Faculty Senate Minutes
November 20, 2008
Call to Order:
Call to order: 4:15 pm; ADUC.
Senators Absent: Verdie Craig, Julia Ann Hypes, Rodney Stanley, Yuqiu You
Visitors: Sam Faulkner, Tim Simpson, Annie Adams
Minutes: Senator Chatham moved to approve the minutes of November 6, 2008 as submitted. Motion seconded. Motion passed.
Committee Review:
Academic Policies: No Report
Communications: No Report
Evaluation: Discussing faculty evaluations by students and workload
Fiscal Affairs: Need to table second reading of UAR 334.01 - Phased Retirement Program (PRP); Will present UAR 304.01 - Sick Leave Bank for first reading
Governance: Will present committee appointment to be voted on; Report of 2007-2008 Governance Committee Investigation of Standing Committee Effectiveness has been sent to the Provost
Professional Policies: Will present a resolution related to PAc-6
Reports:
Chair’s Report:
- The chair encouraged the members to attend and to encourage other faculty to attend the forums hosted by President Andrews on December 2 at 2:00 p.m. and December 5 at 9:00 a.m. in Reed Hall 419.
- Sam Faulkner, Interim Director of the Office of International Education, presented a power point presentation on the Office of International Education. The major charges to the office are:
Coordinating study abroad activities for faculty and students
Coordinating international scholars who come to campus
Coordinate the National Student Exchange Program
Activities of the office are:
- Coordinate visas for students
- Review what other universities do in terms of international education
- In the process of developing an English as a second language program
- Acquire scholarship money for students
- Belong to Cooperative Center for Study Abroad and the Kentucky Institute for International Studies which help students and faculty study or teach abroad
Strengths of International Education
- MSU has a long history of supporting International Education
- Send 175 to 200 faculty and students per year abroad for various activities
- International recruiter in enrollment services office
Weaknesses of International Education
- Lack of coordinated effort and focus due to a lack of an overall plan for International Education
Opportunities for International Education
- English as a second language program
- National student exchange
- Exploring relationships with other universities
Goals for International Education
- Increase number of international students to 100 by 2010, 150 within 4 years, 200 within 5 years
- Increase number of international scholars coming to campus
Dr. Faulkner asked for input from faculty and departments to determine if there are programs in their departments that could work internationally
A question and answer session followed.
- Chair Thomas stated that the Advisory Council for General Education is an Ad-Hoc Committee of Faculty Senate, which means they report to the Senate and the Senate can act on documents that they bring before the Senate.
- The Faculty General Education Advisory Council Report was provided to the members via email prior to the meeting.
- The Advisory Council’s Ratification Document was provided to the members at the meeting.
- Tim Simpson provided an update on the actions of the FGEAC since their last report to the Senate
- On September 30, the FGEAC and GESC conducted two General Education Information Sessions
- Department visits from mid September until October 21
- October 15 and 16 hosted Dr. Terrel Rhodes, Vice President for Quality, Curriculum and Assessment from the Association of American Colleges and Universities
- FGEAC met on November 13 – subcommittees reported
- Feedback form is on web
- First year programs proposal is almost ready for faculty review
- Courses subcommittee has 4 models for course framework to be put on web after November 25
- Assessment committee has developed guidelines for assessment
- Ratification process subcommittee has a proposal to present today
- Learner outcomes subcommittee waiting on the November 25 deadline to reconvene
- A survey is on the web regarding the draft of learner outcomes and models for consideration regarding first year programs, assessment and administrator structure. The deadline for response is Tuesday, November 25.
- Annie Adams provided information on the development of the ratification document and process. The FGEAC talked to other universities to determine how they ratified their General Education Program. Following is part of the minutes of the Subcommittee on Ratification Process from October 13, 2008, which was presented to the Senate body:
“Findings
Based on our findings, ALL universities ratified their general education program by a faculty vote. What constituted a faculty vote, however, differed according to the college and university. Nine of the colleges and universities instituted a full faculty vote. Eight of the colleges and universities instituted a vote by faculty senate. Six of the colleges and universities instituted a vote by a faculty representative body, such as a General Education College curriculum committee.
Proposal
Based on the principle that the curriculum is the purview of the faculty, and following the best practices of the Promising Models identified by the AAC&U and our fellow Kentucky schools, the subcommittee on ratification process recommends the following:
- The new General Education framework (the learner outcomes, assessment measures, course categories and sequences, and course approval processes for the new program) will be approved by a full faculty vote.
- The voting procedure will occur in stages where the faculty will have sufficient time to review and respond to the new general education framework. These stages will be carefully monitored by the FGEAC and the Senate to ensure that they comply with the stated timeline for general education reform.
- The process will be as follows:
- The Faculty General Education Advisory Committee will submit the initial stage (or fundamental element) of the new General Education framework, the Student Learning Outcomes, to the Faculty Senate.
- The FGEAC and the Faculty Senate will share the learning outcomes with faculty for review and response within a designated period.
- The Faculty Senate will vote on the learning outcomes—to approve or modify. Any request to modify must be accompanied by a concrete recommendation for change.
- If the Faculty Senate approves the learning outcomes, then the FGEAC will submit the next stage of the framework along with the learning outcomes.
- If the Faculty Senate modifies the learning outcomes, then the FGEAC will submit learner outcomes with modification along with the next stage of the framework, for example, the assessment strategy.
- This process will continue until all of the elements of the program are approved by the Faculty Senate. At that time, the general education framework will be put to full faculty vote to be administered by the Governance committee of the Faculty Senate.
In order to comply with the timeline for general education reform, the FGEAC and the Senate must have specific portions of the new program approved at particular times. The learner outcomes, assessment models, and outline of the program (categories for course distribution within the new program) must be approved by March 23, 2009. The overall framework for the program (including guidelines for the creation of new general education courses and a structure for reviewing and approving courses) must be approved by October 1, 2009. The FGEAC requests that the leadership of the Senate work with the leadership of the FGEAC in order to formulate a plan that would allow both bodies to productively move the process forward within the stated time frame.”
A question and answer session followed.
A motion was made and seconded to accept the FGEAC ratification process as submitted. Motion passed.
Regent’s Report:
- Regent Morrison met with President Andrews on November 10. Faculty and staff forums will be held. Regent Morrison will ask any questions that the faculty would like him to ask.
- BOR work session was held today. Regents are in process of developing an evaluation of the President using an outside consulting firm.
- BOR will meet on December 4, 2008.
Senate Actions:
Evaluations:
The Provost provided the Executive Council with a document for teaching evaluations by students. The Evaluations committee met and discussed the student evaluations document. Dr. Lennex asked the members to provide her with any online or face to face teaching evaluation documents that they would like the committee to consider.
The committee met with Eric Jerde through the PBSI Ad-Hoc committee regarding differentiated workload. Differentiated workload addresses teaching and teaching workload. The Senate members discussed various issues regarding differentiated workload, service and research. A revised differentiated workload plan will affect several other University documents. The committee will invite Eric Jerde and/or the Provost to speak to the Senate regarding the differentiated workload document.
Fiscal Affairs:
- The committee presented a draft with revisions of UAR 304.01 – Sick Leave Bank for a first reading. The Sick Leave Bank originated in Human Resources, was forwarded to the Employee Benefits Committee and to the Fiscal Affairs Committee. The chair provided background information regarding the Sick Leave Bank. A question and answer session followed.
Governance:
- The members were provided with the Report of the 2007-2008 Faculty Senate Governance Committee Investigation of Standing Committee Effectiveness prior to the meeting. The report has been submitted to the Provost. Standing Committees will be addressed upon completion of the Audit Report. The committee is waiting to receive a list of task forces and Ad-hoc committees from the University. The committee recommended Johnny Newsome (EDU) for appointment to the Scholarship Appeals and Advisory Committee to fill the vacancy for 2007-2009. A motion was made and seconded to approve the appointment. Motion passed.
Professional Policies:
- The Senate previously approved a revision to PAc-6. The Provost discussed with Senator Chatham whether or not a grandfather clause was needed so that those currently at full graduate status could retain that status. The Professional Policies Committee rejected the idea of a grandfather clause. On behalf of the Professional Policies Committee Senator Chatham presented the following resolution: Be it resolved, that it is the opinion of the Faculty Senate that faculty with full graduate faculty status will maintain that status upon the implementation of the revised PAc-6. Discussion followed. Senator Berglee moved to accept the resolution. Motion was seconded. Discussion followed. Senator Rogers moved to add the following to the end the resolution: “and all individuals who held full graduate status during the 2007-2008 academic year shall retain that status”. Motion was seconded. Senator Wymer moved to accept the resolution as amended. Senator Klecker seconded the motion. Senator Wymer moved to end discussion and vote. Motion passed to approve the revised resolution.
New Business:
- Scott Davison presented PAc-36 – Faculty Initiated Review of Administrative Efficiency (FIRAE). He stated that the same reasons that justified the academic audit would justify an audit of the administration. The academic audit did not address the administrative units.
Senator Buck moved to send PAc-36 to the appropriate committee for review. Senator Rogers seconded the motion. The members discussed the appropriate committee to review the PAc. The chair determined the PAc should be referred to the Professional Policies committee. Discussion followed. Motion passed to refer PAc-36 to Professional Policies.
Announcements:
- Open enrollment for health insurance ends tomorrow.
Adjournment: 5:50 pm
