ECOS logo

Faculty Senate Minutes

February 11, 1999 - Gallagher Business Building, 123

Approved - March 11, 1999



Members Present: Chair Walton, C. Anderson, R. Ashmore, D. Black, S. Burnham, W. Chaloupka, A. Chase, F. Clark, A. Crawford, M. Curnow, R. Deaton, J. Esmay, R. Ford, G. Funk, F. Glass-Boyd, J. Graham, K. Hill, J. Hirstein, M. Jakupcak, J. Jacobs, S. Justman, M. Kayll, L. Koester, I. Lange, M. Mayer, B. McBroom, F. McGlynn, S. Mueller, B. Pattee, A. Williams, W. Shellen, A. Sillars, G. Smith, J. Smith, J. Bailey, C. von Reichert

Members Not Present: H. Ausland, M. Burke, M. Harrison, K. Milner, T. Ottaway, W. Watson, C. Work, H. Zuuring

Members Excused: G. Burns, M.E. Campbell, G. Cochran, T. Cook, R. Field, L. Foster, D. Friend, B. Harrison, S. Jenne, C. Johnson, A. McQuillan, E. Moore, L. Queen

Non-Voting Members Present: President Dennison, V.P. Cole, V.P. Hollmann, V.P. Kindrick, Assoc. Provost Schwaller, Registrar Bain

Guests Present: D. Bilderback, L. Carlyon, P. Fandozzi, B. Bigley, M. Kreisberg


Call to Order: Completed by Chair Walton at 3:15 p.m.

Roll Call: Completed by Senate Recorder Bain. The question was raised whether a quorum was present. A quorum was established with 32 members present (four more arrived late).

Review of the Minutes: The minutes for the meeting of December 10, 1998 were approved.

Communications:

1) ECOS Report. Chair Walton reviewed ECOS' activities since the last meeting.

A) The documents pertaining to the revision of the budgeting process, which President Dennison will address today, are available on the Senate Web site.

B) There was a Joint Appropriations Subcommittee on Education Hearing on January 9, 1999. Chair Walton and Vice Chair Ford spoke on behalf of campus. The subcommittee asked them to address five questions. Chair Walton is unsure of the success of their presentation, but pointed out that the legislatures appropriations should not be considered a measure of their success. The materials for this presentation are available on the Senate Web site.

C) Chair Walton met with Assoc. Provost Schwaller, ASCRC Chair Hirstein, M.McClintock, and other English Department folks regarding the Writing proposal in General Education. ECOS brings seconded-motions to the Senate today to remove the proposal from the table and amend it.

D) There was a BOR meeting on January 28, in Helena. UM-M had several Notices of Intent, including a proposal to establish an Institute in Teaching Excellence led by Betsy Bach. This proposal should come before the Senate at its March meeting. There were other matters considered as well, that the Senate should be aware of:
1) The Credit Cap was on the BOR Agenda. Commissioner Crofts made a recommendation regarding the Credit Cap. Copies of his recommendation were given to Senators Deaton and Funk. The Board postponed consideration of the Commissioner's recommendation until the March meeting.
2) A revision of the Telecommunication Learning Policy. Chair Walton was made aware of this just prior to the BOR meeting and asked for the Senate to have time to review it. ECOS will review it and the Senate will see it at the March meeting.
3) A revised Mission Statement for the Montana University System. This revision seems drastic, in ECOS' opinion. Commissioner Crofts recommended that it be circulated in the various campuses prior to being considered for adoption. It will be reviewed at the March Board meeting.
4) Discussion of post-tenure review. There was an early morning work session discussion of post-tenure review. Chair Walton did not get to observe the discussion and, therefore, he does not know what was said. He is unclear what the BOR interests are, but, if a policy is being made then it must be addressed by the UTU, not the Senate. UTU President Mayer has informed the Commissioner that post-tenure review is a UTU matter.
5) ECOS gave UTU President Mayer a memo on one tentative Bargaining agreement.

E) Notices:
1) There will be an open forum with Senator Baucus at 3:30 p.m. on February 16, in Gallagher 122, sponsored by the Faculty Senate and the UTU.
2) One nomination for an honorary degree has been received in the Senate office. More are anticipated in the next few weeks. The Senate will vote on these at its March meeting, in Executive session. Senators are asked to review the nomination in the Senate office. Strict confidence is to be observed.
3) From now forward, Motions of Bereavement will be read and there will be a moment of silence no matter how full the Agenda.

2) UTU Report. UTU President Mayer summarized the UTU's activities since the last meeting.

A) He began by summarizing the legislature's activities:
1) The UTU has hired a lobbyist and he is doing well.
2) The annual cost of living increase for retirees looks like it is going through.
3) A 3% increase is the Governors pay plan, however, it is only funded from October (3/4 of year). Merits, promotions, and the inversion pool come off the top first, which makes it roughly a 2.2% increase. Therefore, only 1.67% would actually be money in pocket.
4) The proposal for health benefits is $15 for the first year, and $10 for the second year. However, it is only funded from January 1 (_ year).

B) President Mayer also briefed that the UTU has sent a letter to the BOR regarding post-tenure review. The UTU informed them that UM-M has had post-tenure review for 20 years and that any discussions need to go through the UTU office.

C) Finally, negotiations on the contract have almost concluded. There are a few sections remaining to be tied up, like intellectual rights to courses, pay plan, and some language on adjuncts in the President's policy.

Senator Jacobs wanted to know why the BOR early morning session was a closed meeting. Chair Walton informed him that it was a workin g session, and it wasn't closed.

3) Revised budgeting structure and process. President Dennison briefed the Senate on the changes to the budgeting committees and the progress of those committees since the last Senate meeting.

A) After meetings with the Senate and ECOS the following revisions were made to the structure and charges of the Executive Council and SaBPaC:

  1. Faculty are included.
  2. Charges were clarified; Executive Council sets parameters and SaBPaC does the work.
  3. SaBPac reviews the parameters set by the Executive Council.
  4. The Director of the UM Foundation serves in an Ex-Officio capacity.

B) SaBPaC has a short time frame to get the budget in place for the coming year, as well as the following year. SaBPaC is expected to have its recommendations ready by late March. At that time, the amount of general fund appropriations should be known.

C) SaBPaC has an important mission to maintain sources of funding. Currently 22% comes from the State. Should the State funding fail, other appropriate sources must be found.

Senator Shellen asked whether part of the role of the Executive Council was to tag groups for retrenchment. The President said no, that was not his intent. Senator Shellen asked whether there had been any change to the contractual rules for entrenchment. The President said no.

SaBPaC Chair Ford briefed the Senate on the committee's activities:

A) The 22 member committee has met three times and elected Senate Vice-Chair Ford as SaBPaC Chair.

B) A steering committee has been established with one representative from each of the following groups: Deans, Faculty, Students, Administration, and Staff. They have been meeting several times a week.

C) SaBPaC will have a Web site, located at: //www.cs.umt.edu/BUDCOM. The intent of the site is to communicate with the rest of the campus community.

Chair Walton explained the role he and Senate Vice-Chair Ford have in the committees. He emphasized that their involvement in no way indicates the approval of the Senate. When the committees produce something which calls for Senate involvement it will be brought to the Senate floor.

Old Business:

1) General Education Writing Proposal . Senate Vice-Chair Ford presented the motion to remove the tabled proposal (Attachment A)from the table.

The motion to remove the proposal from the table passed. Then, Senator Ford introduced a motion from ECOS to amend the proposal (Attachment B) . There was considerable discussion:

Provost Kindrick asked the Senate to give serious consideration to ECOS' amendment which would include having a campus wide committee serve as administrator with the English department.

Senator McBroom asked why this went around ASCRC. ASCRC Chair Hirstein stated that ASCRC had approved it. Senator McBroom said that there should be a linkage between the Provost's committee and ASCRC. He moved that the ECOS motion be amended to include the sentence, "At least one member of the committee shall also be a member of ASCRC," placed after the present second sentence in the Provost's description of the Provost's Writing Committee.

D. Bilderback asked about the makeup of the committee; specifically, why Fine Arts had been singled out. Chair Walton pointed out the peculiarities of the Fine Arts curriculum and said they were simply striving for adequate representation.

A vote was made on the amendment for the Provost's Writing Committee. It passed.

There was a good deal of discussion regarding the ACT Score and 27 credit exemptions from the lower-division writing course. ASCRC Chair Hirstein emphasized that the student would still have to take the writing exam; it didn't exempt them from that.

Senator Mayer made a motion to raise the 27 credit exemption to 60 credits and delete the remainder of the sentence. The motion was seconded. Provost Kindrick said that 32 transferable credits would meet the BOR decree. Senator Mayer asked to change the credits to 32 and Chair Walton said the change could safely be regarded as a friendly amendment. President Dennison suggested the amendment be in-line with the BOR decree, that a transfer student from within the Montana System who has met the 32 credits in General Education requirements is exempted.

Associate Provost Schwaller pointed out that students are not being exempted from anything; it merely dictates when they may take the exam. Senator Shellen suggested leaving the credits at 27 until a justification to change the number is clearer. Chair Hirstein said the ACT scores were chosen at about the 90th percentile because it was thought that a student at that level might be ready to take the exam.

Senator Mayer's motion to amend was voted on. A hand count was required. The motion failed, 14 to 17.

Senator McGlynn pointed out that there is no restriction when registering by the computer for courses if students have not met the prerequisites. This raises the concern that students will take upper-division writing courses prior to the exam. He suggested that the computer stop students from registering for upper-division courses. Provost Kindrick suggested that his Writing Committee be charged with coming up with a system for monitoring the requirements.

A vote on the motion was made. The motion passed.

2) President Dennison's NT/PT faculty policy (latest draft - Attachment C) . President Dennison summarized the revisions to the policy and stood for questions from the Senate.

Chair Walton reviewed the history of the proposal and President Dennison pointed out the changes:
I. A. Lecturers - Introduces a different group on campus; someone usually devoted solely to instruction. He reviewed the lecturer category and expectations. He said that was the major change to the policy.

I. B. Adjunct and Visiting faculty are intended to replace absent faculty in specific courses.

II. B. Should include research faculty in second to last line.

The Senate had many questions for the President:

Senator Brenner asked what funding supports the hiring of lecturers? The President said instructional program funding.

Senator McBroom pointed out to the Senate that when the CBA is approved the policy in effect at that time will be the one referred to.

Senator Shellen asked if the long-term visitors would be transferred to a lecturer status. The President said they could be.

P. Fandozzi asked whether there was a time limit on adjuncts? The President said there deliberately is not.

Senator Anderson asked what was the intent of II. f? Will the evaluation come through FEC's? The President said yes, it would.
P.Fandozzi asked how the limit of two lecturers was arrived at for lecturers. The President said it was an attempt to delineate based on unique responsibilities.

Senator Curnow suggested that the limit of two lecturers could be a penalty for larger departments. She asked if it couldn't it be a percentage based on FTE. The President said that the point is not to negotiate the number of lecturers.

Senator Black stated that she sees it as a continuation of an erosion of tenure. The President said he didn't see it that way. She asked what if a program determines that a full-time faculty member is needed? The President said that there would have to be a search.

Senator Funk said that currently if a faculty member resigns that person can be replaced with an adjunct and the tenurable line is lost. The President said that the intention is to fill vacant spots when faculty leave. He sends a report to the BOR that addresses these positions.

P. Fandozzi said that in his opinion it is an unrealistic policy, and the bottom line is there just is not the money for tenure line faculty.

M. Kreisberg wanted to know whether adjunct faculty who have given years of service would be "turned out?" The President said yes, in some cases they would.

G. Brenner made a speech about the efforts of his committee and encouraged the faculty to talk to their adjuncts.

Chair Walton advised the Senate that its role is to provide advice and counsel to the President and he is free to take it or not.

New Business:

1) Retroactive Drop policy -- Seconded motion from ASCRC (Attachment D) . ASCRC Chair Hirstein summarized the proposal and the reasons that the need for it arose:

A) He pointed out that many drop requests are years after the fact.

B) He said the $100 charge to retake a course has created more requests for drops.

C) He pointed out the exceptions to the proposal.

There was brief discussion:

Senator Jacobs asked when the language would apply and how it works. The Provost said it becomes immediately effective for all students. Chair Hirstein pointed out that some language is unique to cover summer and intersession.

Senator Curnow asked that it be broadly disseminated to all faculty.
Senator Lange pointed out that the onus is on the students to prove they didn't attend after the 16th day of class.

The motion passed.

Good and Welfare :

Senator Shellen reminded the Senate that one of the fundamentals of shared governance is that if the President rejects the advice of the Senate he must give good reason.

Senator Clark briefed the Senate on the Legislative actions surrounding the Montana Comprehensive Health Association. He read a portion of a letter that illustrates how faculty and newly retired faculty could be affected. He asked for the support of both the Senate and ECOS.
Chair Walton said that the information will be distributed via e-mail and perhaps the UTU can be of support.

The meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.


s/Richard E. Walton, Chair - Faculty Senate