Guests: Dr. Habingreither, Ms. Henry, Dr. Garcia, Dr. Blanda, Dr. Sriraman
Chair Stone called the meeting to order at and reported on the first CAD meeting. Discussing the report from the committee that examined the role of the chairs, he said that they should not go outside of the reporting line.
Some deans were asking for a five-year instead of a three-year term for chairs, but Chair Stone said that Dr. Perry did not seem to like this option.
I. Removal of Tenure at Rank of Instructor Option
Senator Shah moved to remove tenure at the rank of instructor option and Senator James seconded it. One proposal was that it would be possible for instructors to count up to three years, but they are not obligated to do so.
Senate wishes to clarify the role of lecturers and instructors and how many times a lecturer may be reappointed, in the pps and in practice.
Senator Hazlewood moved to table and Sawey seconded to table the motion, pending more information on the status of lecturers and instructors.
II. COC report & Librarian Status
Senator Gillis moved and Senator James seconded that librarians be voting members f committees, and that the following appointments be made:
Margaret Vaverek voting member on the Academic Standards committee.
G. Selene Hinojosa will be the voting member on the Curriculum Committee, and Leigh
Kilman may indicate interest in taking over when her Ms. Hinojosa’s ends in 2005.
Elaine Sanchez will be a voting member on the
Jan Tidwell will be a voting member on the Facilities and Environment Committee.
Clara Ogbaa will be a voting member on the University Lectures Committee.
Karen Siegler will be a voting member on the Insurance Committee.
Chair Stone will flip a coin and stagger terms for the librarians.
On other appointments, Dr. Hawkins has declined appointment to the University Research Committee, and Senator Sorensen will look for another appointee.
III. Senate Budget Committee Report
This was distributed for future discussion.
IV. Discussion Items for PAAG
Access to salary, market equity, and merit data (requested as separate files) UTSA’s plan to add 2 or 3 new Ph.D. programs each year Budget from planned cuts from departments; what happened with those? What will happen to cuts taken from department M & O budgets? What will happen to staff when faculty members are added? Feedback on FAS or SAP changes, passing work to departments Purchasing, requisition and approval for grants, moving, transferring money, etc., is changing, downloading work onto faculty and increasing their workload Senator Hazlewood said that certain budget information is already on the web. Under the protocol in faculty of science, the current enrollment schedule is truncated.
Dr. Blanda gave a report on the engineering program. Dr. Sriraman reported on the two programs: manufacturing and industrial engineering Multiple programs are in the works, including u.g. electrical; material sciences (yrs. 3-5 2004-2009); pursuing at u.g. rather than MS or Ph.D. Under Dana Garcia’s stewardship they are pursuing biotechnology.
Chair Stone said he thought that Dr. Blanda was to do a feasibility study or market study, but Dr. Blanda said that was not the case. Dr. Israel had initiated 3 or 4 groups that were to be coordinated. Senator Sawey asked about the Ph.D. program, and Dr. Blanda said that the idea of the Ph.D. program came out of a need expressed by employers in the corridor.
In year 2000, we began graduating students in engineering. Dr. Sriraman said that the enrollment was projected to be over 200 for manufacturing engineering, but it is currently only about 100. Projections were made at a time when the economy was more robust. Industrial and electrical engineering are broad-based, whereas manufacturing is more specific.
Senator Sawey asked about UTSA’s engineering programs and their plans for expansion and whether our enrollments will be affected. He also asked about costs, and Dr. Habingreither said that they have the space. The program cost break-even point will be four years, contingent on enrollment. Line item request of $5 million to fund some of industrial and electrical engineering programs was placed in the budget as a special item. This does not come out of our university budget, but it comes directly from the legislature. If this doesn’t come through, this cost will fall to the college of science.
Senator Sawey said that our class sizes will increase if the university has to fund these programs.
Chair Stone said that less and less is funded by the formula funding of the legislature and more will have to come from tuition.
Senator Bell-Metereau asked about nanotechnology. The B3I consortium of Bio-curriculum coordinates their curriculum.
Environmental scans will be important for us to see how programs are doing.
Senator Montondon asked how many students would need to be enrolled to break even, and Dr. Habengriether said that this would change with the formula change.
Dr. Sriraman said that electrical engineering has a profound impact on all areas and is the highest demand and most expensive.
Chair Stone said that these issues would return a number of times in the next few years.
VI. Senate Goals
Chair Stone suggested the possibility of Instructional Quality. Senator Shah said review of the Constitution of the Senate could be another goal. Senator James suggested increasing involvement of the Senate liaisons and developing electronic newsletter. Senator Bell-Metereau suggested curriculum quality (Facilitating interdisciplinary connections). Get protocol and policies through university more quickly, for example new promotion and tenure policy
VII. New Business
Chair Stone will send email to liaisons to get elections under way and to increase involvement of liaisons.
Senator Conroy said she’d like for the senate to establish an expectation of attendance at one Senate meeting a month for liaisons. Senator Brennan favored having them attend the PAAG meetings, but Senator Bell-Metereau suggested that it might be better to have them attend the meeting before PAAG, in order to help set the agenda. Of course, all liaisons are encouraged to attend all faculty senate meetings, but placing an expectation of one monthly meeting might help increase involvement.
As to the Handbook committee report, it was erroneously submitted to the VPAA and not to the Senate.
Approval of minutes was postponed. Senate adjourned at .
Revised minutes submitted by