Representative Faculty Senate Minutes

Thursday. February 9, 2006

(Special Topic Meeting)

1. Call to Order:

The meeting was called to order by President J. Evans at 2:06 PM. Evans noted for the faculty that this meeting was a University Faculty Senate Meeting, where any Presidential Faculty member could vote, and any faculty member who wished to speak was invited to the microphone. The agenda was suggested by the previous Representative Faculty Senate meeting, to be limited to a discussion of the proposed changes to the Graduate Faculty document. She then introduced President David Adamany.

2. President Address to Faculty:

President Adamany noted for the Senate that the proposal of the changes to the Graduate Faculty guidelines put forward by him and Provost Ira Schwartz would make the Graduate Faculty parallel to the Faculty Senate, to advise the Trustees. He stressed the authority of the Board of Trustees, saying that the present structure of the Graduate Faculty right now can be interpreted as being independent of the Board of Trustees in terms of decision-making. Especially troubling, to him, was the potential litigation of a graduate student after an appeal, and the nominating process of the graduate faculty. He expects the proposed changes to the document will go to the Trustees in a spring meeting.

There were no questions for President Adamany, and he left the meeting to allow deliberation.

3. Motion Presented:

Evans then introduced the motion put forward by the Faculty Senate Steering Committee:

"The Faculty Senate Steering Committee would like to propose the following motion:

The mission of the Senate, as stated in the Faculty Handbook, is…

to advise the administration and the Board of Trustees on all matters of University policy, on all matters affecting the relations of the faculty of the University, and on all other matters of policy and administrative decision-making in which the faculty claims a reasonable advisement either through consultation or review and either at the initiation of the administration or at its own recognizance. The Senate, through the process of recommendation, may initiate advice to the administration and Board of Trustees on any matter of policy, decision and program.

In keeping with this mission, and with a new administration soon to be in place, this does not appear to be the best time to change any major university policy and structuring-document. In particular, we are concerned about President Adamany's proposed changes to the "Structure of the Graduate School."

The current structure of the Graduate School, as found in comparable institutions of higher educations throughout the country, was adopted over thirty years ago and accepted by all the Trustees and Presidents since that time. It has been admirably applied and has worked well throughout this period. In his communication , the President stated that "State law vests final responsibility for a management of the affairs of the University in the Board of Trustees." The Faculty Senate wholeheartedly agrees with this statement. Indeed, over these three decades, every new program approved by the Graduate Faculty was implemented only after being approved by the Board of Trustees, and subsequently utilized only resources allocated by the administration. The President's fiduciary concerns and his more general concerns over final authority are therefore unwarranted. Additionally, with a new administration soon expected, the timing does not seem right for changing major university policies or structuring-documents.

We therefore ask the Trustees to retain the current structure of the Graduate School."

4. Faculty Discussion:

Scott Gratson (SCT) and Michael Goetz (FSBM) asked for clarification about the motion. Evans and Jim Korsh (CST) noted that the motion would go to George Moore, the Secretary to the Trustees, for distribution to the Trustees. Korsh also noted some differences between the present Graduate Faculty practice and the proposed changes: the institution of voting is removed from the document; the authority to name the Graduate Faculty is removed; the power of the Graduate Board in terms of policy is eliminated; and the final ratification of all graduate policies by the Graduate Faculty is removed. Orin Chein (CST) reminded the Faculty Senate that the Graduate Faculty had already voted down at least one of the changes proposed by the President and Provost last spring. Mary Barr (CHP) read a position statement from the Graduate Council of CHP, declaring their opposition to the revisions to the 1975 document, as the original document reflects standard practices at other institutions, and removes local control from the faculty who are best able to make graduate faculty decisions.

The following amendment to the motion was made by Korsh, Bill Woodward (Law) and Paul LaFollette (CST):

The current structure of the Graduate School, as adopted over thirty years ago and accepted by all the Trustees and Presidents since that time has been admirably applied and worked well throughout this period. In his communication, the President stated that "state law vests final responsibility for management of the affairs of the University in the Board of Trustees". The Faculty Senate wholeheartedly agrees with this statement. Indeed, over these three decades, every new program approved by the Graduate Faculty was implemented only after being approved by the Board of Trustees and subsequently utilized only resources allocated by the administration. The President's fiduciary concerns and his more general concerns as found in comparable institutions of higher educations throughout the country, was adopted over thirty years ago and accepted by all the Trustees and Presidents since that time. It has been admirably applied and has worked well throughout this period. In his communication, the President stated that "State law vests final responsibility for a management of the affairs of the University in the Board of Trustees." The Faculty Senate wholeheartedly agrees with this statement. Indeed, over these three decades, every new program approved by the Graduate Faculty was implemented only after being approved by the Board of Trustees, and subsequently utilized only resources allocated by the administration. The President's fiduciary concerns and his more general concerns over final authority are therefore unwarranted. Additionally, with a new administration soon expected, the timing does not seem right for changing major university policies or structuring-documents.

We therefore ask the Trustees to retain the current structure of the Graduate School."

The motion to amend was passed, unanimously (53 aye, no abstentions).

John Nosek (CST) amended the motion to read "as found in comparable institutions of higher education throughout the country" (added to first sentence of the above paragraph), passed by a vote of 53 aye and 1 opposed, no abstentions.

Evans closed the discussion on the motion, as substantive changes had already been made. The vote to send the amended motion to George Moore, Secretary to the Trustees was passed unanimously, (51 aye, no abstentions).

5. Adjournment:

The meeting was adjourned at 2:55.

OFFICERS BY LAWS FACULTY HANDBOOK MEETING SCHEDULE MINUTES COMMITTEES FACULTY HERALD ELECTIONS SENATE HOME TEMPLE HOME		Representative Faculty Senate Thursday. February 9, 2006 (Special Topic Meeting) 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by President J. Evans at 2:06 PM. Evans noted for the faculty that this meeting was a University Faculty Senate Meeting, where any Presidential Faculty member could vote, and any faculty member who wished to speak was invited to the microphone. The agenda was suggested by the previous Representative Faculty Senate meeting, to be limited to a discussion of the proposed changes to the Graduate Faculty document. She then introduced President David Adamany. 2. President Address to Faculty: President Adamany noted for the Senate that the proposal of the changes to the Graduate Faculty guidelines put forward by him and Provost Ira Schwartz would make the Graduate Faculty parallel to the Faculty Senate, to advise the Trustees. He stressed the authority of the Board of Trustees, saying that the present structure of the Graduate Faculty right now can be interpreted as being independent of the Board of Trustees in terms of decision-making. Especially troubling, to him, was the potential litigation of a graduate student after an appeal, and the nominating process of the graduate faculty. He expects the proposed changes to the document will go to the Trustees in a spring meeting. There were no questions for President Adamany, and he left the meeting to allow deliberation. 3. Motion Presented: Evans then introduced the motion put forward by the Faculty Senate Steering Committee: "The Faculty Senate Steering Committee would like to propose the following motion: The mission of the Senate, as stated in the Faculty Handbook, is… to advise the administration and the Board of Trustees on all matters of University policy, on all matters affecting the relations of the faculty of the University, and on all other matters of policy and administrative decision-making in which the faculty claims a reasonable advisement either through consultation or review and either at the initiation of the administration or at its own recognizance. The Senate, through the process of recommendation, may initiate advice to the administration and Board of Trustees on any matter of policy, decision and program. In keeping with this mission, and with a new administration soon to be in place, this does not appear to be the best time to change any major university policy and structuring-document. In particular, we are concerned about President Adamany's proposed changes to the "Structure of the Graduate School." The current structure of the Graduate School, as found in comparable institutions of higher educations throughout the country, was adopted over thirty years ago and accepted by all the Trustees and Presidents since that time. It has been admirably applied and has worked well throughout this period. In his communication , the President stated that "State law vests final responsibility for a management of the affairs of the University in the Board of Trustees." The Faculty Senate wholeheartedly agrees with this statement. Indeed, over these three decades, every new program approved by the Graduate Faculty was implemented only after being approved by the Board of Trustees, and subsequently utilized only resources allocated by the administration. The President's fiduciary concerns and his more general concerns over final authority are therefore unwarranted. Additionally, with a new administration soon expected, the timing does not seem right for changing major university policies or structuring-documents. We therefore ask the Trustees to retain the current structure of the Graduate School." 4. Faculty Discussion: Scott Gratson (SCT) and Michael Goetz (FSBM) asked for clarification about the motion. Evans and Jim Korsh (CST) noted that the motion would go to George Moore, the Secretary to the Trustees, for distribution to the Trustees. Korsh also noted some differences between the present Graduate Faculty practice and the proposed changes: the institution of voting is removed from the document; the authority to name the Graduate Faculty is removed; the power of the Graduate Board in terms of policy is eliminated; and the final ratification of all graduate policies by the Graduate Faculty is removed. Orin Chein (CST) reminded the Faculty Senate that the Graduate Faculty had already voted down at least one of the changes proposed by the President and Provost last spring. Mary Barr (CHP) read a position statement from the Graduate Council of CHP, declaring their opposition to the revisions to the 1975 document, as the original document reflects standard practices at other institutions, and removes local control from the faculty who are best able to make graduate faculty decisions. The following amendment to the motion was made by Korsh, Bill Woodward (Law) and Paul LaFollette (CST): The current structure of the Graduate School, as adopted over thirty years ago and accepted by all the Trustees and Presidents since that time has been admirably applied and worked well throughout this period. In his communication, the President stated that "state law vests final responsibility for management of the affairs of the University in the Board of Trustees". The Faculty Senate wholeheartedly agrees with this statement. Indeed, over these three decades, every new program approved by the Graduate Faculty was implemented only after being approved by the Board of Trustees and subsequently utilized only resources allocated by the administration. The President's fiduciary concerns and his more general concerns as found in comparable institutions of higher educations throughout the country, was adopted over thirty years ago and accepted by all the Trustees and Presidents since that time. It has been admirably applied and has worked well throughout this period. In his communication, the President stated that "State law vests final responsibility for a management of the affairs of the University in the Board of Trustees." The Faculty Senate wholeheartedly agrees with this statement. Indeed, over these three decades, every new program approved by the Graduate Faculty was implemented only after being approved by the Board of Trustees, and subsequently utilized only resources allocated by the administration. The President's fiduciary concerns and his more general concerns over final authority are therefore unwarranted. Additionally, with a new administration soon expected, the timing does not seem right for changing major university policies or structuring-documents. We therefore ask the Trustees to retain the current structure of the Graduate School." The motion to amend was passed, unanimously (53 aye, no abstentions). John Nosek (CST) amended the motion to read "as found in comparable institutions of higher education throughout the country" (added to first sentence of the above paragraph), passed by a vote of 53 aye and 1 opposed, no abstentions. Evans closed the discussion on the motion, as substantive changes had already been made. The vote to send the amended motion to George Moore, Secretary to the Trustees was passed unanimously, (51 aye, no abstentions). 5. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 2:55.

	Powered by