Approved Senate Minutes
September 4, 2002
Senators Present: Blanda, Brennan, Carns, Gillis, Hindson, Renick, Bell-Metereau, Frost, James, Peeler, Sawey, Stone, Stutzman, Conroy
Senators Absent: none
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 P.M.
Chair Renick proceeded with a review of the agenda
1. PAAG agenda for September 11, 2002
2. parking permits and working retirees
3. election of senators for two senate vacancies
4. academic program review list as it pertains to each college
5. salary equity list from Joe Meyer
6. status of the minutes from August 28, 2002
7. parking transportation committee
8. priorities and objectives of the senator for the academic year 2002-2003
Following the review Chair Renick opened a discussion on the current status of the priorities and objectives of the senate. Items 1 and items 2,3 & 4 of the insert of
the handout on priorities and objectives were discussed. The greatest focus of discussion was item one. Concerns were voiced that item one needs to reflect the
senate desire that the faculty senate be clearly involved in governance in a broad based rather than limited way. Further, this involvement by the senate was to provide input into the administration so that the university mission, goals and actions will be consistent over time.
It was decided that the concerns over the language of the priorities were significant enough to appoint a senate subcommittee to study the priorities and objectives.
Senator Stone made the motion to appoint a subcommittee to review the priorities and objectives and to bring suggestions for revision to the senate for the senate to
discuss and vote in block. Senator Blanda seconded and there was no discussion. The motion carried with no dissent. Chair Renick suggested that proposed
revisions by senate members be e-mailed to the committee. Committee members are senators Frost, Bell-Metereau, and Gillis.
The second agenda item was the PAAG meeting for September 11, 2000. Chair Renick indicated the following agenda items:
1. Plaque presentations to senators who have recently completed their three-year terms.
2. President Trauth to discuss the points she made at the convocation
3. Senate discussion of the July 30, 2002 letter of the points the President Trauth made in the letter.
4. Discussion with President Trauth concerning the survey of administrators.
A discussion of the survey of the administrators. It was decided that the senate would like to address general concerns before discussing the survey directly.
Concerns were raised that without more specific data on the survey a discussion would be fruitless. Tangential items to the survey were posed these included:
A. A question on the efficacy of elective chairs which rotate among the faculty
B. Requesting specific data concerning the survey of administrators
C. The status of the academic honesty policy
D. The discussion of PPS enforcement
E. A discussion of the grievance policy
F. Faculty workload reporting policy (the apparent autocratic and capricious ways in which chairs are assigning values to faculty work loads)
G. Sexual orientation and discrimination policy
H. Teaching bonuses when tenured faculty teach undergraduate classes (refer to last paragraph of July 30, 2002 letter)
Following the break parking permits for working retiree�s PPS were discussed. Senator Sawey moved that the word �not� be removed from 02.04 of 04.04.53.
Senator Stone seconded, there was no discussion and the motion passed without dissent.
The next item discussed was the filling of the senate vacancies. Digressing from this, the senate discussed the need for a secretary to take senate notes. It was
determined that someone outside of the senate could take notes as long as an appointed senator was responsible for reviewing and submitting those notes to the
senate. The outcomes of the discussion were the following:
Chair Renick suggested that each senator contact someone who might be interested.
The notes should be descriptive. That is, they should give reasons behind the actions taken by the senate.
Senators will continue fulfilling the responsibilities of secretary on a rotating basis until a permanent individual to take notes can be found.
Two elections will need to be held for senate positions (actual item under discussion)
Chair Renick moved to the next item of business, the list of educators from each college, who could be contacted, to participate in program reviews of other
colleges. Chair Renick asked that each senator review the list of their college representatives on the list to see that these individuals are currently employed as
faculty. He indicated that each college�s deans would have that information. If vacancies were found, Chair Renick requested that senators recommend
replacements and that these recommendations be sent by e-mail to Chair Renick. Chair Renick stated that the academic review list would be discussed during the
senate meeting of September 18, 2002.
Chair Renick then asked that senators Stone and Sawey do an in-depth review of the salary equity figures supplied to the senate by Joe Meyer. The reasons for this
review are as follows:
Salary adjustments are made at different times during the academic year and under different headings
Chairs are only given salary adjustment data related to their particular department
Inequities in salary above one standard deviation may be due to reasons that would contraindicate a salary adjustment. Eg: failure to achieve merit raises over time.
Equity dispersement is often not done according to the PPS on that subject
Chair Renick concluded the senate meeting asking that senators Blanda and Sawey review the letter of July 30.2002 to insure that the minutes of that senate meeting
and the letter are compatible. The minutes of senate meetings August 7, 2002 and August 28, 2002 will be reviewed at the next senate meeting. Chair Renick noted
that a replacement needs to be named for Senator Blevens on the parking committee.