volume 40, number 4
Temple UniversityFaculty Herald


Representative Senate Meeting
February 16, 2010

1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 1:50 p.m.

2. Guests:
President Ann Weaver Hart; Provost Lisa Staiano-Coico; and CFO Tony Wagner

Before introducing today’s guests, President Karen M. Turner asked for a minute of silence in memory of those faculty members who died at University of Alabama in Huntsville.

The first speaker was Provost Lisa Staiano-Coico who began by making a few announcements: She said that the Middle States visitors will be on campus from February 28 – March 3, 2010. She also said that the visit to Temple University Japan, that had already taken place, went well;

She invited the faculty to meet with the Middle States team on March 1st, from 4:00 – 5:00 p.m. The faculty are invited to Kiva Auditorium; the staff will meet in Walk Auditorium; and the students will meet with a team member in the Student Activities Center, Room 217;

She thanked Dr. Corrinne Caldwell (Educ.), Dr. Michael R. Sitler (Kinesiology) and Dean Robert Stroker (BCMD) for co-chairing the Middle States Report;

Provost Lisa said that faculty could look at the report by going to www.temple.edu/middlestates/ or by contacting Deputy Provost Richard M. Englert’s office at 1-8873.

President Ann Weaver Hart spoke next providing, what she called, a seamless overview of the 20/20 Framework that focuses on Destination Temple. She said that a number of those individuals who were very much involved with the framework saw this as seamless because the Academic Strategic Compass was so much a part of the framework. She mentioned that this is a flexible plan for the physical plant in a very bad economy. It is a ten year framework.

President Hart then asked CFO Tony Wagner to discuss important threads related to the 20/20 Framework. He spoke of the following:

Declining state appropriations;

Reliance on tuition, endowment, fundraising and research;

Importance of pricing to be competitive in the market place;

Shrinking student cohorts.

CFO Wagner showed us how trends had shifted with Commonwealth appropriations. He discussed the difference between 1972 when state appropriations made up 60% of our budget compared with the 22.5% of our current budget. He provided us with a sense of what the Commonwealth emphasizes today including Medicaid, corrections and basic education that take up much of their budget. Higher education only makes up 6.5% of the current appropriations and Temple itself receives even less. CFO Wagner pointed out that 50% of our tuition dollars are made up of student debt. Additionally, he spoke of the next decade’s demographics in which the cohort of students will be down 8-10%. Currently we are at capacity, but we have to maintain a high level of tuition dollars, and we need to increase our market share. We also have to take into account our residential needs. Increased enrollment without an increase in facilities for our students has been a problem for us.

President Hart provided a more in-depth overview of our physical plant situation. She offered some background:

Before the Academic Strategic Compass was completed, she sat with Trustees and discussed the need for help with the physical plants. A competition was held and Olin Partners became our consultants;

It was decided that Barton Hall had to be replaced. It is a poor physical plant and not reusable;

Paley Library was from the 1960’s, and it proved to be cost prohibitive to upgrade this library for the 21st Century; however it has “good bones” and can be reused, perhaps as a research building;

A Steering Committee was brought together of deans, administrators, faculty and students as well as Temple Trustee, Mitchell L. Morgan, who became Chair of the Facilities Committee.

President Hart then spoke of the planning principles. They included:

The importance of facilities aligning and supporting the Academic Strategic Compass, focusing on the academic and research mission of the university;

The need to increase Temple’s competitive profile;

The emphasis on campus-wide participation and community participation. In this case, this was accomplished by holding two open Town Hall meetings and targeting faculty for focus groups;

The stress had to be on fiscal responsibility;

There must be a commitment to sustainability

There had to be a respect for the surrounding community who would prefer to have fewer of our students living in the neighborhood and asked that we not expand the footprint of the campus.

Hence, she pointed out that the 20/20 Framework, with Destination Temple at the center, should not be carved in stone, needed financial supports, and should take into consideration strategic serendipity. President Hart then focused on design goals. They were:

A need for the best resources to attract and serve students, faculty and staff;

The importance of increased activity on Broad Street moving it into the academic core;

Enhanced safety and engagement with surrounding neighborhoods;

Venues for activities to attract outside groups, such as the use of the Baptist Temple for interfaith services next year on Martin Luther King Day.

She showed us a map of future sports and recreation areas on Temple’s main campus. She spoke of Pearson and McGonigle Halls and discussed that the decision was to leave them and see if they could be remodeled to add dedicated practice facilities for basketball, exercise space and retail stores. The plans include upgraded dance studios and parking that would not be on Broad Street. As an aside, she mentioned that every part of the USB building will be recycled.

President Hart spoke of the new science research and education building, and the 21st Century library that would be across Broad Street so that the community could also use the facility. There may be a new residential tower and the development of green space, creating a campus quad where Barton Hall now stands. In addition, she talked of the need for separate spaces for architecture and engineering.
When new designs will be discussed, President Hart is hoping that faculty in these affected areas will volunteer to take part in the planning process. She believes that the plans must be razor sharp so there will be no change orders requiring more monies than originally anticipated. She will be doing her best to seek philanthropy and capital appropriations to pay for the new buildings. Since the past campaign raised more monies than expected, she has high hopes. Hence, as she says, the story is not full of doom and gloom for Temple’s future. After the presentations, there was some time for questions:

Dieter Forster (CST) asked about the reconsideration of closing 13th Street to traffic and President Hart said that conversations were going on at the present time.

Karen Turner inquired if CFO Tony Wagner’s presentation could be made available. President Hart said it could be but she wanted to make certain that the presentation would be kept current and she suggested that a date needed to be put on the slide show. Provost Lisa said that the slideshow could be provided not only by Tony Wagner’s office but through her link as well.

Roberta Sloan (SCT) said that missing from the plan was the theatre and some of the arts. There was a need for black boxes, and dance performance and opera appropriate spaces. President Hart indicated she had a couple of donors in mind, and Dr. Sloan said she would be very willing to work with them.

Art Hochner (Bus.) said he was glad that we had this presentation, and he mentioned the troubling article in The Philadelphia Inquirer. President Hart said she was surprised by the piece as well. Art Hochner then spoke about his concern that money might be taken from the teaching and research budget for buildings. President Hart said this was not the case and when questioned about the plant fund she said that was strictly for maintenance operations and not for new construction.

Luke Kahlich (BCMD) encouraged President Hart to use the expertise of the faculty for fund raising. He said that it might be worth finding out if faculty wanted to put their energies into helping to raise funds for small creative projects. President Hart said that David Unruh, Senior Vice President for Institutional Advancement, was planning to use this approach.

Frank Friedman (CST) found the plans to be very impressive. However, he said that while it was good to focus on the future, we needed to also think about new researchers to Temple who were frustrated by a lack of support. Provost Lisa believes that the new Senior Vice Provost for Research Administration and for Graduate Education could play an important role in helping these researchers. She urged faculty to attend the up-coming open interviews.

Tracey Weiss (CST) spoke of how other universities recruit new students and asked if we were as competitive as we should be. Provost Lisa said that her office was working with enrollment management to craft positive messages to attract students.
Jane Evans (Tyler) was concerned about The Pennsylvania State University moving into Philadelphia. President Hart responded that this was a misunderstanding; it is the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education that is coming to Philadelphia and not Penn State. She had even spoken with Penn State President Graham Spanier about this, and he was not even aware of the misreporting.

Michael Jackson (STHM) spoke about the student facilities labs and the increased pedestrian and traffic flow on Broad Street.

Tony Wagner responded that his office had been studying the pattern and felt that there could be a library on the other side of Broad Street. President Hart was impressed with the Temple Officers and their ability to move traffic. President Hart was also focusing on the wheel chair accessibility of the Baptist Temple.

Michael Jackson then went on to mention his concern about parking and wondered if the cylindrical design he had seen in China would be used here. Tony Wagner would like to talk to Michael Jackson about what he had seen.

Nora Alter (SCT) mentioned the transfer students and was pleased that their concerns of where they would live were being considered.

3. Approval of the Minutes:

The Representative Senate Meeting Minutes from January 25, 2010, were approved unanimously.

4. President’s Report: Karen M. Turner
President Turner announced that there now was a Subcommittee for the Constitution and the Bylaws that included Paul LaFollette (Vice Pres.), Tricia Jones (Educ.), Mark Rahdert (Law) and herself.
She mentioned that the topic for the next Representative Senate Meeting would be Shared governance. She hoped everyone would come ready to participate in this important issue.

President Turner stated that Vice President Paul LaFollette was still looking for volunteers for the University Tenure and Promotion Advisory Committee, the Personnel Committee and the University Honors Program Oversight Committee. Paul LaFollette asked that any volunteer should contact him.

5. Unfinished Business:

There was none.

6. New Business:
There was none.

7. Adjournment:
The meeting ended at 3:20 p.m.

Joan P. Shapiro



Representative Senate Meeting

January 25, 2010



1. Call to Order:

The meeting was called to order at 1:45 p.m. 


2. Approval  of the Minutes:

The Special Representative Faculty Meeting Minutes of December 10, 2009, were approved with two abstentions.  


3. Guest:  Provost Lisa Staiano-Coico


  • Provost Lisa began by thanking the Temple community for their help with the relief efforts for Haiti.  In particular, she thanked the medical school team that has left for Haiti. 
  • She reminded the faculty of the two sets of SEED Grants and urged us to submit.  There are ten science/social science grants and ten arts and humanities grants.  While interdisciplinary grants are still emphasized, this does not mean that you need to partner with faculty outside of your school as there can be an interdisciplinary grant within one school.  Proposals are due by April 15th and awards will be made in June.
  • Now that appropriations have been approved, Provost Lisa has asked deans to pull together hiring plans for recruitment of new faculty.
  • Middle States reviewers will be at Temple from February 28 – March 3, 2010.  She thanked the faculty involved in the process and thinks we are in good shape.
  • Turning to the Senior Vice Provost for Research Administration and for Graduate Education Search, the Provost asked Luke Kahlich (BCMD) how many candidates there were and he said that nine candidates will be interviewed off-campus. The Provost also indicated that there was a hope to find someone who displays a balance between research administration and graduate education.  She indicated that there are a wide range of questions for the candidates to cover many fields, including the arts and humanities and not just the sciences. 
  • The University Tenure and Promotion Advisory Committee was discussed.  The Provost needs three nominees and the Faculty Senate needs three as well.  The Provost would like the Faculty Senate to put forth their names first. There cannot be more than two representatives per college/school.
  • The Provost asked Diane Maleson, Senior Vice Provost for Faculty Development and Faculty Affairs, to explain the new process with this committee.   In the new contract, the uncontroversial cases would go directly to the Council of Deans; split votes would go to the Tenure and Promotion Committee; difficult cases from the Council of Deans would go to the Tenure and Promotion Committee.   All materials are online although there would probably be a need for discussions with difficult cases.     
  • Provost Lisa then answered questions:
  • The first question focused on who was eligible to serve on the University Tenure and Promotion Advisory Committee.  The answer was only full tenure track professors;
  • A professor wanted to know if and how the 20/20 plan connected to the Academic Strategic Compass. The Provost was looking into this and also awaited President Hart’s visit to the Representative Faculty Senate;
  • A faculty member was concerned about an article in The Philadelphia Inquirer which said that Penn State was going to open a campus in Philadelphia.  It was stated that Temple was too expensive and there needed to be competition.  The Provost agreed that this was worrying and already had Kenneth Lawrence Jr, Senior Vice President for Government, Community and Public Affairs, looking into this;
  • Another faculty member hoped that non-tenure track faculty would be receiving merit in this next round (2008-2009).  The Provost said this would occur.  She also mentioned that the new online Annual Report would hopefully help to make merit more equitable;
  • A faculty member from the Fox Business School wanted to know if Honor’s Students would be helped with financial aid.  The Provost mentioned a new web site focused on students that would provide current information on scholarships;
  • The issue of salary compression was brought forth.  The Provost said that there was $852,000 available now, some of which could be used for economic adjustment.  She stressed that any chair can bring forward a request for salary adjustment to the provost at any time;
  • The TAUP President mentioned that individuals could write to their dean about the need for a pay increase.  The deans had thirty days to respond before being reviewed by the Provost’s Office;
  • A Health Science Senior Associate Dean wanted to know if all faculty or only TAUP faculty could go to his or her chair about salary adjustment and after thirty days be reviewed by the Provost’s Office.  Provost Lisa said this policy applied to all faculty;
  • A new full professor with tenure complained about the confusion he experienced in setting up wet labs at Temple.  It took the better part of a year to get his labs up and running.  Now he is having problems with the federal government.  His labs have been closed for three months.  The Provost knew of the difficulties and felt it important to report problems to the federal government.  However, she hoped the new Vice Provost for Research Administration and for Graduate Education would review the bureaucracy of getting labs up and running swiftly. 

4. President’s Report: Karen M. Turner


President Turner mentioned briefly the retreat that the Faculty Senate Steering Committee had with Provost Lisa.   She spoke of initiatives coming out of the retreat. Some of these initiatives will be discussed when CFO Tony Wagner and President Hart will address the 20/20 Plan at the February representative senate meeting. She also stated that in March, shared governance will be discussed.  In April, Eleanor Myers, Faculty Athletics’ Representative, the Athletic Director, and four coaches will join us. 


President Turner also said that Paul LaFollette and she attended a collegial assembly at the Engineering School.  She asked that other representatives let her know if they would like her to visit their school/college.

5. Vice President’s Report: Paul S. LaFollette


Vice President LaFollette spoke of the two elections that would be coming up in the Faculty Senate.  The first was for officers of the senate.  Nominations would be presented at the March meeting.  He was hopeful that candidates would not run unopposed.  You can nominate from the floor.  After this meeting, he will send out an announcement that will describe the process.


Mark Rahdert (Law) made a comment related to the election of officers.  He said that generally the officer process was a gradual one, moving from secretary to president.  He stressed the need for experience with the faculty senate.  So, of particular interest, was the nomination of a secretary for the senate.  This is not required but it is customary that experience is valued.


Other elections consist of the University Tenure and Promotion Advisory Committee and the Educational Programs and Policies Committee (EPPC).  Also needed is one person from the University Honors Program Oversight Committee and one from Personnel Committee. He asked that representatives go back to their schools/colleges and encourage faculty to run for these committees.


6. New Business: Ad Hoc Faculty Life  at Temple Committee

Paul LaFollette introduced the members of the Ad Hoc Faculty Life Committee who would lead the discussion.  They included:  Mark Rahdert (Law), David Waldstreicher (Fac. Herald) and Paul LaFollette (Vice pres.). 

Paul LaFollette first read the email that was sent out by the committee on January 23, 2010, providing some ideas of what kinds of questions might be asked. 

Mark Rahdert first provided a brief background for the need for this committee and its charge.  The topic came up from the Senate floor, but due to contract negotiations, it had been put on hold until now. Then the questions and discussions were opened to the Faculty Senate Representatives in attendance.


  • A faculty member from the Health Sciences brought up the issue of tuition remission for children of faculty who are going to universities other than Temple.  He did not feel that we were as competitive as other universities in the area because of the lack of tuition remission.
  • In response, Art Hochner, President of TAUP, provided the institutional memory that Temple did have such a policy until 1996.  But the remission was very low ($870.00 taxable benefit).  The state legislature did not look kindly as a state related institution using its monies to fund other institutions and the benefit was just too small.
  • · A NTT faculty member felt that it was hard for younger faculty to juggle their working lives with children.  He also thanked TAUP and Provost Lisa for really taking into consideration the role of an NTT faculty member.
  • A faculty member from CST was concerned about his younger colleagues who did not have post-retirement medical benefits.  He said this may not be an issue if the health care bill comes through; however, he was concerned and felt something should be done for his junior colleagues;
  • A faculty member in Anderson Hall felt that there were very real problems with this building.  They included:  climate control; elevator troubles; and poor classroom facilities. He wondered if anything could be done, even to the point of demolishing the building. 
  • A new faculty chair in Communications thought that a chair mentorship was needed.  Senior faculty, especially those who were brought in to lead units, need advice as it is hard to find one’s way at Temple.  They also needed to find out about what resources were available for their young children.
  • A faculty member in Anthropology wanted to know if the Dysfunctional Rules inbox had been taken down. He felt that it was important to have this charge given to a standing committee.
  • Provost Lisa explained that The Faculty Herald would hopefully take on this task and provide an anonymous outlet for compiling these rules and sending them on to her.
  • The Provost also spoke of the joint topics that the Council of Deans and the FSSC would be discussing at the dean’s retreat.  Dysfunctional rules and policies might be one of those areas.
  • President Turner expressed concern that this was meant to be a conversation and not just a point by point presentation.  She then asked a new chair who had previously mentioned her need for an orientation to elaborate a bit more.
  • The chair stressed the need for more orientation specific to this kind of position that should be provided right away and not in November when it was too late.  She also felt there was no support for a personal life.
  • Another chair in the same school, who was relatively new, agreed with the new chair’s comments.  She said that the acronyms alone were terribly confusing.  Outside chairs needed help.
  • An experienced faculty member, here for a long time, indicated that he felt that the new health center was very helpful as well as the CARE Team.  But he believed that treatment of the staff was not as good.  New chairs needed to learn how to treat staff.
  • Another faculty member felt that orientations should not be once a year but should be often and ongoing.
  • A faculty member in the health sciences found the orientation to be very good.  But she discovered childcare to be a real problem on the Health Sciences’ campus.
  • Another faculty member felt strongly that Temple University should be a safe place for dissent.
  • An alumna of Temple’s undergraduate program, who had a successful career in business and became a faculty member here, encouraged her child to apply to Temple.  She discovered that Temple took too much time to accept her daughter, and other schools did not.  She also wondered why there seemed to be a lack of community here. Big receptions are not enough.  Pride and community are needed.
  • A faculty member said that the helping of newcomers varies from department to department.  Orientations for all chairs and deans are needed.  Newcomers need to be encouraged to participate in faculty governance.
  • The Chair of the Faculty Senate’s Committee on the Status of Women thought President Hart’s words at The Balancing Act Conference were wise.  President Hart spoke about the glass ceiling that exists in certain disciplines for women. The Chair also felt that on-site childcare deserved attention.
  • A faculty member from the Health Sciences said that while the new medical school is superb; the physical therapy space is the same one that she was educated in some years ago.  There is a learning space issue and a taskforce is needed.
  • TAUP representatives wanted the faculty to know that they were doing a little bit toward making the university more family friendly by providing parental benefits for new children in a household.  Most recently, a male faculty member used this option.  Art Hochner said to contact the TAUP Office for more information and he also said the contract would be out soon and faculty could read about this for themselves.  Provost Lisa was very supportive of this option.  
  • An NTT faculty member thanked the administration for their support of multi-year contracts which are good for the faculty and for the university.

Paul LaFollette asked faculty to join the Ad Hoc Faculty Life at Temple Committee. Either write to him directly at: Paul.LaFollette@temple.edu  or write to senate2@temple.edu with a brief statement of interest and, if possible, provide a link to your curriculum vitae.


7. Unfinished Business:

There was none.


8. Adjournment:

The meeting ended at 3:01 P.M.  


Joan P. Shapiro