(minutes to be considered for approval at April 24, 2001, meeting of the 2000-2001
Senate)
FACULTY
SENATE
UM-ST.
LOUIS
March
13, 2001
3
p.m. Student Government Chamber Millennium Student Center
The meeting was called to order at 3 p.m. by the Chairperson of the Faculty Senate, Dr. Lawrence Barton.
It was reported that the new (2001-2002) Senate had met and had reelected Dr. Barton as Chairperson and Dr. Lois Pierce as Secretary. The Committee on Committees also was elected, and Dr. E. Terrence Jones was elected at the Committee’s initial meeting to serve as committee chairperson.
Minutes from the previous meeting of the 2000-2001 Senate (held February 13, 2001) were approved as submitted.
Report from the Chairperson – Dr. Lawrence Barton
The Chair announced that the Senate Office has completed elections for both representatives in the various departments and at-large delegates. His attempt to provide more lead-time for departments involved in reelecting representatives to discuss the topic almost backfired when he wrote individually, by e-mail, to all departments conducting an election. He experienced great difficulty in identifying correct addresses and, in some cases, eligible voters. The Chair suggested that in the future, we ask departments to identify the list of eligible voting faculty members. Furthermore, he remarked that he opposes a request for interest to run because this doesn’t always attract the best people. Often, the best people would not volunteer to run but may be persuaded by others. The Chair recommended a nomination process, with the proviso that the individual agrees to be nominated.
Chair Barton reported that he served on the Student Government Association’s parking forum. He commented that it was good to see so many students involved, and that there was a good discussion. The students have cause for frustration, he said, pointing to the steep escalation in parking fees over the past several years.
-2-
The Chair also serves on the Alumni Association Board and has been involved in discussions with various campus administrators as part of their long-range planning process. One problem that surfaced several times was the difficulty in getting help from the campus in web page design or construction. He remarked that given all the
talk about computers on this campus, it is a pity that the computing administration cannot provide more assistance.
Chair Barton said he voted for the resolution of the Missouri Association of Faculty Senates affirming that normal faculty governance processes must be used in the development, approval, and operation of on-line and other cooperative degree programs. He also briefed the Steering Committee about this.
The Steering Committee asked the Chancellor to try to move along more quickly the discussion of possible new general education requirements – which the Chair remarked that he has never seen, nor has the majority of the Faculty.
It was Dr. Gail Ratcliff, the Chair believes, who asked him whether the Faculty was involved in any of the discussions concerning space utilization on the campus. This is a priority of the Curators this year, under the new President, Paul Steele. The Chair said he was invited to participate in the Space Committee’s deliberations, and the Committee met earlier that very day. He informed senators that he was the only faculty member present and that his two schools (Arts and Sciences and the Graduate School) were not well represented, which he feels is a pity because some important decisions are looming. Chair Barton said he heard that a faculty member had written to Curator Steele and informed him that we have vacant spaces and no plans for their use. Even it that were true (and the Chair does not believe it is), he said he would hope that faculty would not go off-campus with their concerns and complaints before
they have exhausted attempts at resolution on the campus.
At the February Senate meeting, the Chair reported that he was about to attend an Intercampus Faculty Council meeting. He said he would bring up the issue of the budget – the measly 12 percent of it that UM-St. Louis receives. He also said he would mention the unique problems we on the program-poor St. Louis campus face when asked to reallocate funds for our salary increases, relative to the much larger and better-funded Columbia campus, for example. The other point he promised to raise was that it is unfair to treat us the same when it comes to reallocation but not when it comes to funding the campuses adequately.
The Chair said he made all the points to President Pacheco, and also pointed out that it was due to the frustration of dealing with an unsympathetic president in efforts to obtain adequate funding and new programs that caused essentially all of the former chancellors to leave here. The President was not very sympathetic but correctly pointed out that he had agreed to support a proposal for a joint doctoral program in what we loosely called “Urban Affairs.” He noted that the program is languishing
-3-
here and said he is a bit concerned that we complain about the lack of programs and then don’t establish them when he lets us. We need to act on this program as soon as possible. Our former colleague, Vice President Lehmkuhle, has also not been supportive of our comments, so this week, the Chair said, he took action on his own.
With assistance from the Director of the Office of Research, who downloaded some data from the web, and Dean Timothy McBride, who converted the data to charts, he sent a letter to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and included all the data. He asked that they use it in an op-ed piece, or a letter to the editor, but doesn’t know if they will do that. (Note: A copy of the letter and charts is attached.)
Chair Barton reported that next month, our last meeting will have a different format. The Assembly/Senate combination has not worked so well because attendance at the shorter Assembly meetings has been very poor. The new (2001-2002) Senate will meet at 2:30 on April 24th to elect members of Senate committees. That meeting will be followed at 3:15 p.m. by a meeting of the current University Assembly. The current Senate will convene at 4:00 p.m. or immediately following the Assembly meeting. Invitations to the Senate Banquet, held at 5:30 p.m. on April 24th, will be mailed soon. Guests include all members of the 2000-2001 Senate and University Assembly, past Senate Chairs, and Ms. Susan English, our former Assistant, who has been very helpful to the Senate Office during this year. Please note that you will need to RSVP, whether you plan to attend or not. You can do this by phone or e-mail.
Business to be carried over to next year includes the adoption of a set of Senate Operating Rules.
In closing, the Chair welcomed comments and concerns. As the representative of the Faculty in an increasing number of situations, the Chair said he wants to do the best job possible. He asked that senators aid him by sharing items of concern. He remarked that he has been a bit disappointed at the poor attendance now that most senators are representatives of departments and urged departmental delegates to report back to their constituency.
Concerning the Chair’s concern about web-based computer assistance, Dr. William Long commented that there are many courses offered that faculty have not taken advantage of. Chair Barton pointed to the Alumni Association and Athletics as two examples of units unable to get assistance for web pages. Associate Vice Chancellor for Technology Jerrold Siegel responded by noting that we have only two people to do web development. Dr. Joseph Martinich reported that Dr. Vicki Sauter has class projects where groups get together to develop a web-site and train people to run it.
Concerning the President’s admonition that we didn’t run with the ball when he gave us permission to go forward with a degree in Urban Affairs, Dr. E. Terrence Jones remarked that we are interested in programs we want, rather than Urban Affairs. He
-4-
deemed it inappropriate for the President to criticize us in this way rather than supporting our attempts to include needed programs on the campus.
Report from the Chancellor – Chancellor Blanche Touhill
The Chancellor reported that President Pacheco has asked that each campus incorporate more connections between the System Strategic Plan and their respective campus plans. We do not have to have our revisions in to the President by April 1, as we once thought, but will probably make our presentation of the new plan to the Board of Curators in fall. Chancellor Touhill noted that we have distributed copies of the revised plan. Comments are invited and should be conveyed to Ms. Flo Nolte in the Chancellor’s Office. The Chancellor said we will be scheduling a campus-wide meeting sometime in April. Another opportunity to share thoughts concerning the campus plan will come when the Task Force meets again on March 20 at 1 p.m. in 222 J. C. Penney.
The state Coordinating Board for Higher Education has required that all universities review their respective general education requirements. Deans David Young and Robert Bliss have led that review on this campus and have shared a proposal with the Senate Curriculum and Instruction Committee. Chancellor Touhill strongly encouraged each school and college to review the proposal and provide feedback to the C&I Committee.
The fourth of five candidates for Vice Chancellor for University Relations met with various people and groups yesterday and today, the Chancellor reported. The final candidate is on campus tomorrow and Thursday.
In closing, the Chancellor announced that, along with the Bi-State Development Agency, we have been reviewing proposals to develop the property we jointly own along Interstate 70. If we find an appropriate developer, we will consider leasing the land we own to private enterprises to develop in a manner that the campus community believes to be beneficial. She added that we are not planning to contribute financially to the project. Indeed, we have no money for such projects.
Dr. Gail Ratcliff noted that some years ago, it was decided that parking fees are pre-tax. How much, she asked, is being taken out for increases. Chancellor Touhill said we don’t take parking out of faculty/staff raises. From $12 per month, Dr. Ratcliff commented, students are now paying $16 per credit hour. To this, the Chancellor responded by saying we have put up new garages, for which no money is forthcoming from the state. Vice Chancellor Krueger works hard, she said, to keep fees the same for faculty, staff, and students.
Dr. Martinich inquired if the strategic plan is an empty exercise in light of the fact that nearly all of the initiatives require money. Chancellor Touhill remarked that each
-5-
of the past presidents has had his own strategic plan. It is, she said, beneficial for us to have a plan in case an opportunity presents itself.
Report from the Intercampus Faculty Council – Dr. Joseph Martinich
(see attached)
Dr. Susan Feigenbaum returned to the issue of the dependent fee waiver. Dr. Martinich explained that UMC is opposed to this, and Dr. Feigenbaum urged that we move ahead with it and let Columbia do as it pleases. Dr. Martinich said he doesn’t think the IFC can do much more and suggested that the Benefits Committee take it on. Dr. Feigenbaum commented that we need to get the other three campuses to work together.
Dean Bernard Feldman inquired about the articulation agreement. Dr. Martinich remarked that some IFC representatives, notably from Columbia, would like to hold to certain requirements so that students are better prepared. UMC, he said, has a number of general education requirements at the upper-level. Dean Young commented that students who complete a degree somewhere else may not be able to transfer into UMC.
Report from the Budget and Planning Committee – Chancellor Blanche Touhill
(see attached)
Report from the Committee on Curriculum and Instruction – Dean David Ganz
Dean Ganz reported that at the last meeting of C&I, Dean Young presented a plan for general education. He is sharing that presentation with all of the departments in the College of Arts and Sciences and is willing to take it to other units. Dean Ganz urged that this offer be accepted. We will have to do something this year, he said, to comply with CBHE next year.
Academic
Calendar (Revised)
It was reported that no campus is following IFC’s schedule guidelines. Dean Ganz indicated that he drafted a calendar that would be in compliance with IFC, but the Senate/Assembly Steering Committee decided it was so full of problems that it should not go forward to the Senate. Dean Ganz noted the salient points of the calendar, which was revised to include summer sessions I through VI. At the close of his remarks, the 2002-2003 calendar was approved by the Senate without dissent.
Dean Ganz noted that the proposal offered last month has been revised to add another tier of courses at the graduate level. Dr. Ruth Bohan noted that even if we adopt the course renumbering plan, there will be discrepancies with the community colleges, which are not engaged in renumbering. Dean Ganz responded by saying that our purpose is not to change what the community colleges are doing. They have most of their courses at the 100- and 200-level, he said, and we simply would not accept a 300-level course from them as fulfilling our requirements.
Dean Ganz reminded senators that when the issue of course renumbering was discussed (at the February Faculty Senate meeting), the plan was to implement it in 2003 to give us plenty of lead time to prepare. At that time, Dr. Burkholder favored a 2002 implementation date. Now, however, we are being told that we can’t go forward until the implementation of PeopleSoft.
Dr. Bohan commented that advisement would be a real headache with new numbers.
Dean Ganz agreed, saying that we would have to label new course numbers as “formerly.”
Observing that the proposal is clearer as revised, Dr. Mark Burkholder urged that it be approved and implemented as soon as possible.
Dr. Peter Stevens, a member of C&I, remarked that he felt the proposal is over-developed. His own unit, Biology, should be able to use just one tier for all graduate levels, he said. Dean Young commented that a department could choose not to use all the tiers. Dean Douglas Wartzok remarked that more distinction at the graduate level is good. We have higher expectations of graduate students than we have of undergraduates in the same course, he observed. Dr. Gail Ratcliff said she is very uncomfortable with the proposal, commenting that she doesn’t know how many students and departments can accommodate the present 300-level being changed to the 400-level in terms of the limited number of faculty and the numbers of students.
Dean Ganz commented that course renumbering has not been revisited since our inception in 1963.
Speaking in support of the proposal, Dr. Fred Willman observed that it parallels what other schools are doing, and Dean Young remarked that the proposal provides a lot of flexibility.
At the close of the discussion, the Senate voted to approve the course renumbering proposal. There was some dissent.
-7-
Report from the Committee on Research – Dr. Gordon Anderson
(see attached)
Dr. Gail Ratcliff reminded senators that in the past, a decision was made to take some of the money and set it aside for use by Dean Wartzok. She inquired if this practice has continued. Dean Wartzok responded by saying that the largest component of this
was for grant-writers. Not all units have hired someone for this purpose, so he has put the money back in the pool.
Dr. Donald Phares commented that he has sent several dossiers for Curators Professorships forward without hearing the outcome. Chancellor Touhill said the dossiers will go forward this spring. The Chair agreed that we are lax in not informing people when they are not successful. Dr. William Long reported that he has made recommendations for honorary degrees two years ago and has never heard the outcome.
Dr. Barton reported that the incoming (new) Senate will meet at 2:30 on April 24th to elect committee members for next year. The University Assembly will meet at 3:15 p.m. that day, and the current Senate will meet at 4:00 p.m. (or immediately following the Assembly meeting). All meetings will be held in the Student Government Chamber of the Millennium Student Center, which will also be the site of the Senate Banquet, which begins at 5:30 p.m. in the Millennium Student Center’s rotunda. Invitations to the banquet will be mailed shortly.
Completing the business at hand, the Faculty Senate adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lois Pierce
Faculty Senate Secretary
(minutes written by Ms. Joan M. Arban,
Faculty Senate Assistant)