Chair Stone, Senators Brennan, Conroy, Fite, Hazlewood, Hindson, Homeyer, James, Montondon, Shah, Warms, Winek
Meeting called to order at 4:00.
Senate Seat Distribution:� Chair Stone circulated a distribution table based on the definitions that: 1) a faculty member is a person who holds academic rank of lecturer or higher, and 2) a faculty voter is a faculty member, exclusive of per course faculty, who are paid at the rate of fifty percent or more from funds budgeted for faculty salaries, and the rule that the Senate is a body of approximately fifteen faculty members elected by the faculty voters to represent proportionally the faculty members of each college.� Prior to annual elections, the Senate calculates representation each spring based on the number of faculty members based on the number of faculty members as of the previous fall.� The number of Senators per college is determined by dividing the number of faculty members in the college by the number of faculty members in the University, multiplying by fifteen, and rounding the result to the nearest integer, although no college will ever bye represented by less than one senator.� Also, there can be no more than one senator from any one academic department, and all senators will serve the full three-year term to which they were elected, notwithstanding subsequent calculation.� The new list shows some significant changes from the prior election period.� While the total number of faculty decreased from 1,209 for the 2005-6 Senate to 1,169 for the 2006-7 Senate, in the colleges, Applied Arts went from 87 faculty to 72, Business from 111 to 113, Education from 232 to 171, Fine Arts & Comm from 209 to 181, Health from 92 to 74, Liberal Arts from 309 to 327, and Science from 169 to 231.� These new figures imply representation in Applied Arts to remain the same with 1 senator, Business to be reduced from 2 to 1 senator, Education to be reduced from 3 to 2 senators, Fine Arts & Comm to be reduced from 3 to 2 senators, Health to stay at 1 senator, Liberal Arts to stay the same with 4 senators, and Science to go from 2 to 3 senators.� The sense of the Senate was to request that the Chair discuss the new numbers with Dir Meyer, Institutional Research, to make sure there is a logical explanation for the new figures.
ACC Recommendation: The Senate considered the recommendation from the Academic Computing Committee that was presented to the Senate by Dr. Tim England last week.� A motion to approve the recommendation passed unanimously.
UCC Recommendation: The Senate also considered the recommendation of the University Curriculum Committee that was presented by Dr. Dan Lochman last week.� A motion to approve the recommendation also passed unanimously.
Perception Survey Committee Report: It was recommended that the Senate�s perception survey of the President, Provost, and Deans will be done electronically this spring with a separate link for the President, Provost, and each Dean.� The start date for the survey will be as soon as practical, but after a test run is done with College of Applied Arts.� The end date for the survey will be two weeks after its inception.� As usual, there was a discussion about what to do about the written comments.� A motion was forwarded to publish the comments on the Senate web page with possible editing if there are damaging third party comments.� The motion was approved unanimously.
W-Date Discussion: The draft PPS 4.09 for Schedule Changes, Drops and Withdrawals was discussed briefly.� The draft will go to Council of Academic Deans next week, but there are some rumblings that the Council of Chairs wants more research on the issues in the draft that could possibly change.� Specifically mentioned were article 9 which would change the automatic �W� period from the first three weeks of the 14 days of classes for fall or spring semester and first one week five days of a summer term to the first 60 percent of any semester, and article 12 which indicate that after the automatic drop deadline, a student must receive a grade of A, B, C, D, F or I.� If the draft is implemented, changes will not go into effect until the spring semester.
Change of Grade by Chairs and Deans: A question was raised about the possibility of a student�s grade being changed without the approval of the instructor of record. There seems to be very little formal information on grade appeals.� UPPS 07.10.01 Honor Code discusses a process for appeal and PPS 4.07 Grades and Change of Grade discuss a change of grade is initiated by the faculty member.� On page 62 of the Undergraduate Catalog 2004-2006, indicates that if a student wants to protest a grade, he/she must first discuss the issue with the instructor of record and if no resolution is reached, the student may appeal to the department chair, and if no resolution is reached, the student may appeal to the college dean whose decision is final.� The paragraph in the catalog indicates that a student grade appeal must be made no later than two years after the grade is issued.� Another question was raised about how long grade records must be kept by a faculty member.� It was decided to seek information on the issue from the Office of the Registrar, since the change of grade forms have a line for the signature of the faculty member, the department chair and the college dean.
Potential PAAG Items: There was a brief discussion about possible PAAG agenda items for the April meeting.� The Board of Regents report, change of grades, academic records, and the long lost faculty handbook draft are topics for consideration.
Mace Bearers: There was discussion about Mace Bearers for Spring Graduation Ceremonies.� Senators Davidson, Fite, Sorenson, and Warms volunteered and Dr. Elaine Eikner was recommended.
University Fund Drive: The University Fund Drive was discussed and faculty members are encouraged to contribute.� It was mentioned that gifts could be directed to individual accountants.� Specifically mentioned was the Faculty Senate account #13110000004000061000.� Everyone give generously.
�University Advancement: Senate members are invited to see the candidates for Vice President of University Advancement who will be on campus March 30.� The Senate�s designated time is 2:30 to 3:15.� Details will come later.� University Advancement is useful for making contact with potential donors to academic programs
Presidential Award for Excellence in Teaching: There are still some faculty vacancies on the Presidential Award for Excellence in Teaching Committee.� While the Senate normally recommends past recipients to the committee, there was some question about proper representation of the broad university community.� The Chair will find out the current faculty makeup of the committee and report next week.
Parking:� Is there any new word about potential parking fee increases?� Also, a question was raised regarding the McCoy Hall parking garage: will addition spaces be allocated to faculty parking when the College of Business moves to McCoy Hall?�
Development Leave Applications:� Development leave applications are due this week.� Be aware that their consideration by the Senate is coming.
Invitations to the Senate:� Dean Willoughby is still on the list for an invitation to discuss graduate assistant course loads with the Senate.
AVPAA Candidates:� The new Associative Vice President for Academic Affairs position has had curricular issues added to the job description.� It seems reasonable since the Faculty Senate oversees the faculty side of curricular issues that it be included in the interview process.� Vice Chair James will query the Provost to see if the Senate can be invited to the interview sessions March 29th.
Minutes:� Minutes for 03/08/06 were approved.