Texas State University Logo

May 27, 1998 Minutes

Present: Bible, Gillis, Gordon, Hays, Irvin, McGee, Pascoe, Renick, Sawey,
Skerpan-Wheeler, and Stimmel.

Absent: Anderson, Conroy, and Winek

Guests: Mimi Tangum (ORSP) and Rebecca Bell-Metereau (Eng)

Presidential Award Committees
Request for "emergency" FREG grant
FREG Funding Process Recommendations
Faculty Research Committee Restruction
FREG Funding Recommendations
Request for Bonus Criteria
Group Chairs Selection for Faculty Affairs and Resources
Mission Statement Review
New Business
Vistor Parking

Chair Bible called the meeting to order at 3:00.

Presidential Award Committees

The Senate discussed recommendations from the Excellence in Teaching Committee
for changes in all Presidential Award Committees (Teaching, Scholarship,

-Change to three categories (now two) for
Associate Professor
Assistant Prof./Instructor/Lecturer
-Limit school nominees to one per category, who would automatically receive
the $1,000 award
-Charge univ. committee to choose $5,000 award recipient from the seven
nominees in each category

A motion to accept the recommendations failed. Senator Skerpan noted that some
kind of weighted formula should be used to ensure fairness to the larger
schools like Liberal Arts. The Senate decided to appoint an ad hoc committee
to further study the issues. The committee will work on this task during the
98-99 year and hopefully have new recommendations ready to implement for the
99-2000 year; it will include the chairs of the "Excellence Award" committees
(Mimi Tangum of Scholarship, Grant Simpson of Teaching, and Robert Smallwood of
Service). Grant Simpson was appointed chair. Also included will be 3 other
members, who must be faculty, from the three committees. The Senate set the
date of December 1, 1998 as a deadline for the committee recommendations.

Request for "Emergency" FREG Grant

Dr. Tangum asked the Senate to approve an emergency grant from surplus Research
Enhancement Grant funds for a faculty member who was not eligible to apply for
funds during the normal granting process (because of the 3 out of 5 years rule)
but needed funds to keep his research project viable. Dr. Tangum felt this was
a good use of the money and that there was no other source. The Senate felt it
was inappropriate to use the funds in this manner because it bypassed the
normal process/cycle, might set a bad precedent and was unfair to other faculty
who did not know they could apply for such funds. However, the Senate did
support an idea to provide for these kinds of situations and to also use up the
surplus funds ($40,000 this year) which would go back to the state if not
distributed by August 31, 1998. It was suggested that after the two regular
application cycles are over, any left over funds be distributed through a (3rd)
supplemental round. This round would be open only to faculty submissions and
without regard to the "3 out of 5 year" rule. Proposals which had been turned
down in the original cycle would not be eligible and those who were not fully
funded will not be able to request more funds.

For this year's surplus funds only, the Senate authorized Dr. Tangum to immedi-
ately publish the availability of funds, accept and judge proposals, and award
the funds. She will bring her recommendations to the Senate, which will
revisit this issue in the fall and at that time set up formal guidelines for
the use of surplus Research Enhancement funds in the future.

It was also suggested by Senator Conroy via Chair Bible that perhaps a small
portion of the Research Enhancement Grant funds to set aside (saved) at the
beginning of each fiscal year to be used for emergency funding after the two
regular cycles have been completed. The Senate took no action on this idea.

FREG Funding Process Recommendations

Dr. Seifert, chair of the ad hoc committee on Research Enhancement, forwarded
to the Senate recommendations for improving the grant proposal process. One
was a PPS to govern this valuable program, which the Senate accepted.

Dr. Tangum asked that the "3 out of 5 year" limitation be removed from the
guidelines. The limitation was added a decade ago when funding was less to
allow more faculty to begin first-time research efforts. The Senate discussed
the need to retain a priority list of those who should be awarded funds first
and eventually agreed to change the limitation from an absolute bar to one of
the list of priorities. Specifically, it decided to amend the program
guidelines as follows:

Section I: remove paragraph D (3 out of 5 year rule)
Section III: add a new section C specifying that the lowest funding priority
will be applicants whohave been funded 3 out of the past 5 years.

Faculty Research Committee Restructure

Senator Irvin, a member of the Committees on Committees, suggested that the
members of the Faculty Research Committee need to be selected more carefully.
He proposed removing the FRC from the usual Committee on Committees appointment
process, which is to select new committee members from faculty who volunteer to
serve through the Senate Preference Poll. He noted that often the faculty
community is not aware of which schools have openings on the research committee
and that it is important for this committee to have well qualified, experienced
faculty to review research proposals. He recommended that each fall, senators
and liaisons be told which schools have openings, that nominations be made to
the Senate and that the Senate then appoint the new committee members from
those nominated. Sen. Irvin also proposed limiting membership to 3 consecutive
years for both members and departments. The Senate accepted these

FREG Funding Recommendations

The Senate approved the FRC recommendations for funding for the spring round.

Request for Bonus Criteria

The Senate, which continues to be interested in developing criteria for the
awarding of faculty bonuses, put together a list of possible criteria which
might serve as a starting point in the process:

1. Deans shall seek input from chairs and faculty in establishing criteria
2. Criteria shall be disseminated in advance of awarding period
3. Deans who want to revise criteria shall repeat steps 1 and 2
4. A list of bonus recipients, amounts received and reasons for award
shall be published each fall

The Senate noted that it has been requesting written criteria for an entire
year and that faculty are entitled to know what is required to receive a bonus.
The Senate asked Chair Bible to forward this list to VPAA Gratz and to the
Deans and to ask that it be included on the agenda for a future CAD meeting.

Group Chair for Faculty Affairs Selection

Dr. Marguerite Gillis will act as Group Chair of the Faculty Affairs section of
the Faculty Senate Committees. Dr. Oren Renick will act as group chair of the
Resources Committees.

Mission Statement Review

The Senate had no input to offer on the draft of the SWT Mission Statement.

New Business

Visitor Parking

Chair Bible handed out a proposal to restructure what has been considered
"Visitor Parking." The item will be discussed at the next Senate meeting

Next Meeting Date

The Senators agreed to meet on Wednesday, July 1, from 3-5.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm.