Guests: Margaret Vavrek, Michael Korn
Chair Stone called Faculty Senate to order at and reviewed the agenda.
I. Minutes for October 8 and October 15 were approved with revision of Blanda giving guidelines on Roster changed to Guidelines for Research Enhancement Program.
II.Senator Brennan distributed the following revised wording for the Faculty Senate statement on librarians/curators:
The Faculty Senate recognizes that the draft proposal marks a significant first step in incorporating Librarians/Curators more fully into the academic enterprise. Understanding that this proposal is part of an ongoing process, the senate recommends that the subcommittee continue to investigate the issues not addressed by the document and monitor the implementation of the plan. In particular, the following three areas of concern need to be clarified expeditiously.
A. The proposal needs to state categorically a guarantee of committed effort on the part of all parties for inclusion in university and Faculty Senate committees.
B. Association of College and Research Libraries and its Guidelines strongly endorse a non-staff employment status for academic Librarians. Why is the full intent of ACRL not recognized in this proposal?
C. The proposal requires elaboration on the issue of where new Librarian job codes will reside. What specific reasons are there for disaggregating job codes on Staff pay plan vs. the Faculty pay plan? Why does the proposal ignore the standard of non-staff status at the majority of our sister schools and peer institutions?
With these concerns in mind, the Faculty Senate endorses the proposal.
Senator McGee asked why Vice President Wyatt seemed to be opposed to change.
Dr. Trauth had warned people to be careful what they ask for. This might imply that librarians would be expected to publish and undergo tenure review, etc.
Ms. Vavrek said that the majority of the librarians are pleased with the current proposal. They haven’t examined the benefits and drawbacks well enough to make a decision to request faculty status at this point.
One librarian was extremely opposed to Wyatt’s proposal, but 79% were supportive of the proposal.
Senator Gillis moved and Senator James seconded a motion for endorsement, which passed unanimously.
II. Sexual Orientation
Senator Sawey reported on the response to the publicity on the issue and distributed the anti-discrimination motion passed unanimously at the TSUS CFS meeting.
Mavis Triebel, Lamar State College-PA Chair did not accept a motion on the issue.
This needs to be sent out to each individual senate to ask for its approval. The other motion has same language, except at the end it has a clause allowing discretion of the individual institution.
In the past, President Supple was the only president to vote in favor of non-discrimination.
Senator Bell-Metereau suggested that we use the version with the stipulation that individual campuses could make their own decisions.
Senator McGee and Senator Conroy also stated that this would be a good idea.
Senator Sawey moved to send the second, and Senator Bell-Metereau seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
Senator Sawey asked if regents committee for diversity could deal with this, but this did not seem like a promising route. Sam Houston is already dealing with a grievance policy and would probably not welcome another issue.
Senator James said that in the big meeting there was no dissension. Mavis Triebel had maintained that it was merely procedural and that they didn’t take motions.
III. PAAG Items
Senator Sawey asked how many research non-teaching faculty they have.
Senator James said she wondered when someone is brought in for $120,000 for non-teaching faculty. Ron Walter is a Mitte Chair. Institute for Industrial and Environmental Science is not part of the department. They fund themselves, according to Michael Korn. They are adjunct full professors. They pay their own salaries from individual grants.
Senator Shah asked if the faculty is working for tenure or promotion or not.
Chair Stone said a research professor is not promotable. It’s a new class of faculty brought in perhaps with the ability to direct a thesis, according to Michael Korn.
This will be a PAAG item.
Senator Gordon asked if we can discuss chair terms and whether senate will have a representative on the committee being formed.
Senator Peeler asked if we can discuss having a separate board of regents, because of the difference between our school and our sister institutions.
Senator Hazlewood would like to examine administrative removal of faculty privileges, being denied research facilities, etc. They have such a policy at A & M. We’d like to have a committee to examine policy on these issues.
Senator Gillis opposed having this being addressed, because it would create a policy whereby this could be normalized.
Senator McGee said he would like to have more information on what we’re asking and see A& M’s policy before we discuss it in PAAG. Senate agreed to wait on the issue.
Senator Shah asked for new laptop for faculty senate.
Senator McGee said Lisa Adams, the new faculty senate administrative assistant, said she was considering bringing her own laptop, since this one was so hard to work with.
Senator Sawey asked if we want to query about the new engineering degrees and statements made on the issue by Dr. Stan Israel.
IV. Senate support of campus environment & Facilities Survey: Nancy Nusbaum asked senate to get more faculty involvement. It has already had a second reminder sent out, which irritated some faculty. She would like senate involvement.
Senator Shah said that email surveys get deleted. Some faculty are not comfortable with computers.
Chair Stone said he would tell Nancy Nusbaum we would encourage faculty involvement.
Chair Stone said the committee met again on the voting structure and status of post-tenure review policy. If it isn’t on by the time of PAAG social, then we’ll bring it back.
Senator Sawey said we need to think about policy for the mailing list. What is an important item for which we would reasonably use this list? We don’t know if it will work currently.
Senator Conroy asked if we should use it for routine business, such as minutes and the agenda.
Senator Gillis said the minutes are posted on the site, and when a senator sent them out faculty asked if they could stop.
Senator Rao said that her faculty were grateful to receive minutes when she sent them out.
Chair Stone asked if people wanted the agenda to go out with a link to the senate website.
Senator Conroy said developmental leave applications, call for Piper and research enhancement could go out through the list.
Chair Stone said Piper nominations would come to us at the next meeting.
Senator Shah asked if we could mail out our status report. Chair Stone said he thought it was posted, but Senator Shah said Chair Stone hadn’t sent it to him yet.
Senator James said it should go on the web.
Senator Gillis said when there is proposed policy, faculty could make comments.
Senator Shah said to leave it to chair discretion, but Chair Stone said he liked guidance. We want to avoid things that go out through other sources as well. For example, ads for academic administrative jobs. Opportunities to comment on pps changes, etc.
Senator Shah said he would email minutes by email. Faculty can read them or not. Chair Stone declined to send out minutes by email.
Senator Conroy said liaison election reminders, etc., would be good.
Senator Hazlewood asked how we find out how to do it, and Chair Stone said it was difficult. He will send next week’s agenda out to see if it works.
Senator Brennan asked if we have a date for liaison elections, and Chair Stone said Terry hasn’t responded to requests to explain how it works to Lisa.
Shirley Pilus might also be willing to come in to explain the process.
Senate Adjourned at .
Draft minutes submitted by
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree