(minutes to be considered for approval at the Faculty Senate meeting on December 5, 2000)
FACULTY SENATE
UM-ST. LOUIS
MINUTES
November 14, 2000
3 p.m. 126 J. C. Penney
The meeting was called to order at 3:05 p.m. by the Chairperson of the Faculty Senate, Dr. Lawrence Barton.
Minutes
Minutes from the October 17, 2000, meeting were approved as submitted.
Report from the Chairperson -- Dr. Lawrence Barton
The Chair began by noting that the agenda for the Faculty Senate meeting that day was relatively short but that the agenda for the December meeting will be considerably longer. He regretted that it was not possible to meet in the Student Government Chamber at the Millennium Student Center due to the reservation of the room by the Student Government Association.
The Chair indicated that the regular Intercampus Faculty Council report would be presented later in the meeting by Dr. Joseph Martinich. Faculty Senators were informed about the special role of the campus governing body chairs at meetings of the IFC. It seems that at each IFC meeting, the chairs report to President Pacheco about activities on their respective campuses. The Chair said he was taken by surprise at his first meeting, but since the reports are presented alphabetically by campus (so we are always last), he was able to improvise and come up with something acceptable during other reports.
At the Friday, November 10, meeting, among other things the Chair reported to the President that the campus has been relatively quiet during the past month, possibly due to the Chancellor's being away for some of the time and perhaps because Dr. Timothy McBride no longer runs the Faculty Forum since he accepted an appointment in the Arts and Sciences' dean's office. (The Chair commented in passing that Dr. McBride has resigned his Senate seat and has resisted the Chair's attempts to dissuade him from doing so. There are already four such deans who serve on the Senate, the Chair said.) At the IFC meeting, the Chair pointed out to the President that several of our colleagues here have gained good publicity for themselves and the campus at the local, national, and international level during the election fiasco. The Chair said he specifically mentioned Drs. David Robertson, Andrew Glassberg, E. Terrence Jones, Richard Pacelle, and Stephen Caliendo. He further reported that Dr. Joyce Corey won a major regional award last month. The Chair commented to President Pacheco that the campus is not looking forward to dealing with the impending budget reallocation which has been brought about by the state's asking us to generate more than half of the 4 percent salary increase. He reported that Chancellor Touhill had indicated that the budget cuts would parallel those of last year, and he reiterated that reallocation was most unfair to the UM-St. Louis campus. The Chair repeated that we have fewer programs than two of the campuses and thus much less flexibility. Furthermore, he quoted the President by saying that we are a developing campus and have not been funded adequately in that role. What was the President's reaction to all this? The Chair remarked that Dr. Pacheco is quite an agreeable fellow and doesn't get angry when such issues are brought up, although he doesn't necessarily agree.
With respect to Senate elections, the Chair reported his preference that replacements for at-large vacancies take place no more frequently than once per year. Since the re-definition of voting faculty membership, the Chair noted that the list of eligible faculty voters has become a moving target. In light of this, the Chair said he has suggested that the Committee on Bylaws and Rules consider a revision to the bylaws that would allow the appointment of the next-highest vote-getter whenever we need to replace a faculty member-at-large.
The Chair reported that Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Douglas Durand could not attend the Faculty Senate meeting, but Dr. Durand requested that the Chair inform Senators that the task force to resolve issues concerning ATP procedures is in place. The appointees include three deans (Charles Kuehl, David Young, and Douglas Wartzok) and three members each from last year’s ATP Committee and this year’s Committee (Drs. R. Rocco Cottone, Roberta Lee, Susan Feigenbaum, Fred Willman, Joyce Corey, and Robert Nauss). The Chair said he made the faculty suggestions to Dr. Durand, and the Vice Chancellor accepted them all.
At the close of his report, the Chair invited questions from the floor. Dr. R. Rocco Cottone commented that Dr. Bruce Wilking should be on the ATP task force. The Chair agreed, noting that Dr. Wilking had been asked but decided to decline. Dr. Gail Ratcliff requested that attachments to Senate material be posted on the web. The Chair said this would be done.
Report from the Chancellor – Chancellor Blanche Touhill
Chancellor Touhill encouraged Faculty Senators to attend a memorial service for Dr. Edward Andalafte, which was scheduled for November 16, at 7 p.m., in the Century Room of the Millennium Student Center.
The Chancellor reported that the Budget and Planning Committee met on October 18. Agenda items included the status of our campus strategic plan, the status of Mission Enhancement funds, and scenarios for possible rate and cost reallocations for FY 2002. Reallocation scenarios range from $1.2 million to as much as $3 million. It was reported that the Coordinating Board for Higher Education was recommending that UM-St. Louis receive supplemental funding to offset the high cost of educational fees in the Barnes College of Nursing and in the School of Optometry. The Budget and Planning Committee will meet again on November 17, at 10 a.m., in 331 SSB (the
McDonnell Conference Room).
Chancellor Touhill noted that last month, she reported that our total enrollment for fall had declined significantly because of a state-mandated change in the Advanced Placement program, which allows high school students to take college credit courses through UM-St. Louis at the high schools. She has since learned that enrollment in the Advanced Placement program has now reached a level very near where it was last fall. Nonetheless, the Chancellor reminded Faculty Senators that the Advanced Placement program does not factor into our general operating budget because this is a Continuing Education program.
Also last month, the Chancellor reported that she was told by Central Administration that the implementation of PeopleSoft would be simplified and enhanced if all four campuses handled investment income on gift accounts in the same way. As a result of this—and to follow the model of the other three campuses—we had begun to collect and shift into a central account interest on all non-endowed gift accounts. Chancellor Touhill said that we will continue to collect this interest at the end of each fiscal year to be consistent with the other campuses; however, she will return these funds to their original accounts after we have accomplished our PeopleSoft mandate.
In closing, the Chancellor reported that there has been a running debate in the halls of the President’s office as to whether UM-Rolla should remain a very focused technical institution or whether it should broaden its mission. Rolla is now moving forward on an undergraduate business degree and on a degree on the master’s level called “Architectural Engineering.” Chancellor Touhill believes this is a signal that the decision has been made for UMR to broaden its offerings a bit. She noted that Rolla’s enrollments have been dropping over the past few years, and they were trying to figure out how to handle their future development. Dr. Joseph Martinich offered the information that in their campus report at the IFC meeting, Rolla announced that they were exploring the concept of creating a degree program in information technology systems. He said he believed it would be a spin-off of computer science into a software systems area, looking a lot more like MIS. The Chair observed that during the questions to the President, Rolla wanted to know if they could be excused from giving a 4 percent salary increase because they have such an enormous drop in enrollment. In addition, he said, Rolla has very serious financial problems. President Pacheco said no to them.
Dr. Paul Roth inquired if the Chancellor expected UMR to have problems with the Coordinating Board for Higher Education if Rolla attempted to open another business school within the UM System. Chancellor Touhill replied that she would not expect difficulty with CBHE if the decision has been made to broaden Rolla’s offerings and if that decision has been agreed to by President Pacheco.
Dr. Mark Burkholder thanked the Chancellor for her decision concerning the gift accounts. In response to a question from Dr. Gail Ratcliff, Chancellor Touhill updated Faculty Senators on the status of several open positions.
Returning to the issue of the expansion of Rolla’s degree offerings, Dr. Roth asked how Rolla will fund this. He was told that all of the program proposals are circulated among the four campuses, giving us the opportunity to look at their last budget pages to see where the money is coming from. CBHE has always maintained that it should come out of reallocation. If UMR is asking the state for new money, the Chancellor added, it would be a good opportunity for us to ask for money for nursing, which received no money from the state.
Report from the Intercampus Faculty Council – Dr. Joseph Martinich
(see attached)
Chancellor Touhill remarked that if you have to have money to endow a new degree program before you can offer it, it will be very hard for us to get new programs on this campus. Dr. Martinich said he believed Vice President Lehmkuhle was referring to existing programs for which we wanted enhancements. As an example, he mentioned the speaker’s series or some sort of special enhancements to programs for which we could get endowments that would then be matched by the state. That money would be designated to a program rather than to an individual. This is a way of enriching existing programs but not designating the money to a specific body, he said.
Chancellor Touhill commented that we are doing some of that now. Right now in the System, she said, for $30,000, you can get a 5 percent endowment, which gives you $1,500—enough for a nice little lecture. Be careful, she cautioned, about tying endowments with programs.
Dr. Roth suggested collecting data on the retirement of senior faculty across the System and also senior faculty who leave us across the System by way of making the point that if you are going to have graduate programs, they can’t be run just by hiring assistant professors. Some replacement has to be done at the senior level, as well. This is, he said, easily forgotten, especially when you are trying to do things “on the cheap.” If the idea is to increase our research profile, part of it is not only retaining our best investigators but replacing some at a senior level. Dr. Martinich agreed that it would make sense to get data on the current profile of faculty age at different ranks so we can see how many will be reaching retirement age, and recent historical data on people who have left the University with the reason why they have left. He promised to make a point to ask that at the next IFC meeting.
Report from the Committee on Research – Dr. Gordon Anderson
Dr. Anderson reported that the Fall Panel of the Committee on Research reviewed 29 proposals, totaling $24,132, in the first of three rounds of the Small Grants competition. Of these, 24 were funded in amounts totaling $20,589. The deadline for the second round of the Small Grants competition is January 26, 2001.
The Panel met on Friday, November 10, to review 25 Research Award proposals with requests totaling $231,258. Approximately $100,000 was available for distribution in this round. The letters to the applicants will go out later in the week.
Completing the business at hand, the Senate adjourned at 3:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lois Pierce
Senate Secretary
(minutes written by Ms. Joan M. Arban,
Faculty Senate and University Assembly Assistant)
IFC REPORT TO THE FACULTY SENATE – November 14, 2000
IFC met on November 10, 2000.
The following are the main items discussed.