identify potential candidates. Wunder stated that he has not seen an initiative that is similar for hiring women. Fuller noted that the Chancellor appointed someone to assist with diversity hires but not for female hires.
Spann suggested that two parallel committees could be appointed by the Senate. One committee would work on the issue of women and the other would work on the diversity issue. He noted that the two committees could work together at times.
Alexander stated that Nebraskas ranking as an institution is a problem. He noted that many female faculty members and people of color do not see much opportunity for career growth at Nebraska. He stated that once a faculty member has been successful, it gives them an opportunity to move to more prestigious institutions. Whitt stated that this is true in Sociology, particularly with minorities. He pointed out that there is not a critical mass of people of color in Lincoln and this affects the retention rate.
Fuller pointed out that in Art & Art History the faculty is now more than 50% women. She stated that this makes a tremendous difference for new female faculty members.
Wunder stated that the campus needs to create a critical mass of female faculty members and people of color. He stated that this would help units that have difficulty in hiring female faculty members and faculty members of color and would possibly help in the retention rates. Peterson asked if this should occur within units or the whole university. Wunder stated that it should start within the units.
Whitt moved that the Executive Committee should create two ad hoc committees, one on female faculty and one for faculty of color. Spann seconded the motion. Motion approved.
5.4 Resolution to Support Work of International Affairs
Peterson reminded the committee that when it met with members of the International Affairs Office last semester that it was agreed that the Executive Committee would make a motion supporting the work of International Affairs. Peterson then made the following motion:
After meeting with representatives of the Office of International Affairs and learning of the extraordinary burden that has been placed on that Office by the USA Patriot Act, the Academic Senate Executive Committee offers this statement of support for International Affairs and calls on the UNL Administration to make every effort to provide International Affairs with additional resources as needed to comply with the Act.
Fuller seconded the motion. Motion approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:56 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, January 21 at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in 201 Canfield Administration Building. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Shelley Fuller, Secretary.
