University Senate - April 29, 2024 Minutes

UNIVERSITY SENATE

Meeting Minutes

April 29, 2024

The University Senate was called to order at 3:30 p.m., in 111 Harrison Hall on Monday, April 29, 2024. Members absent: Adam Beissel, Riley Crabtree, Daniele Fioretti, Evan Gallagher, Chip Hahn, Venus Harvey, Frank Huang, Patrick Houlihan, Jeffrey Kuznekoff, Yong Lin, August Ogunnowo, Ganiva Reyes, Nyah Smith, and Peng Wang.

1. Call to Order and Announcements and Remarks – Tracy Haynes, Chair of University Senate Executive Committee

2. Approval of University Senate Minutes

University Senate Full Meeting Minutes_04.15.2024 (Results: 46-Yes, 00-No, 01-Abstain)

3. Consent Calendar: The following items were received and accepted on the Consent Calendar:

Curricular Items _04.17.2024
Curricular Items_04.24.2024
Graduate Council Minutes_04.16.2024
LEC Meeting Minutes_04.09.2024

4. Old Business

SR 24-12 WST - Individualized Studies, Bachelor of Philosophy, Nicholas Money, Director of Western Program and Professor of Biology,The curriculum document can be accessed at - click on 'title' and type 'Individualized Studies, Bachelor of Philosophy*' in the Search section. Click on 'WST - Individualized Studies, Bachelor of Philosophy’ - (Results: 42-Yes, 00-No, 05-Abstain)
1. Senator Questions and Comments
  1. Senator: What is our strategy on this, because we are cutting majors and then are asked to add new majors? It seems with this we are trying to get around the CAS requirements.The concern is, do we need to do that or could we do a co-major instead? It seems like a concern that we are approving things to get around CAS requirements. (A) 1) We’re always updating the curriculum. We did something different this fall- I’m not trying to say it was the same. There is a desire for more of an open curriculum so students can choose their path. As we’ve seen some CAS enrollments decline, this could be a good thing for that college. 2) Why the CAS requirement is being avoided is this: There’s a demand- a small, but significant group of students want a truly open curriculum where they can do anything at all. The CAS requirement is above the �� Plan by a considerable amount. This keeps with the Western tradition. In a sense, we opposed on it a set of strictures that don’t keep with the original spirit. CAS curriculum committee fully vetted the proposal. Faculty were in support and key groups were represented in that process.
  2. Senator: I am concerned about the confusion that students may have when distinguishing between a philosophy major vs bachelor of Philosophy degree.(A) That will come through advising, but the term philosophy is used in many different ways without the implication that this is a degree in philosophy. We’ll require expert advising. We have a BA and this will be a Bachelor of Philosophy in Individualized Studies. This will meet a need and this may become a good retention tool for those students who see CAS requirements as a barrier.
  3. Senator: I have been having the same question asked by my constituents. The most recent question is wanting to know about adding new faculty lines. My constituents have been told we are on a hiring freeze, but here we are adding new lines for these new programs when we have been told that there is not enough money to move forward. (A) We are not doing that at present. This is revenue neutral. It isn’t going to grow really fast. We can easily accommodate them in the classes. I’d like to see more faculty involved in the future. Some endowed funds could help to support some faculty without additional faculty lines.
  4. Senator: Would a co-major be a better fit and did anyone look into this? (A) Right now, most of our students have a co-major. That option remains available. Through this, by avoiding the full suite of CAS requirements, it gives students a broader range of options.
  5. Senator: Do you see the Bachelor of Art going away?(A) That’s a good question. I think a Bachelor of Arts will retain its premium. I can’t imagine the future, but it could happen in the future. There is no way to predict the future.
  6. Senator: Would that create a better efficiency by not having 2 BA’s?(A) I guess we’ll see how the Bachelor of Philosophy degree develops.
  7. Senator: Is there data showing these conversations with students who are requesting to have more flexibility? Also, does it show if the data is coming from current students or students that decided not to come here? I think it would be helpful to this body if we could see where this data is coming from. (A) In the original proposal, we had a number of article links that described the number of students wanting this option at the entry point. It’s anecdotal, but at Make it ��, we are hearing interest from students.
  8. Senator: They often have to turn students away because of the CAS requirements. Do you think that if the CAS requirement changes and comes down, it will affect the demand for this Bachelor Philosophy or do you see that being complementary to this? (A) This is just my opinion, but the CAS requirement seen as an impediment would be the language requirement. I don’t see that going away in the near future.
SR 24-13 Registration Policy Proposal, Michael Crowder, Associate Provost and Dean of the Graduate School - (Results: 46-Yes, 00-No, 01-Abstain)
1. Senator Questions and Comments: None
SR 24-14 Doctoral Time Limits Policy Proposal, Michael Crowder, Associate Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Results: 46-Yes, 00-No, 01-Abstain)
1. Senator Questions and Comments
  1. Senator: Does this make any provision for military service?(A) It does not. This revision changes how the ten years are counted and specifies the dates the period starts and ends.
SR 24-15 Sense of the Senate: Department of Comparative Religion Elimination Process Coordinator Recommendations (Results: 46-Yes, 00-No, 01-Abstain)
1. Senator Questions and Comments: None

5. New Business

EHS TCPL cap increase--Amity Noltemeyer, Interim Dean and Professor, Presentation only; Discussion and Anticipated Vote on May 06, 2024
1. Limitation on Number of Lecturers and Teaching Faculty - TCPLs may not exceed the following percentage of continuing faculty (full-time TCPL and Tenure/Tenure Track) within each division:
  1. CAS: 23.0%
  2. CCA: 29.0%
  3. EHS: 269.0%
  4. CEC: 29.0%
  5. FSB: 29.0%
  6. CLAAS: 29.0%
2. Context and Rationale
  1. EHS has a number of clinically and professionally focused programs, with several coming on board in recent years.
  2. Our current cap at 26% does not provide us the flexibility to hir needed continuing faculty in some of our programs.
  3. This proposal would put us at the same level as CCA, CEC, FSB, and CLAAS
3. Process and Feedback
  1. EHS Governance
    1. Silent on TCPL cap and faculty composition
  2. Divisional Precedent
    1. Did not previously vote on faculty composition changes
  3. Opportunities for discussion and feedback
    1. Individual and group discussions: email to division with information on how to share feedback; drop-in session with Interim Dean.
4. Senator Questions and Comments
  1. Senator: Why TCPL and not Tenure Track?(A) Particularly in consultation with accredited clinical programs, departments are saying that clinical faculty would be more appropriate for that role. They feel TCPLs would bring an excellent skill set.
  2. Senator: It is better to find those that are qualified and that are interested in coming to �� to be a part of the Faculty as a TCPL as opposed to filling those roles with VAPs and adjuncts.(A) Thank you. Individuals I talked with agreed that filling these positions with permanent roles would be preferred. In full transparency, I have been told that some would not be in favor of going higher than 29%.
  3. Senator: According to the Policy Library the Division must work in the structural governance process to modify this limitation. Do you intend to change this?(A) I also noticed that. It’s why I did a lot of background work to be sure we’re following it. Our status quo is that we don’t have a policy. We could be open to revising governance in the future, potentially. I would be supportive of that if the governance committee decides to go in that direction. I’ve heard no concerns, so that’s why I’m standing here today.
  4. Senator: Since we haven’t followed the process would make me object to this, because it is not following the process.(A) I didn’t realize that was the intent. If that’s the intent, we can come up with a policy. We’d have to work with governance to do that.
  5. Senator: I don’t object to the increase, just how it came about.
  6. Senator: I support increasing the cap. I’ve heard a lot of people talking about not opposing TCPL cap increases because of all that TCPLs bring, but just pointing out the salary disparity if we continue to increase these caps. (A) Thank you.
  7. Senator: What percent of faculty are visiting and how has that changed over time? Are you at 26% because of the deduction of VAP positions or a decrease in TCPL positions? What are the overall projections?(A) Between 2019 and 2023, it’s hard to look at it over that time period d/t COVID. We had 32/15/20/26/25% VAPs on a downward trend. Then, as far as TCPL and tenure-track, the percentages have varied. Those out of faculty roles and in administration does seem to have impacts; it has ranged from: 23/25/23.8/26%.
  8. Senator: Is that because the total number of Tenure track or TCPL is decreasing or increasing? (A) It looks like TT has been 69, 66, 67, 66, and 64%. TCPL has remained more consistent over those years.
  9. Senator: When we have discussed this before we have always had them bring in those numbers for how the faculty is mixed. None of them had a way to make these discussions happen, so maybe we make a charge from SEC to governance to make governance policy process to do things like this? (A) I think that would be an excellent idea. I certainly support going through the proper channels. I think the governance committee would very much appreciate that.
Senate Attendance Policy, Tracy Haynes, Chair of University Senate Executive Committee, Presentation only; Discussion and Anticipated Vote on May 06, 2024
1. Senate request changes to the Standing Rules, Meeting Procedures of University Senate as outlined below:
  1. When an at-large faculty Any member of University Senate who is unable to attend meetings of Senate for a semester or longer because of a leave-of-absence or other reasons should notify the Secretary of University Senate as soon as possible. His or her seat shall be declared vacant. The Governance Committee will be notified to fill faculty vacancies by the appropriate process. The Chief of Staff will be notified to fill Presidential Appointee vacancies and CPAC or UPAC will be notified by the Secretary of Senate and the Staff representative of the Senate Executive Committee to fill the CPAC or UPAC vacancy. The Associated Student Government or Graduate Student Association will be notified to fill student vacancies. A vacancy for an at-large faculty member of University Senate will be filled by the candidate (who had not been previously elected) who receives the largest number of votes when the ballots are re-tabulated after the votes for the person who has resigned have been deleted and those votes are reassigned. At-large senators who expect to be unable to attend meetings of Senate for a full semester or more should notify the Secretary of University Senate as soon as possible. The name of the faculty member who is replaced shall be undeleted when the faculty member becomes available for service and thereby becomes eligible for election, should future vacancies occur prior to the next all-University election for at-large faculty members of Senate.
    1. (Approved SR88-56C, April 18, 1988)
      (Amended, SR99-1, August 31, 1998)
  2. Upon three (3) absences of a member of Senate from regularly scheduled meetings of Senate during a semester, the Executive Committee of University Senate will notify the senator alerting them to the absences. the Secretary of University Senate shall be directed to report said absences to the constituency of the member of Senate. In the case of student members of Senate, said report shall be reported to the executive cabinet of the Associated Student Government or the Graduate Student Association. Upon the fourth absence six (6) absences of a member of Senate during the semester, the Secretary of University Senate shall be directed to report said absences to the constituency of the member of Senate. In the case of at-large faculty members of Senate, Presidential Appointee, or staff senators, said report shall be reported to the Chair of the Executive Committee of University Senate. In the case of student members of Senate, said report shall be reported to the executive cabinet of the Associated Student Government or the Graduate Student Association. Then, Senate shall consider a motion to declare said member’s seat to be vacant and to direct the Governance Committee to fill faculty vacancies by the appropriate process, the Chief of Staff to fill Presidential Appointee vacancies, CPAC or UPAC to fill staff vacancies, and the Associated Student Government or Graduated Student Association to fill student vacancies . At-Large Senator vacancies will be filled as described in Part 1.
2. Senator Questions and Comments
  1. Senator: Is that 3 consecutive meetings or over the course of the semester?(A) It’s three for the semester. We’re not presenting 3 consecutive.
  2. Senator: What is the definition of a Leave of Absence and would a Research leave fall under that?(A) I would say a research leave would fall into that. That could be one reason for a leave.
  3. Senator: A research leave does not apply towards committees. (A) Maybe I misspoke. I will have to look into that and we can discuss it and make some clarifications.
  4. Senator: Potential flexibility, is there an option for attending remotely? Maybe by only allowing so many remote appearances a year? Technically, I would fall into this category, but I have had situations that caused me not to be able to make it here physically but I could have made it remotely. (A) We actually talked about it. We thought we’d go to the person to ask questions, but determined that due to privacy, we wanted to be careful. If there are good reasons, it wouldn’t mean you would always be replaced. We have not wanted to have remote options in the past. We can continue the conversation, but at this point we weren't planning on a remote option right now. However, we can talk about that option more.
  5. Senator: I want to push for that remote option because some parents need that remote option for sick kids, etc.(A) We can definitely talk about it. Currently the remote is not in the policy, but we can discuss it in SEC more.
  6. Senator: Do I need to let people know when I can’t make it to Senate? We have had issues in the past with not having quorum to do our business. With voting, I could see issues doing that remotely with trying to make sure we have a quorum. (A) I do receive emails sometimes. I think Tammy or Rob do, too. Our thought was that we don’t want to make decisions that are excused or not excused. It would be on a personal level for people to determine if they want to share their rationale for not attending or not. We didn't want senators to feel that they have to report personal information to SEC.
  7. Senator: What is currently being reported? The policy says 3 absences and it doesn’t say consecutive. Constituents want representation, so they want their rep to attend and if they can’t attend they want to know. That is why this would go back to constituents.
  8. Senator: It is not clear where the flexibility would come into play. If it is there and I am missing it please let me know.(A) The flexibility is not for us to alert your constituents, but the purpose was to open an opportunity to talk to Senate Execute first because it may be something private going on. We would have this discussion after the 3rd absence.
  9. Senator: It says “Then, Senate shall consider a motion to declare said member’s seat to be vacant”. Would this be the right time then for that member to defend why they were absent and then the senate would decide or appeal the decision? It says Senate not Senate Execute, so it would be for the senate to decide. (A) That’s the current language. I’m not sure what that looks like. The policy has always been there. We’d like to start enforcing so we can continue to do business by reaching quorum.
  10. Senator: I am pleased to hear the increase in flexibility, I would like to see that language added into the policy. Also, something to think of is if you go to constituents instead of straight to the senator you could open a conversation about medical issues that their constituents may not be aware of and that the Senator doesn't want them aware of. (A) We can work on that.
  11. Senator: Answer: As a counterpoint the Senators are elected by constituencies. They are not consistently aware of Senator absences. There has to be a balance. If they’re not here to fulfill and meet quorum, they’re not meeting the need. At some point, going back to constituencies probably has some merit.
  12. Presenter: We can work on the language and bring that back to you.
Administration of Graduate Awards: Time Limits, Jason Abbitt, Associate Dean of the Graduate School, Presentation only; Discussion and Anticipated Vote on May 06, 2024
1. Policy Revision: Time Limits for Graduate Awards - Policy defines time limits for eligibility to hold Graduate Assistantship
  1. Current Policy
    1. Master’s degree 2 years
    2. Doctoral degree:
      1. 4 years beyond master’s, or
      2. 6 years beyond bachelor’s degree
  2. Revised
    1. No charge to Master’s or Doctoral eligibility
    2. Specifies new 3 year limit for
      1. Master of Fine Arts
      2. 3-year Master of Architecture
  3. Rationale for change:
    1. 3-year programs
      1. MFA in Art (60 cr hr), terminal degree
      2. M. Arch. III (88 cr hr)
    2. Student recruitment concerns
    3. Students required to petition for additional eligibility
  4. In-Practice
    1. All GAs are 1-year appointments
    2. Eligibility aligns with length of program
    3. Addresses eligibility, not availability of GA eligibility, 1-year appointments, and reappointment.
    4. Eliminates need for petitions
2. Senator Questions and Comments
  1. Senator: Just a comment that the MFA and MFR in the Arts is a Terminal degree in those fields
  2. Senator: Do you have a sense of how many students this would affect and how many potential have been denied?(A) There have been petitions. None have been denied. The Grad Council thought about that. I don’t know the exact number; not zero.
  3. Senator: Are these consecutive years?(A) It doesn’t specify consecutive years. They typically are. It doesn’t impact the source of GA as they can come from a variety of sources.
  4. Senator: Could you extend the limit for the doctoral degree as well? Not a change to the money. (A) We talked about it. It wasn’t part of this policy change, but it is something we’ve talked about. We’re talking about the best approach to move forward with that separately.

6. Adjournment

7. Executive Session - Election of Senate Executive Committee Members

8. Adjournment

��������

��