College of Arts & Sciences: James Armacost, Raymond Doe, Jennifer Fowler, B. Garrick Harden, Pat Heintzelman, Matt Hoch, Tina M. Kibbe, Cheng-Hsien Lin, Jane Liu, Mark Mengerink, J.P. Nelson, Joe Nordgren, Edgardo Pujols, Melissa Riley, Yasuko Sato, Cengiz Sen, Jennifer Thedford, Sujing Wang
College of Business: Tim McCoy, Vivek Natarajan, James Slaydon, Xiao “Jerry” Zhang
College of Education and Human Development: Daryl Ann Borel, Tom Harvey, Eunjin Kwon
College of Engineering: Clayton Jeffryes, Gleb Tcheslavski, Chun-Wei Yao
College of Fine Arts & Communication: Lilian Felipe, Brielle Frost, Stephan Malick, Eric McCluskey, Nicki Michalski, Millicent Musyoka
Library: Poornima Gunasekaran, Trina Nolen
Call to order
3:30 p.m.
Taylor’s Minute – An Inside Higher Ed article indicated West Virginia University has a $75 million per year deficit, Penn State has a $150 million deficit, and Rutgers has a big deficit. Texas and ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ are in a good position.
ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ is making a $400,000 investment in faculty to address inversion and compression. The CFO and the Provost worked on this a lot. Cheng-Hsien Lin and Jennifer Fowler helped too after names were removed from salary records. The state’s financial situation is very good because of the current budget surplus.
Mark Robinson (Chief Financial Officer) – ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ tried to get faculty salaries to 95% of the average of those in a similar range within departments. The analysis just looked at departments, ranks, and years at ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ. There was a $10,000 cap on salary increases that could result from the analysis.
James Slaydon asked whether the university adjusted for faculty members’ disciplines in this process. In response, Provost Dann Brown asserted that we do not have a large sample in some disciplines.
Gleb Tcheslavski asked if people who got equity the previous year were excluded from the current salary adjustments. Mark Robinson and Provost Brown both asserted those faculty members were not excluded from the current salary adjustments.
Sujing Wang asked for clarification of how the averages were determined and the years of service and 95% were addressed in the analysis. CFO Mark Robinson asserted that the university added .25% per year in the current rank.
Vivek Natarajan inquired about how the current adjustments will address the problem of assistant professors making more than full professors. CFO Mark Robinson asserted that for the most part the issue has been addressed.
Provost Brown stated that the university will try to get out a faculty contract that includes the adjustment and hope to get it out by the first week of June. Provost Brown further emphasized that merit raises were separate from the current adjustments, and stated that faculty will probably get their first contract with a salary adjustment, and a second contract with a 3% merit raise as well.
Pat Heintzelman thanked President Taylor for saying that the 1940 AAUP (American Association of University Professors) Principles could be in the Faculty Handbook, and asked President Taylor if ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ would endorse the 1940 AAUP Principles.
Provost Brown asserted that we believe in academic freedom.
Matt Hoch asked why students need to take a class to be hired on a grant for the summer (if they are full-time students in the fall). In response, CFO Mark Robinson stated that hourly employees do not need to be enrolled as students. Provost Brown also said that as long as a student is registered for the subsequent fall term, the student can work in the summer.
Jennifer Fowler made a motion to approve the March minutes as distributed, and Stephan Malick seconded the motion.
The members unanimously approved the March minutes; the motion passed (votes: 31 aye, 0 nay, 0 abstain).
B. Garrick Harden made a motion to approve the April minutes as distributed, and Tom Harvey seconded the motion.
The members unanimously approved the April minutes; the motion passed (votes: 33 aye, 0 nay, 0 abstain).
Faculty Senate President’s Report (Cheng-Hsien Lin)
The data used to calculate current equity-based adjustments were anonymous. We want to push the President and Provost to make more adjustments next year. .25% per year in rank is small; we originally proposed 1% per year in rank.
The Faculty Senate is purchasing licenses for Robert’s Rules training. Fifteen people chose to take the class soon after the announcement.
We are almost done with elections; we have finished electing new senators.
We will survey senators regarding whether to allow online participation.
Our office will request to review committees and councils; we should see which committees have not had significant meetings and dissolve them.
Later this month, President Lin would like both chairs (the Faculty Handbook committee and Faculty Issues) to discuss the Faculty Handbook with the Provost. [
Provost Brown asked to delay action on non-tenure track rank and promotion, and only talked about honor code policy. A tentative meeting is scheduled for May 17. The committee is seeking clarification from Provost Brown about something.
An instructor had an issue with another instructor, and that issue was brought to Melissa’s attention today. B. Garrick Harden provided an example of an incident from the previous Monday. This incident involved one instructor in computer science who goes over time, and is disrespectful to other faculty. As a result, students will sit in on classes they are not in and refuse to leave. This is a pattern of behavior.
B. Garrick Harden asserted that any instructor has to end class on time to get out for the next instructor.
Jim Mann stated that this is the type of situation the Ombuds Office can address. Cheng-Hsien Lin concurred that this can be handled by the administration or the Ombuds Office.
The committee met last month and shared a current draft of the grievance policy with President Taylor and Provost Brown. They are reviewing the policy. They will try to hire an Assistant Provost in charge of policies. The potential new hire will probably review policies and we will get feedback.
Jennifer Fowler suggested we change this subcommittee’s name to “Faculty Affairs.” Cheng-Hsien Lin said we will change the name in the coming academic year.
Cheng-Hsien Lin is asking the committee to look at merit plans (university-wide, college, etc.).
Cheng-Hsien Lin expressed concern because merit raises are handled very differently in different colleges and departments. Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that Provost Brown and President Taylor agreed to look at this again, and Dann Brown would prefer that merit raise money not be used within departments and colleges to promote equity.
Jennifer Fowler mentioned being asked to go to Academic Council (formerly Dean’s Council) to discuss these issues.
No report: John Gossage was not present.
The committee is working on the new F2.08, which involves looking at peer universities and their rubrics so that the committee can make suggestions about the new F2.08.
Millicent Musyoka gave a presentation on the campus climate survey’s quantitative results, and explained that more time is needed for qualitative analysis, which will be the subject of a future presentation.
The committee did not meet. They spoke with Dann Brown and President Taylor. The Provost and President accepted the preamble.
Pat Heintzelman emphasized that the administration will allow some language in the handbook that they are reluctant to endorse.
Matt Hoch stepped down as chair of the Faculty Handbook committee because of summer obligations.
J.P. Nelson summarized the report of the committee and read the policy recommendation the committee made about a timeline policy.
Brielle Frost stated that the university will send out an email about centennial soon. [Note: Brielle Frost serves as an Faculty Senate representative in the committee of ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ University Centennial Celebration]
Cheng-Hsien Lin urged senators to report back if they serve on another committee and/or council.
James Slaydon asserted that not doing evaluations until the fourth year for chairs and deans means they can cause a lot of problems in that time, and ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ should do evaluations after 2 full years (during the third year).
Matt Hoch emphasized that we should go a step farther than James Slaydon’s proposal. Hoch argued that internal candidates get interim positions and are interim administrators without any evaluation for a few years, and can do lots of damage and keep going when they are chair. Matt Hoch argued we should treat chairs and deans similar to tenure-track faculty (two-year review, four-year review, etc.).
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that we probably will not resolve this today.
Tom Harvey said we should develop a position statement that chairs and deans should have annual evaluation, and biannually the faculty should have input.
Jennifer Fowler stated that James Slaydon is proposing going back to the previous version of the Faculty Handbook. Slaydon concurred with Fowler’s statement, and argued that Brenda Nichols is likely to have changed the previous policy.
Cheng-Hsien Lin argued that James Slaydon should put together a motion and we can vote on it via survey over the summer.
Jennifer Fowler asserted that because the idea is old business, we could vote on it now.
Daryl Ann Borel asked whether interim administrators would be included in the motion.
James Slaydon accepted a friendly amendment to add interim positions to the motion.
James Slaydon made the amended motion, and Tim McCoy seconded the amended motion.
The members unanimously passed James Slaydon’s motion.
Cheng-Hsien Lin said we should bring up Pat Heintzelman’s previous proposal to extend the meeting time to 5:30.
Tom Harvey asserted that efficient running of the meetings is important to finish at 5:00 p.m.
Cheng-Hsien Lin said we will allow the meeting to go a little after 5:00, but we do not need to change rules today.
Pat Heintzelman motioned that the Faculty Senate endorse the AAUP Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure. B. Garrick Harden seconded the motion.
Cheng-Hsien Lin asserted we had AAUP support language in the motion to support instructors.
Pat Heintzelman said we should move to say we expect a written response from university leadership to each motion. Time would not keep going on; it would hold them accountable.
Cheng-Hsien Lin said we always bring motions to administrators. It would be good to have a written response; they could also say we are working on that. In regard to Dean’s review schedule, It will be very challenging to get five Dean’s Review committees together each year.
Vivek Natarajan motioned to adjourn, and Matt Hoch seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 5:25 pm.