EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Alexander, Beck, Buck, Fech, Fuller, Logan-Peters, Peterson, Shea, Spann, Wunder
Absent: Miller, Whitt
Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2004
Location: 201 Canfield Administration Building
1.0 Call to Order
Wunder called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Article on the Number of Female Faculty Members
Beck reported that there will be an article in the January 11th newspaper on the number of female faculty members at UNL. She noted that there are only four more female faculty members now than there were five years ago while the average increase at our peer institutions over the same period of time is 68. Spann asked if the number of total faculty members has increased. Wunder stated that only four of our peer institutions have had an increase in the number of faculty members. He pointed out that the decrease in the total number of faculty members at UNL has skewed the percentage of female faculty members giving the appearance that UNL has had a larger increase in the number of female faculty members than has actually occurred. Beck pointed out that the IPED figures are often used by administration because it includes all faculty while the AAUP figures, which shows that UNL is not doing well, provides figures only on instructional faculty members.
3.0 Chancellor Perlman, VC Owens, Interim SVCAA Brinkerhoff
3.1 Budget
Chancellor Perlman reported that he will not know about the Universitys budget until Governor Johanns makes his formal announcement. He noted that the reports made by the newspapers on what the state Senators are thinking regarding the University and the budget appear to be positive.
3.2 Update on Searches
VC Owens stated that the search for a new SVCAA is progressing and that the search committee will be meeting soon. He noted that the pool of applicants shows diversity and that there are some very good candidates. Logan-Peters stated that there have been about 40 applicants although one has pulled out of the search. VC Owens stated that the committee hopes to narrow the field quickly and that they would like to begin interviews in the spring.
VC Owens reported that the search committee for the Head of Biological Systems Engineering has identified three candidates that will be brought in for interviews. He reported that an announcement for the Head of Agricultural Economics has just been made.
Chancellor Perlman reported that the search committee for the President has met once already but that they will be meeting soon to review candidates that have been identified by the search firm. Wunder asked if the search committee has a schedule for the search process. Chancellor Perlman noted that President Smiths appointment ends June 30th. He stated that the committee is shooting for that date as a target date. He stated that he does not know if President Smith would be willing to stay on longer if a new President is not hired by June 30th.
Interim SVCAA Brinkerhoff stated that a person has been hired for Director of Financial Operations. He stated that the new Director has considerable experience in financial analysis and has great skills and assets.
3.3 Relationship of Athletic Department to the University
Wunder stated that he has spoken to faculty members who have concerns regarding the search process for a coach versus searches that are conducted for faculty members or administrators. He noted that the Board of Regents comments stating that they have no say as to who is hired as coach is completely different than how searches are normally conducted at the University. Wunder asked if there are proper safeguards for institutional control in this search. He asked who has the final say on who will be hired. Chancellor Perlman pointed out that the Bylaws of the Board of Regents gives the Board the power to retain final approval if they wish to do so. He stated that the Board of Regents has delegated authority to hire a new coach to himself and the Athletic Director, although he, as Chancellor, will make the final decision. He pointed out that President Smith has worked hard to give the authority to hire back to the campuses.
Wunder noted that the rules for conducting searches and hiring are very different for the campus than they are for the athletic department. He asked why. Chancellor Perlman stated that the Regents and UNL Bylaws are specific about hiring academic administrators but they are not on the hiring of coaches. He pointed out that the athletic department must follow the same general rules of Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity as the rest of the campus. He noted that a search committee is not needed if there are particular reasons why it would not be in the best interest of the search. He stated that the reasons must be justified in a letter that will be kept on file.
Chancellor Perlman stated that one of the problems with searching for a new coach is oftentimes the candidates are still currently employed and confidentiality is a key issue. He pointed out that most coaches have and an agent and working with a search committee would be difficult. He stated that the term one-man search committee was unfortunate because it implied he would conduct the search without consultation. The Chancellor noted that Athletic Director Pederson has had wide communication in the athletic arena discussing possible candidates and who would be a good fit at Nebraska. He stated that Pederson has consulted broadly with many people, including people within the University.
Wunder pointed out that the publicity and problems associated with the search have caused problems for faculty members in how Nebraska is being perceived. Chancellor Perlman stated that he is aware that it is causing problems. He stated that he did not want things to work out the way they have but circumstances he could not control took place which exacerbated things. Spann noted that it would be helpful, at some point, to get clarification on the rules governing athletic searches.
Fuller stated that it would be helpful for faculty members and employees of the university to know how to address this issue so they can respond when asked by other people. Chancellor Perlman pointed out that sometimes there is a need to recruit individuals for a position rather than just targeting certain people. He noted that the pool of candidates is diverse and he pointed out that no offer had been made to anyone. He pointed out that no discussions have been held regarding a salary of over $1.5 million. He stated that the figure being given by UNL was $1.2 to $1.5 million. He noted that he had interviewed one internal candidate and would be interviewing the other later this afternoon.
Wunder stated that the search has created a public nightmare for the university and that it is discouraging when so much time has been spent on building UNLs reputation. Chancellor Perlman noted that the administration was doing everything it can to avoid the damage but you cannot always control the situation and it remains important to make the hard decisions that have to be made. Spann pointed out that there was not as much concern from the public over the budget cuts to the university as there has been for the firing and hiring of a football coach.
3.4 ES/IS Proposal
Wunder asked the Chancellor how he felt about the ES/IS proposal. Chancellor Perlman stated that generally he was very supportive of the direction of the proposal. He stated that he has not had an opportunity to completely read the Transition to Universities Report but he believed there could be some mergers between it and the ES/IS proposal.
Chancellor Perlman stated that the Transition to Universities Report suggests that administrators should teach a freshman class. He noted that he has no objection to this but pointed out that it could not be done each semester, but perhaps regularly. He stated that every tenured faculty member should be doing some teaching, whether it is teaching an entire course or a portion of a course. Wunder stated that there is a lot of unutilized teaching power on campus. Chancellor Perlman pointed out that part of this is due to scheduling conflicts. He stated that he believed that administrators need to be connected to the university and spending time in a classroom would help to make this connection.
4.0 Approval of 12/10/03 Minutes
Peterson moved and Shea seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
5.0 <![endif]>Unfinished Business
5.1 ES/IS Amendments
Wunder distributed a list of suggested amendments to the ES/IS proposal. He noted that his amendments were based on conversations he has had with various faculty members regarding the proposal. He stated that he would be meeting with Dean Hoffman of Arts and Sciences to discuss his concerns with the proposal.
Wunder stated that he has concerns that departments have not had an opportunity to fully discuss the proposal and its implications. He stated that the Senate might want to vote to postpone voting on the proposal until the February meeting. Peterson stated that the Senate should have extensive discussion on the issue. Fuller noted that her department discussed the proposal and voted to approve it.
Peterson stated that most of the concerns he has heard are about credit hour productions and whether departments will see a decrease in the production as a result of the proposal. He pointed out that the proposal suggests a university minimum of credit hours but each college can require additional credit hours beyond this minimum. He stated that the only real change is that colleges and departments would be required to accept the courses that are listed under ES.
Beck reported that the biggest concern she has heard is over the IS courses. She stated that most of these courses in IANR are taught by women and that there is concern that this will have an impact on the teaching load of female faculty members. She pointed out that most of the Foundation courses are also IS courses. Peterson stated that the basic consensus of the committee is that the curriculum is the property of the faculty and that the IS courses should be turned back to the control of the departments. He noted that most students are confused about the IS courses and do not know what constitutes these courses or how they differ from other courses.
Beck asked how the committee knows that the IS courses are not working. Peterson stated that a report written by Professors Goodburn and Ritchie examined the IS courses and it was determined that 61% of the instructors teaching these courses did not even know they were IS courses. Wunder pointed out that many of the professors who created and established these courses are no longer teaching them due to retirement or other reasons. Fuller stated that IS courses create a real problem for transfer students and that they are difficult for the arts which has more visual components to their courses.
Peterson stated that the consensus of the committee was that it is useful to give the responsibility for the IS programs to the departments. He noted that the college curriculum committee should want to see an annual assessment of these courses and that they should be included in the academic program review.
Wunder asked that the committee read his suggested amendments and provide him with feedback. Spann asked if the procedure to get a course recognized under ES would merely require identification by the department and approval by the college curriculum committee. Peterson stated that under the proposal that this would be correct.
5.2 Motion on Presidents Salary
Wunder stated that there is concern over the language of the motion, particularly the use of the word average. The committee agreed that amendments to the motion should be made at the Senate meeting.
6.0 New Business
6.1 Vacancy on Executive Committee Due to Carlo Resignation
Wunder reported that Professor Carlo has resigned from the Senate and the Executive Committee. He stated that he would make an announcement of the resignation at the Senate meeting and ask that anyone interested in running for the Executive Committee should contact him. He stated that he wanted to encourage senators from the hard sciences to run for election because the Committee needs their input. He noted that several colleges are not represented on the Committee and he will encourage senators from those colleges to run. Spann suggested that Wunder should send an email message to the senators about the vacancy before the Senate meeting.
6.2 Dead Week Reform Proposal
Wunder stated that he constructed a proposal eliminating dead week and proposing that the Monday and Tuesday of the 15th week be used as study days with final exams to be given on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday and continuing on Monday and Tuesday of the following week. He stated this would then give instructors three days for grading which would resolve the problem of trying to get grades in for seniors before graduation. He noted that the Senate would need to make a decision on the proposal.
Peterson stated that an amendment to the proposal could be made to hold classes on Monday of week 15 leaving Tuesday as a study day with finals beginning on Wednesday as indicated in the proposal. The reason for this change to the proposal is that classes that currently meet on Monday are one class period short because of Labor Day in fall and Martin Luther Kings birthday in spring. A class meeting MWF has only 44 sessions instead of the expected 45 (3 times a week x 15 weeks). Holding classes on Monday of the 14th week would equalize the class time for all courses.
Peterson stated that that the proposal would effectively reduce the semester from 15 weeks to 14 which is commonly the length of semesters at other universities.
Wunder stated that there is a serious problem for faculty members who have Friday afternoon exams completing grading for senior students who are graduating the next day. He stated that the current system does not allow enough time for the grading to be done and turned in. Peterson stated that one possible solution is to let the student go through the graduation ceremony but not provide them with a diploma until the grades are in. Spann stated that faculty members can determine if a senior student is in jeopardy and could have the student take the exam earlier. Buck asked if it is enough of a problem to suggest changing the entire final exam structure. Fuller pointed out that the students complain each semester about the dead week policy. She stated that the policy needs to be changed. Wunder stated that the current system is problematical and that the committee should look into possibly restructuring it.
6.3 Proposal for a Faculty Leadership Summit
Wunder stated that in lieu of budget cuts and recent events he thought it would be a good idea to have a gathering of faculty leaders to assess where faculty members stand at the university. He stated that possible topics of discussion include tenure; faculty governance; the relationship of UNL to UNO, UNK, and UNMC; the pros and cons of collective bargaining; and the definitions of roles for departments, programs, colleges, deans and department chairs. He pointed out that the purpose of the summit is to provide an opportunity for discussion, not to have action come out it. The committee agreed that holding a faculty leadership summit would be a good idea.
6.4 Special Committee to Consider Revisions in the Procedures for Reductions-in-Force
Wunder stated that new members need to be appointed to the committee that is being reactivated. He asked the Executive Committee to suggest possible members to this committee.
6.4 Email Message from Professor Fuess Regarding University Curriculum Committee
Wunder stated that he received an email message from the chair of the Curriculum Committee regarding pertinent issues pertaining to the committee. He suggested that the Executive Committee should discuss this at the next meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, January 14th at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace, Room 203. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Shelley Fuller, Secretary.
