Minutes

Senate Minutes - 10-21-2015

University Senate Meeting
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
3:00-5:00 pm
128 Chiles

Attendance can be found at the bottom of the page.

Introductory Remarks, Senate President Randy Sullivan

President Sullivan reiterated his intent to give everyone their chance to talk at Senate meetings. He outlined a process for establishing a queue of speakers; encouraged everyone to not repeat comments others have made; and noted that it is appropriate to stand when addressing the Senate.

1. Call to Order: 3:05 pm

2. Approval of Minutes

2.1 October 7, 2015  Seeing no one interested in modifying the minutes, President Sullivan declared them accepted as posted on the Senate website.

4. New Business

4.1 Approve Committee on Committees members and call for volunteers for 2015-2016: Robert Kyr (Music), Anne Laskaya (English), Jennifer Ellis (Business), Gordon
Sayre (English), Laura Leete (PPPM), Deborah Baumgold (Political Science)

Unanimous vote to approve this group of committee members.

4.2 Motion (Legislation): To Promote Representative Attendance at Senate Meetings; Senate Executive Committee

President Sullivan turned the gavel over to Vice President Harbaugh, so he could present and discuss this motion.

President Sullivan noted that this is a returning motion from last year. It comes to the Senate in its original form, but Sullivan has developed a revised version that he hopes the Senate will adopt. The changes are based on input from the Senate Executive Committee and those commenting on the Senate blog. They include a complete listing of the constituent groups, confirming that substitutes will count toward a quorum and carry the full obligations and privileges of the senator they are replacing, and reaffirming the two unexcused absences in a term rule.

In response to questions, President Sullivan clarified that faculty on sabbatical can serve as senators and that they are legitimately excused when not able to attend Senate meetings. He also noted that under the proposed legislation senators who are not able to find substitutes, for example due to last minute illness, will still be listed as excused, since illness is an acceptable reason for missing a meeting.

Motion: In section 2.1 of the original motion, substitute “may” for “shall”, so it is clear that senators may seek substitutes but are not required to. Presented by: Colin Koopman. Second: Unknown.

Moved/Seconded/Carried – Unanimously. No abstentions.

President Sullivan pointed out that senators were focusing on the wording of the original motion that had been returned to the Senate, rather than the changes he was proposing. After some discussion with the Parliamentarian, Vice President Harbaugh suggested that the best way to proceed would be for the Senate to formally substitute Sullivan’s proposed amendments for the original motion and then discuss possible changes to the amended motion. A vote to substitute only requires a majority vote, whereas a final vote on this resolution to change the Bylaws will require a 2/3 vote.

Motion: Substitute Sullivan’s revised version of this legislation, including sunset language, for the returning original version of the motion. Presented by: Randy Sullivan. Second: Colin Koopman.

M/S/C – Unanimously. No abstentions.

Senators proceeded to discuss the revised version. Senator Jennifer Freyd asked what purpose the second sentence in 2.4.1 serves, since the UO Constitution already covers unexcused absences. She wants to be sure the Senate isn’t doing anything to allow senators to stop attending meetings and just send a substitute. Vice President Harbaugh asked if there was any interest in postponing discussion on this legislation.

Motion: Postpone discussion of this legislation until the next Senate meeting. Presented by: Sullivan. Second: Michael Price.

M/S/C – All voting “Yes”, except Shner “No”.

President Sullivan resumed chairing the meeting.

4.3 Motion (Policy Proposal): US14/15-66: Hiring of Academic Executive Administrators; Senate Executive Committee

Vice President Harbaugh described the history behind this motion that has been carried over from last year. He said he and Scott Coltrane are the two people most involved in drafting it. Much has been agreed on, but there are still differences over which positions this policy will apply to, how many faculty positions there will be on these hiring committees, and how the faculty members will be chosen. For recent such hires, the faculty and Senate have been invited to submit names, but the Provost has decided which faculty will serve on the hiring committees. This doesn’t meet AAU standards and doesn’t seem sufficient, Harbaugh said. In discussing this matter with UO President Schill, though, it appears he is willing to open the hiring process more, so Harbaugh is recommending that the motion be held over until the first Senate meeting in January to allow for further discussion. Harbaugh, Sullivan, and Teri Rowe will be representing the Senate in these discussions.

Motion: Postpone discussion of this policy proposal until the first Senate meeting in January 2016. Presented by: William Harbaugh. Second: Jane Cramer.

M/S/C – Unanimously. No abstentions.

4.4 Motion (Policy Proposal): US14/15-67: Review of Academic Executive Administrators; Senate Executive Committee

Vice President Harbaugh said the issues with this motion are similar to the ones just discussed in Agenda Item 4.3. In addition, there is interest from the faculty in allowing a less-detailed review of an academic executive administrator’s work to occur in less than the current five years. Scott Coltrane noted that the recommendations contained in both Items 4.3 and 4.4 were developed by committees that included faculty members as well as administrators.

Motion: Postpone discussion of this policy proposal until the first Senate meeting in January 2016. Presented by: William Harbaugh. Second: Jane Cramer.

M/S/C – Unanimously. No abstentions.

S.1 [SUSPENSION OF RULES] Motion (Resolution): Support for the IFS Resolution Addressing Violence in our Schools; Robert Kyr (Music), Immediate Past President

President Sullivan asked for a suspension of the rules, so this resolution could be heard. It didn’t quite meet the submission timelines, but the matter is pressing. Seeing no opposition, President Sullivan determined there was unanimous support for suspending the rules.

Presented by: Rob Kyr. Second: Monique Balbuena. Rob Kyr read the motion and provided background on the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate (IFS). Representatives from the other six universities and OHSU will be bringing similar motions about school violence to their senates in October and November. The UO has three representatives on the IFS – President Sullivan, Vice President Harbaugh, and Rob Kyr.

Senator Craig Parsons expressed support for the content of the resolution, but asked whether this was an appropriate matter for the Senate to be addressing, since it didn’t appear to him to have anything to do with academic matters. He said he wants the Senate to be as effective as possible and to do that it needs to have a clear focus.

Kyr noted that the Senate Bylaws allow resolutions to be considered on any subject, not just those involving academic matters. Several senators, including Zach Lusby, Gina Psaki, Jennifer Freyd, and Peter Walker, indicated that they clearly saw school violence as an academic matter.

Senator Colin Koopman said he supported the spirit of the resolution, but is concerned about the Senate taking stands on issues when it should be focusing more on policy matters. He was unsure that the IFS needed our Senate’s support in order to follow through on this issue.

Senator Jane Cramer noted that issues like gun violence, sexual violence, divestment, and climate change all come up in the classroom and this makes it meaningful for the Senate to discuss and take a stand on them. 

Senator Mike Price pointed out that while Section 7.2.3 of the UO Constitution says that Senate resolutions are “unrestricted in scope”, the preceding Section 7.2 seems to limit such action to “university issues”. It “requires that the University Senate express its views on University issues through appropriate Legislation, Policy Proposals and Resolutions.” Senator Parsons noted that even though senators represent the whole university, nothing says the Senate has the right to speak on political issues.

Motion: Continue discussion of this resolution for an additional 10 minutes. Presented by: Max Burns. Second: Zach Lusby.

M/S/C – Unanimously. No abstentions.

Senator Cramer suggested that every issue is in some way a political issue and that you can’t make an easy separation between the classroom and university policies. Senator Walker supported this view and said it’s arbitrary to try to create a boundary between political issues and university interests. He said some might well conclude that remaining silent on an issue like this was in effect taking a political position on it.

Senator Koopman said he isn’t interested in the Senate being apolitical. His concern is with how the Senate uses its time and he’d rather see it act in ways that impact real policy matters, not things like the divestment issue that came up last year.

Senator Burns noted that the action called for in the resolution is for the Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC) to convene a “statewide conversation” on school violence.

President Sullivan closed the discussion and called for a vote on the original resolution.

M/S/C – All voting “Yes”, except Parsons “No”.

5. Open Discussion

5.1 Topics: Full participation of Senators and the UO Community in Senate Deliberations. Progress of Motions.

President Sullivan repeated his interest in ensuring that everyone can be heard at Senate meetings and that motions proceed through the Senate in an orderly manner. The University Senate is the only representative body at the UO, he said, that is open to all constituencies. He will encourage committees to work through issues before they reach the Senate floor, so the discussion there can be more substantive and less procedural. Sullivan also hopes the new Senate blog will encourage robust discussion on matters before the Senate. Senate Executive Committee members will be assigned to “chaperone” motions through the deliberation process, so they don’t get lost, and there will be a priority on ensuring that postponed motions return for consideration.

Senator Cramer said we can’t operate the Senate online. She emphasized the importance of face-to-face discussion. She also noted that many classes like hers deal with very controversial subjects and that if students were allowed to carry weapons on campus, there would be a real risk of violence. Senator Parsons said he appreciated being reminded of the fact that the Senate represents the entire campus community, which helps him see that gun violence is an appropriate issue for discussion.

Frank Stahl would like to see more faculty attending Senate meetings, since the Senate is a committee of the Statutory Faculty. He feels faculty don’t realize the impact they could have if they were involved. He’d like to have an email sent to all faculty each year inviting them to take part in shared governance.

Senator Balbuena urged the Senate to get its policy workgroups active again reviewing the policies the university inherited from OUS. A lot of good work was done last year and there’s more that needs doing, she said. She agreed, though, that gun violence is very important, since it affects everyone’s sense of security.

Senator Freyd asked why information about Senate and committee meetings isn’t featured on Around the O. This might encourage more participation. Senator Keith Frazee suggested inviting speakers to make presentations at Senate meetings as a way of attracting more people to Senate meetings. Senator Greg Bryant remarked that the wider the Senate’s purview, the more people we’re likely to attract to meetings.

President Sullivan thanked everyone for their input.

6. Reports

Vice President Harbaugh announced that there is a motion on the Senate web page regarding the Faculty Advisory Council and the Senate’s open meetings policy. He urged senators to review it before the next Senate meeting when it will be up for discussion and vote.

Frank Stahl reminded senators that his resolution on the UO Police Department is scheduled for discussion at the next Senate meeting.

7. Notice(s) of Motion

President Sullivan noted that Frances White has submitted legislation that would change the Summer Term schedule. It is posted on the Senate web page and blog.

President Sullivan provided notice of two motions: 1) repealing policies 2.001, 2.010, and 2.015, which are duplicates of policies that have already been repealed, and 2) repealing an inherited Oregon State Board of Higher Education (OSBHE) policy on accreditation reports, since it requires contacting bodies that no longer exist.

President Sullivan noted that Rob Kyr has already provided notice of motion to have the Senate create an Academic Excellence Committee.

Rob Kyr reminded senators that they will soon see motions regarding the ASUO campus safety campaign.

8. Other Business

8.1 Announcement of special election for PTRAC and FPC.

Senate Executive Coordinator Betina Lynn explained that there will soon be a special election to fill a vacancy on the Promotion-Tenure-Retention Appeals Committee (PTRAC), because of technical difficulties in last spring’s election. There are five people willing to serve. She also announced that there will be a special election to fill a seat from the School of Journalism and Communications on the Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC) due to a retirement. She expects two or three candidates for that position. Lynn hopes to have these elections completed by Thanksgiving.

President Sullivan reported that all former OUS policies were incorporated into the UO Policy Library over the summer where they are currently reviewable. There’s a link to the policy library on the Senate website. If anyone has questions about these policies, they should contact Chuck Triplett in the President’s Office. Sullivan also noted that those policies which the Senate acted on last year are all being reviewed by the UO’s Policy Advisory Council, which he and Senator Balbuena are members of. Those wishing to stay current on policy matters can subscribe to a policy email list at: policy-notification-request@lists.uoregon.edu. Sullivan said he would post an update on the Senate website about the Senate’s policy workgroups.

9. Adjournment: 5:05 pm

Attendance:

University Senate Members    2015-16         Date: October 21, 2015

Senators

Pres

Abs

Exc

Senators

Pres

Abs

Exc

CAS – Natural Sciences

 

 

 

Librarians

 

 

 

Jeff Cina

 

X

 

Victoria Mitchell

X

 

 

John Conery

 

 

X

Edward Teague

 

 

X

Dejing Dou

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jennifer Freyd

X

 

 

Lundquist College of Business

 

 

 

Weiyong He

X

 

 

Robin Clement

X

 

 

Ken Prehoda

 

X

 

Jennifer Ellis

X

 

 

Michael Price

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reza Rejaie

X

 

 

School of Music and Dance

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Alexandre Dossin

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Idit Shner

X

 

 

CAS – Social Sciences

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Cramer

X

 

 

Clark Honors College

 

 

 

Michael Dreiling

 

 

X

Monique Balbuena

X

 

 

William Harbaugh

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Parsons

X

 

 

Other Academic Units

 

 

 

Peter Walker

X

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAS – Humanities

 

 

 

Officers of Administration

 

 

 

Jane Averill

X

 

 

David Espinoza

X

 

 

Dianne Dugaw

X

 

 

Keith Frazee

X

 

 

Colin Koopman

X

 

 

Stephanie McGee

X

 

 

Geraldine Poizat-Newcomb

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regina Psaki

X

 

 

Students

 

 

 

Donna Shaw

 

X

 

Max Burns

X

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Zach Lusby

X

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Martin Martinez-Santoyo

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tess Mor

X

 

 

Architecture and Allied Arts

 

 

 

Evan Roth

 

X

 

Chris Bell

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura Leete

X

 

 

Classified Staff

 

 

 

Ron Lovinger

X

 

 

John Ahlen

X

 

 

Richard Margerum

 

 

X

Theodora Ko Thompson

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jimmy Murray

X

 

 

College of Education

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deanna Linville

X

 

 

Career Non-Tenure Track Research

 

 

 

Laura Lee McIntyre

 

 

X

Greg Bryant

X

 

 

Deborah Olson

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Journalism and Communication

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Debra Merskin

 

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ex-Officio

 

 

 

School of Law

 

 

 

Randy Sullivan, President

X

 

 

John Bonine

 

 

X

Rob Kyr, Immediate Past Pres.

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Schill, UO President

 

X

 

 

 

 

 

Scott Coltrane, Provost

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Helena Schlegel, ASUO President

 

X

 

Ex Officio: Betina Lynn, Paul Simonds

Guests: Dave Hubin, James West, Mario Radic, Susan Gary, Frank Stahl, Jette Foss, Melanie Muenzer, Chuck Triplett, and Kurt Willcox

Senate Executive Committee Minutes - October 14, 2015

Senate Executive Committee Meeting
Wednesday October 14, 2015
3:00-5:00 pm
Ford Alumni Center Room 403

Attendance information can be found at the bottom of this page.

Call to Order: 3:06 pm

Approval of Minutes: Minutes fromSeptember 30, 2015 SEC meeting. Approved without objection.

Introductory Remarks and Discussion of October 21 Senate Meeting Agenda, Senate President Randy Sullivan

President Sullivan noted that he, Vice President Harbaugh, Immediate Past President Kyr, and Senate Executive Coordinator Lynn met with UO President Schill and his Executive Leadership Team this morning to review the agenda for the October 21 Senate meeting and ensure there were no surprises. He said such meetings will be a regular occurrence.

New Business:

4.1 Committee on Committees appointments: President Sullivan and Vice President Harbaugh noted that Jennifer Ellis recently agreed to be a committee member, in addition to the six people who have already been nominated. As two of the three members of the Senate Nominating Committee, Harbaugh and Sullivan formally nominated Ellis for this position.

4.2 Promoting Representative Attendance (Substitute Senator): President Sullivan reminded members that there are clean and red-lined versions of this legislation, as well as the relevant Bylaws, on the Senate blog. He said he would turn the gavel over to Vice President Harbaugh and present this revised returning motion at the Senate meeting.

4.3 and 4.4 Hiring and Review of Academic Executive Administrators: Vice President Harbaugh said these policy proposals were reviewed this morning with UO President Schill. He is willing to expand faculty participation in these areas, including electing faculty to selection committees and having formal reviews sooner than after five years. President Sullivan said these returning motions will be postponed until January when they are brought before the Senate on October 21. That will give Vice President Harbaugh time to continue discussions with President Schill about final acceptable text for both motions.

Discussion of Campus Violence motion, Immediate Past President Robert Kyr

S.1 Interinstitutional Faculty Senate (IFS) Resolution on School Violence: Rob Kyr reviewed the text of the motion, which calls on the Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC) to coordinate a “statewide conversation” on “violence in our schools.” He noted that the University Senate will be working with the IFS on this and that other Oregon schools are already putting this on their senate agendas. President Sullivan said this item will come up under New Business after the returning resolutions, but he also committed that the Senate will address this critical resolution at the October 21 meeting. In response to a question from Max Burns, Kyr noted that the HECC only has authority to convene a discussion. The universities and community colleges are the ones with the authority to take action. He also noted that the discussion will cover multiple forms of violence, including both sexual and gun violence.

Open Discussion:

5.1 Full Participation at Senate Meetings: President Sullivan noted that he had to cut a few people off last meeting when the question was called. Even though he went back and asked for their comments under Open Discussion, he doesn’t feel this is a satisfactory solution. He wants to be sure everyone feels they were heard and will ask senators on October 21 to discuss improving our processes, so all can be included. He’s also going to ask everyone who wishes to speak to hold up their tent card, so staff can establish a queue for him to work through.

Reports:

6.1 Possible Exemption of the Faculty Advisory Council (FAC) from Open Meeting Requirements: President Sullivan noted that this report and possible resolution is not yet ready for Senate consideration. Vice President Harbaugh said he will report on the status of things and request postponement until the November 11 Senate meeting.

Other Business:

8.1 Special Election for Promotion-Tenure-Retention Appeals Committee (PTRAC) and Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC): President Sullivan said he will announce these special elections on October 21. The PTRAC election is the result of a challenge to the way last spring’s election was held. The FPC election is to fill a recent vacancy from the School of Journalism and Communications.

Rob Kyr noted that the two motions from the ASUO on their upcoming campus safety campaign should be in front of the Senate on November 11.

[Mandy Chong left the meeting to keep another commitment.]

Discussion about the role and charge of the Senate Executive Committee (SEC)

President Sullivan noted that the main responsibility of this group is to set the agenda for University Senate meetings. He said he wants to see the SEC focus more on the progress of motions through the Senate than on their content. Parliamentarian Paul Simonds pointed out that the SEC is an advisory body to the Senate President. Even when votes are taken, the president is free to act as he or she chooses. President Sullivan said he would definitely ask for more discussion before going against a vote of the SEC. There are currently two vacancies on the SEC – one for an NTTF Senator and one for the chair of the Academic Council, which has not met yet or elected a chair.

Discussion about Fraternity and Sorority Life (FSL)

Jennifer Freyd asked if others had heard about a meeting yesterday that involved a review of fraternities and sororities at the UO by an outside panel of experts. She had been asked to make a presentation about her sexual violence campus survey, but since she was unavailable, she sent some of her graduate assistants instead. They reported that the panel did not seem interested in their findings. Freyd is concerned about the seeming failure to actively recruit faculty participation in areas – violence, academic achievement, and student conduct – that are legitimate faculty concerns. She noted that sexual violence is greater among sorority women, that she has had difficulty getting information from FSL representatives, and that the Senate’s task force had recommended against expanding the number of fraternities and sororities on campus until sexual violence issues were better addressed. Freyd is worried that decisions are being made without any clear public sense of who is responsible and what the process is that is being followed.

Members discussed what they knew of the review meeting and rumors that fraternities and sororities will be expanding beyond the two to three that are currently in the works. There was a consensus that this is an academic matter and that the Senate should be involved. President Sullivan suggested that the Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (CSGBV) and the Respect and Community Values Committee should invite FSL representatives in for further information and discussion. Greg Bryant and Kyr suggested there be a regular liaison person from FSL to the CSGBV. Rich Margerum suggested contacting FSL for clarification on the process for expanding the number of fraternities and sororities. President Sullivan said he would check with the FSL Office and bring them into the discussion.

Review of November 11 Senate Meeting Agenda, Senate President Randy Sullivan

President Sullivan noted that the Senate will be considering a motion on “Improving the Effectiveness of the UO Police Department”. He said UO President Schill knows it is coming. Sullivan said the motion is properly before the Senate and that senators can do what they please with it – pass it or refer it to committee. Rich Margerum noted that the Senate needs to be more than just a suggestion box for everyone’s ideas. Vice President Harbaugh said he hopes the Senate will encourage UO President Schill to establish a police review board.

Vice President Harbaugh noted that the Senate will also be considering legislation on November 11 on the addition or subtraction of intercollegiate sports. There are already several resolutions the Senate passed last spring on athletics-related topics that were rejected by Interim UO President Coltrane and that require a response from the Senate. Harbaugh said he would like to find a way to withdraw all these motions for now and provide UO President Schill an opportunity to investigate and address the issues involved, but this is complicated by the fact that some of the motions have already passed the Senate. President Sullivan urged Harbaugh to work with Parliamentarian Simonds to determine a procedurally appropriate way to accomplish this before the November 11 Senate meeting.

Notice of Motion:

Rob Kyr announced that he had just submitted a notice of motion relating to the Senate’s role in promoting academic excellence.

Attendance Data:

Kurt Willcox announced that he had completed a spreadsheet started by Betina Lynn and Chuck Triplett to provide some data on Senate meeting attendance last year, which would be relevant to the “Substitute Senator” discussion. He distributed copies for SEC review. Members discussed the data and its implications. President Sullivan asked that the spreadsheet be added to the Senate blog devoted to this legislation.

Knight Library Browsing Room Meeting Space:

Max Burns expressed concern about the way seats were arranged for the first Senate meeting. He found it difficult to view and interact with other senators. There was support for this concern and discussion about available spaces that allow for broadcast of our meetings. Rob Kyr said he has a suggestion for reconfiguring the browsing room that should meet all needs and he will send it to President Sullivan to review.

Adjourn: 5:00 pm

Attendance

Senate Executive Committee Members 2015-2016

Name

Unit

Present

Absent

Excused

Randy Sullivan

Senate President

X

 

 

Bill Harbaugh

Senate Vice President

X

 

 

Rob Kyr

Immediate Past President

X

 

 

TBD

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Richard Margerum

Faculty Senator - PPPM

X

 

 

Regina Psaki

Faculty Senator –              Romance Languages

 

 

X

John Bonine

Faculty Senator - Law

 

 

X

Jennifer Freyd

Faculty Senator - Psychology

X

 

 

TBD

NTTF

 

 

 

Teri Rowe

OA Council Chair

 

 

X

Stephanie McGee

OA Senator –                        Human Resources

X

 

 

Theodora Ko Thompson

Classified Staff Senator – Admissions

 

 

X

Greg Bryant

Officer of Research Senator

X

 

 

Max Burns

Student Senator

X

 

 

Helena Schlegel

ASUO President

X

 

 

James West

ASUO University Affairs Coordinator

X

 

 

Melissa Redford

Faculty Advisory Committee    Co-Chair

 

 

 

Mandy Chong

Erb Memorial Union

X

 

 

Betina Lynn

Senate Executive Coordinator

X

 

 

Paul Simonds

Parliamentarian

X

 

 

 Guests: Chuck Triplett, Kurt Willcox

 

 

Minutes of the UO Senate Meeting for October 7, 2015

University Senate Meeting
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
3:00-5:00 pm
Knight Library Browsing Room

Attendance can be found at the bottom of the page.

Brief Introduction to Parliamentary Procedure by Paul Simonds, Parliamentarian

Simonds distributed a handout describing basic procedures under Roberts Rules of Order.

1.   Call to Order: 3:06 pm

2.   Approval of Minutes

2.1 May 27, 2015 and June 3, 2015:

Moved/Seconded/Carried (M/S/C) – Unanimously. No abstentions.

3.   State of the University

3.1 Remarks by President Schill with questions

UO President Schill said he’s seen a huge amount of passion, hope, and excitement on campus and he takes his responsibility to lead the UO forward very seriously. He reviewed his top three goals:

1) Build the tenured faculty by adding 80-100 over the next five years, recruit more graduate students to work with them, and build the necessary facilities by targeting areas of excellence.

2) Make attending the UO more affordable and accessible for Oregonians. This is less about tuition levels and more about significantly improving our graduation and time to completion rates. He described the current graduation rates – 49% in four years and 69% in six years – as abysmal. The UO will devote $3 million of the additional funding provided by the state this year to Pathway Oregon, assistance grants to help students graduate, and more academic advising and consulting.

3) Provide a great student experience by making lots of outside the classroom activities available to all students, including clubs, music, student government, sports, etc., and by ensuring a diverse environment that helps students learn about and from each other.

Schill noted that all this is consistent with the strategic planning work that was coordinated by Frances Bronet and Rob Kyr last year. He said he will be distributing a draft version of the strategic plan soon.

In order to pay for the things that need doing, Schill said the UO will increasingly need to rely on private philanthropy. There is no way we can expect to raise the needed funds through tuition increases or contributions from the state. Oregon is currently 47th among the states in state funding for higher education.

Schill introduced several new members of his Executive Leadership Team, thanked Scott Coltrane for his work as interim President, thanked Jennifer Freyd for her efforts on sexual violence, noted the interim policy on confidentiality of student records, and congratulated United Academics and SEIU on the successful completion of their contract negotiations.

Schill said he has heard the frustrations over the current budget model, particularly in the Humanities. He indicated that he will be reviewing this over the next 6 months and expects there will be more centralization and less reliance on student enrollment in making budget decisions.

Schill noted that our IT infrastructure needs a thorough review and likely a major overhaul. This will be an expensive project, but these systems need to be stable and secure, if we are to attract the faculty and research we are looking for.

Schill also intends to reorganize what he sees as inefficient administrative processes, such as too great a reliance on paper documents and extreme decentralization. There is wasted effort and it is often difficult to even know what is actually going on.

Schill feels we are at a critical, formative moment in the university’s history and we need to get our governing structures right. He said he intends to work closely with the Senate. He believes firmly in shared governance, but feels the Senate’s governing role involves academic issues. It’s not in athletics, budgets, or labor relations. There is plenty of work that needs the Senate’s attention in academics. He urged the Senate not to seek out issues that will divide us. “I need you. I want you. I implore you to be my partner”, he said.

Schill was asked what the dividing line is between administrative functions and academics. He said there is not always a clear boundary. Those things that are clearly academic – course content, promotion and tenure, etc. – belong in the Senate. Those things that are not as clearcut should be discussed. Schill said he looks forward to lots of dialogue and consultation, but he said if the Senate sends him legislation on non-academic issues, he will turn it back. He noted that if the Senate wants to challenge him, he’d prefer that it happen face-to-face, not through legislation and resolutions. He also urged senators to recognize that administrators are human and make mistakes. We should all show each other some grace, he said. Don’t assume the worst about Johnson Hall.

Jane Cramer asked about online classes and whether President Schill saw this as an academic issue. Schill agreed this is an academic issue and said the Senate should be involved in helping the UO develop a real plan in this area. He noted that he dealt with online classes at the U of Chicago and that he serves on the board of a non-profit organization that focuses on online learning. He stressed that the UO is a residential university and nothing should be done to change this, but we should be looking at online classes where this makes sense, especially if it helps students complete their degrees in a timely manner.

John Bonine reminded Schill that the University Senate includes members from all campus constituencies, not just faculty, and so must be responsive to a variety of needs. He urged the president to talk to the Senate when he feels it is headed in the wrong direction. Michael Dreiling seconded that sentiment and Schill committed to doing so.

6.  Reports

6.1 [SUSPENSION OF RULES]: Report from Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence, Jennifer Freyd (Psychology)

The Senate agreed unanimously to suspend its rules and hear a presentation from Jennifer Freyd about the findings from her UO 2015 Sexual Violence Survey.

Freyd described the research group involved, the definitions and methodology used, the survey’s connection to the work being done nationally by ARC3 (Administrator-Researcher Campus Climate Collaborative), and their basic findings. The 2015 survey included graduate students as well as undergraduates.

The 2015 survey largely confirmed the results from the group’s UO 2014 Sexual Violence Survey regarding the amount and types of sexual violence occurring on campus and how students view the university’s efforts to address it. It found that 27% of undergraduate women and 10% of graduate women reported some level of sexual victimization. 68% of undergraduate women and 58% of graduate women reported some form of sexual or gender-based harassment from another student. However, graduate women (38%) were much more likely to experience such harassment from faculty or staff members than undergraduate women (28%). And women in the Law School appear to be at especially high risk of this harassment. Students are unaware of some key support services offered by the university and have limited confidence in how the university will respond if they report sexual victimization incidents. 44% say they have experienced at least one type of institutional betrayal and a majority of female students don’t feel safe on campus.

The UO 2015 Sexual Violence Survey is available at:

http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/campus/UO15-campus-IVAT-24Aug15.pdf

Senator John Bonine asked if there was data about sexual victimization rates for seniors versus freshmen. Freyd said they are higher for freshmen and that female students’ initial term at the UO is the most dangerous. Renae DeSautel, Director of Sexual Violence Support Services, noted the particular danger for graduate women and urged an update of the university’s relationship policy. Keith Frazee pointed out two university websites that provide information and resources. They are: safe.uoregon.edu and prevention.uoregon.edu. Laura Lee McIntyre asked how the UO compares with other universities and Freyd said our results are very similar to what the recent AAU Survey found. Carol Stabile pointed out that the UO survey data continues to show increased victimization rates among fraternities and sororities.

4.   New Business

S.1 [SUSPENSION OF RULES] Motion (Resolution): In Support of UCC Survivors and a Call to ActionRegarding School Violence; Robert Kyr, Immediate Past President of the University Senate

The Senate agreed unanimously to suspend its rules and hear the resolution from Rob Kyr about the recent shooting at Umpqua Community College.

Presented by: Rob Kyr. Second: Monique Balbuena. It was noted that the date of the incident was listed incorrectly and that will be changed to October 1.

M/S/C – Unanimously. No abstentions.

4.1  Motion (Legislation): To Promote Representative Attendance at Senate Meetings; Senate Executive Committee

President Sullivan requested that this legislation be postponed until the October 21 Senate meeting, so the Senate can address the next resolution on confidentiality of students’ counseling records. Approved unanimously. No abstentions.

4.2 Motion (Resolution): Confidentiality of Student's Counseling Records; John Bonine (Law), Senator

Presented by: John Bonine. Second: Michael Price. Bonine offered a number of changes to the resolution that had been posted online primarily in response to the temporary confidentiality policy recently announced by UO President Schill. He asked that the rules be suspended to allow consideration of the revised text.

The Senate agreed unanimously to suspend its rules and hear the revised resolution.

Bonine praised the temporary confidentiality policy. He noted that it will now take a court order in most cases to access student records and that a therapist or custodian of records may request the University to provide funding for an independent legal counsel in certain circumstances, which makes the UO policy one of the strongest in the country.

The question was called cutting off debate and resulting in a vote on the revised resolution.

M/S/C – Two dissenting votes. No abstentions

5.  Open Discussion

President Sullivan invited senators who had not been able to comment on the previous motion when debate was cut off to offer their comments now.

Zach Lusby who is being appointed by the ASUO to serve as a senator noted that the ASUO is opposed to any expansion of fraternities and sororities based on Freyd’s research. They want to see how effective several new Fraternity and Sorority Life (FSL) programs are first. Laura Lee McIntyre questioned whether it was the Senate’s proper role to comment on the confidentiality policy announced by UO President Schill. Craig Parsons said he sees things similarly to McIntyre and doesn’t consider the confidentiality of student records issue as an academic matter.

7.  Notice(s) of Motion:

Kyr: Will bring two motions to the October 21 meeting from the ASUO regarding their campus safety campaign and November 4 workshops.

Harbaugh: Will bring a motion to the October 21 meeting on exempting the Faculty Advisory Committee from the Senate’s open meetings legislation.

8.  Other Business: None

9.  Adjournment: 5:03 pm

Attendance:

University Senate Members  –  2015-16         Date: October 7, 2015

Senators

Pres

Abs

Exc

Senators

Pres

Abs

Exc

CAS – Natural Sciences

 

 

 

Librarians

 

 

 

Jeff Cina

X

 

 

Victoria Mitchell

X

 

 

John Conery

X

 

 

Edward Teague

X

 

 

Dejing Dou

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jennifer Freyd

X

 

 

Lundquist College of Business

 

 

 

Weiyong He

 

 

X

Robin Clement

X

 

 

Ken Prehoda

X

 

 

Jennifer Ellis

X

 

 

Michael Price

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reza Rejaie

X

 

 

School of Music and Dance

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Alexandre Dossin

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Idit Shner

X

 

 

CAS – Social Sciences

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Cramer

X

 

 

Clark Honors College

 

 

 

Michael Dreiling

X

 

 

Monique Balbuena

X

 

 

William Harbaugh

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Parsons

X

 

 

Other Academic Units

 

 

 

Peter Walker

X

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAS – Humanities

 

 

 

Officers of Administration

 

 

 

Jane Averill

X

 

 

David Espinoza

X

 

 

Dianne Dugaw

X

 

 

Keith Frazee

X

 

 

Colin Koopman

X

 

 

Stephanie McGee

X

 

 

Geraldine Poizat-Newcomb

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regina Psaki

X

 

 

Students

 

 

 

Donna Shaw

 

X

 

TBD

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Architecture and Allied Arts

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

 

Chris Bell

 

 

X

TBD

 

 

 

Laura Leete

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ron Lovinger

X

 

 

Classified Staff

 

 

 

Richard Margerum

X

 

 

John Ahlen

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Theodora Ko Thompson

X

 

 

College of Education

 

 

 

Jimmy Murray

X

 

 

Deanna Linville

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura Lee McIntyre

X

 

 

Career Non-Tenure Track Research

 

 

 

Deborah Olson

 

 

X

Greg Bryant

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Journalism and Communication

 

 

 

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Debra Merskin

 

X

 

TBD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

School of Law

 

 

 

Ex-Officio

 

 

 

John Bonine

X

 

 

Randy Sullivan, President

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rob Kyr, Immediate Past Pres.

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Schill, UO President

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scott Coltrane, Provost

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

Helena Schlegel, ASUO President

 

X

 

Ex Officio: Betina Lynn, Paul Simonds

Guests: Frank Stahl, Jette Foss, Zach Lusby, Caley Eller, Dave Hubin, James West, Olivia Decklar, Cheyney Ryan, Renae DeSautel, Michael Strain, Susan Gary, Kyle Henley, Kevin Reed, David Luebke, Carol Stabile, and Kurt Willcox

Senate Executive Committee minutes - September 30, 2015

Senate Executive Committee Meeting
Wednesday September 30, 2015
3:00-5:00 pm
Ford Alumni Center Room 403

Attendance information can be found at the bottom of this page.

Welcome by Senate President Randy Sullivan

President Sullivan called the meeting to order at 3:05 pm. He noted that he will be instituting a Senate Exec Committee blog on the Senate website to encourage discussion among SEC members.

Approval of Minutes and Agenda

None.

Announcements:

Nominating Committee and Rules Committee Appointments

Senate Rules Committee: President Sullivan appointed Rob Kyr.

Senate Nominating Committee: President Sullivan appointed Bill Harbaugh, Gina Psaki, and David Espinoza. If David doesn’t serve, Sullivan said he will appoint another OA Senator.

Senate Budget Committee appointment and designation

Senate Budget Committee: President Sullivan appointed Shawn Stevenson to the committee. He also designated Bill Harbaugh to represent the Senate President on the committee.

Special Election for PTRAC and FPC

Promotion-Tenure-Retention Appeals Committee: President Sullivan explained that there had been a procedural problem in the way the PTRAC election was handled last spring, so there will be a special election within the next two months to fill a vacancy on that committee. Because of very specific membership requirements, only about 34 faculty members are eligible to serve. The Nominating Committee must propose at least two nominees, but nominations can also occur via petition.

Reports:

Update on repeat course policy issues (Registrar Sue Eveland)

Sue Eveland explained that under current UO policy when undergraduate students repeat the same course, they only get credit for taking it once, but each grade counts toward their GPA. Because of an inquiry from a faculty member last year after a student who received an “A” in their class repeated it, the Registrar’s Office researched the issue and discovered there has been a lot of repeating going on.

Since 2000 there have been nearly 54,000 repeats. They were done primarily by students trying to raise their GPAs. 5,500 of the repeats were by students who received “A” or “B” the first time they took the course. 3,400 students repeated more than two classes. 102 students repeated 10 or more classes and one student repeated the same class 15 times..

Eveland noted that this is not just an issue of students “gaming the system”. Every student who repeats a class is potentially keeping another student from taking that class, which may impact how long it takes that second student to graduate. She noted that the Undergraduate Council worked on this problem and made some recommendations, but it didn’t consult with other interested groups and focused mainly on how to treat grades, not the general issue of repeating itself. This past summer the Academic Council looked at that issue and produced a draft policy after consulting with affected committees. They are now reaching out for student input. President Sullivan noted that this issue resides with the Academic Council and will come to the Senate when that council is ready to proceed.


Report on the motions in negotiation with the President's Office (Vice-
President Bill Harbaugh)

Vice-President Harbaugh reported that there were a number of resolutions and pieces of legislation that the Senate sent to Interim President Coltrane last spring that he did not support in one form or another. Because of the imminent arrival of President Schill, the Senate voted to postpone the start of its 60-day response period to September 16, in order to allow for negotiations with the new president. That period is now running.

Vice-President Harbaugh noted several of the issues that need to be discussed, including gender neutral bathrooms, payments from the Athletic Department for general academic purposes, faculty selection of the Faculty Athletic Representative (FAR), morale building event expenditures, adding a member of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC) to the university’s special admissions committee, having faculty nominate the faculty member on the Board of Trustees, and the UO’s countersuit in the Jane Doe case.

SEC members discussed whether and how to proceed on these issues. Members requested that the Executive Coordinator post all these items on the Senate website with a link to their texts and to Interim President Coltrane’s responses, so the SEC and all senators could provide input on how to proceed.

Business:

Nomination of Committee on Committee by Senate Nominating Committee

Because David Espinoza was absent, President Sullivan appointed himself temporarily as a member of the Nominating Committee.

Vice-President Harbaugh announced the names of those people he was recommending to serve on the Committee on Committees. They include: Gordon Sayre, Laura Leete, Robert Kyr, Deborah Baumgold, Anne Laskaya, and Bill Harbaugh. The Nominating Committee approved these nominations.

Vice-President Harbaugh noted that there are 4 – 6 more positions to fill on the Committee on Committees and that he is still recruiting.

Review of tentative Senate Agendas for 10/7 and 10/21

President Sullivan distributed draft agendas. On October 7 there will be a parliamentary briefing before the meeting. In addition, the rules will need to be suspended to allow Jennifer Freyd to present the findings of her most recent sexual violence survey right after UO President Schill speaks.

President Sullivan discussed the “substitute senator” legislation that was postponed last year and needs to be dealt with. It will return to the Senate in its original form on October 7, but President Sullivan distributed a revised version that he is recommending for SEC consideration.

Some committee members raised a number of questions and concerns about the original motion and the proposed revisions. These included allowing senators to select their own alternates, the appearance of proxy voting, and whether this will fix the problem of senators who regularly don’t attend. Others liked the concept, because it may mean better attendance and more representative decision-making. They offered suggestions such as trying this approach as an experiment for a year and using the second highest vote getters, if there are any, as the alternates.

President Sullivan asked to have this item placed on the October 7 agenda and said he would make further revisions based on today’s discussion and distribute them for consideration.

There was extended discussion about bringing postponed motions back to the Senate. Vice President Harbaugh briefly reviewed the content of motion US14/15-68 on adding or deleting sports. Rob Kyr and Provost Scott Coltrane reviewed the history of US14/15-66 and US14/15-67 on the hiring and review of academic executive administrators. Rob Kyr described motions US14/15-73 and US14/15-74 which involve policies from OUS on student petitions and student financial aid appeals.

President Sullivan pointed out that it is important for the Senate’s credibility that postponed motions don’t just disappear, but are returned for final consideration. He is determined that this is how the body will operate this year. Committee members wanted to know more about which motions, besides the ones tentatively listed for the October 21 agenda, are waiting to return. Several members expressed interest in having the appropriate committee and the SEC review them before they are placed before the Senate.

Vice President Harbaugh committed to reviewing where things are with US14/15-68 and getting back to the SEC. Harbaugh recommended putting US14/15-66 and US14/15-67 on the October 21 agenda and committed to talking with Provost Coltrane and Human Resources before then. Kyr recommended contacting the sponsors of US14/15-73 and US14/15-74 to see if they’re now prepared to move forward before placing these motions on the October 21 agenda.

Presentation by University President Michael Schill

UO President Schill said he has heard from many people who are optimistic about our future and want to see the UO become a great university, like UCLA, Virginia, and Michigan. To move in this direction, the UO needs to focus on three key areas:

1) Significantly boost the number of tenured and tenure-related faculty. We need to emphasize research, primarily in the sciences, but also elsewhere. The goal is 80-100 positions within the next five years.

2) Improve access and affordability. Raising our graduation rate is a more critical need than ensuring small tuition increases. We’re investing $3 million of the additional funding we received this year from the state into Pathway Oregon, graduation grants, and more coordinated academic advising. The Senate needs to be actively involved in reviewing and coordinating graduation requirements.

3) Provide a great co-curricular environment. Much of what students learn occurs outside the classroom, so, as a residential university we must provide a robust experience for students through clubs, sports, student government, and other activities.

President Schill stressed that this is a formative time at the UO. We all need to figure out our roles and how we’ll help the university work together. He supports shared governance, but sees the Senate’s role as primarily academic. The UO President and the Board of Trustees are responsible in other areas. He said it is critical that we get governance right.

President Schill also expressed an interest in having the university put more emphasis on online courses and he asked SEC members to consider how much the UO should emphasize a global perspective in enrollment and course offerings.

Discussion and Questions

Several SEC members suggested an informal, private meeting between the UO President and senators, so there could be a free and open exchange of ideas and perspectives about academic matters and the role of the Senate. President Schill expressed interest in such a meeting and indicated a preference for a small group meeting first. He said he will always talk to the Senate about academic issues, but he welcomes consultation on a wide range of matters.

President Schill noted that we still don’t have a policy on the confidentiality of student records in place, so he will be issuing an interim policy very soon. He will have new Vice President and General Counsel Kevin Reed work to finalize a permanent policy as soon as possible.

Committee members urged President Schill to avoid surprising Senate leaders on key decisions and policy actions and to encourage the top vice presidents to attend Senate meetings. Members pointed out that our Senate involves more than faculty members and that it is responsible for a wide range of committees, some of which have no direct connection to academics.

President Schill stressed that the UO needs increased financial resources to achieve greatness and the primary source for securing them will not be state funding or tuition increases; it will be from philanthropy, which is where he is focusing much of his attention. For those academic areas that are not likely to generate significant philanthropy, the UO will have to look at internal institutional resources, such as NTTFs and retirements. President Schill noted that a number of strategic academic decisions that cross departments will need to be made and he expects to make those within the administration after consulting with faculty and the Senate.

President Schill said there are some “very big lifts” coming in the way of decision-making and he expects that some of them will upset people. He hopes the Senate will be able to help him accomplish these changes. He pledged to work with the Senate and to try to avoid surprises, but he also asked that senators recognize that all administrators are human and they make mistakes. He said the administration is not looking to “put anything over” on faculty or the Senate, so please don’t immediately “go to the ramparts” when we disappoint you. “We must act out of grace to each other and work together.”

Adjourn

President Sullivan adjourned the meeting at 5:33 pm.

 Attendance:

Senate Executive Committee Members 2015-2016

Name

Unit

Present

Absent

Excused

Randy Sullivan

Senate President

X

 

 

Bill Harbaugh

Senate Vice President

X

 

 

Rob Kyr

Immediate Past President

X

 

 

TBD

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Richard Margerum

Faculty Senator - PPPM

X

 

 

Regina Psaki

Faculty Senator –              Romance Languages

X

 

 

John Bonine

Faculty Senator - Law

X

 

 

TBD

NTTF

 

 

 

Teri Rowe

OA Council Chair

X

 

 

David Espinoza

OA Senator –                        Counseling &  Testing Center

 

 

 

Theodora Ko Thompson

Classified Staff Senator – Admissions

X

 

 

Greg Bryant

Officer of Research Senator

X

 

 

TBD

Student Senator

 

 

 

Helena Schlegel

ASUO President

X

 

 

James West

ASUO University Affairs Coordinator

X

 

 

Melissa Redford

Faculty Advisory Committee    Co-Chair

 

 

 

Mandy Chong

Erb Memorial Union

X

 

 

Betina Lynn

Senate Executive Coordinator

X

 

 

Paul Simonds

Parliamentarian

X

 

 

 

Guests: Tom Lininger (FAC Co-Chair), Sue Eveland, Susan Gary, and Kurt Willcox

Nov 26 Senate Exec Minutes

Senate Executive Committee Meeting
Wednesday November 26, 2014
3:00-5:00 pm
Ford Alumni Center Room 403

Attendance information is inexact and can be found at the bottom of this page.

Minutes:

President Kyr called the meeting to order at 3:13pm.

Kyr: I’d like to see us step up to the plate and respond to Chuck Lillis’s challenge. If we want to do that, doubling our normal number of meetings is not going to work. We’ll be adding this to the OARs and the strategic planning task force, completion of the 10th year review of standing committees, and our search for a new Senate Executive Coordinator.

President Kyr emphasized the importance of having everybody in the room and speaking, as well as the importance of the Board’s involvement.

Working with the Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC)

Kyr: We’re in a good place, but that place demands much more work. The OUS system is in its last days. New programs are being determined through the University Senate, the Board of Trustees, and the Higher Education Coordinating Commission (HECC).  

Hubin: We need to make sure that the HECC doesn’t become another OUS. It’s supposed to look for unnecessary duplication and focus more on statewide issues.

Kyr: At the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate (IFS), we’re trying to nurture that relationship with the HECC. It is not their job to control new programs. They are more interested in resource development and distribution. They’re trying to figure out how each school can achieve its mission statement and how to make the finances flow to reach those goals.

Academic Standards and the Potential GTFF Strike

Kyr: On the academic standards motion, which ultimately passed, I’ve heard a mixed response. Some loved the open discussion and the way things ran. Others were concerned about the tone of the meeting and thought it was too critical and negative. I want to ask you what you thought of it.

Kyr: The GTFF strike is scheduled for Dec. 2nd. President Coltrane is very open to meeting with people. Do you think this could be a Senate-hosted discussion? A forum of some kind? Or is it necessary at all?

John Bonine: I don’t understand the fragile nature of people who don’t want to see anger come up in a meeting. They would probably say don’t do it.

Kyr: People might need more time to talk about these things. For many people, a serious line was crossed here. We need to have more communication about what we expect of the academic standards of this institution.

Richard Margerum: I don’t mind debate. I like a strong debate. There is often a fine line separating people from the problem and that line was crossed when people were confronted.

Several senators offered opinions about the Senate meeting, dealing with emergency situations like a strike, the university’s use of outside consultants, and whether or not to hold a campus forum.

Bill Harbaugh: This came to a head at the Senate because the administration tried to act through a confidential memo. People were angry. It’s good they got that off their chest. This shows the lack of an honest relationship between the administration and the Senate. We should direct those involved Senate committees to do the work needed to fix this.

Margerum: If we don't respond, we’ll just be the place that things go to get debated and then die.

Kyr: Should we wait for the president’s response? Or should we make our own statement first? How should we go forward?

Paul Simonds: You can’t always tell when there is going to be an outburst, but you do have the authority to shut that person down when they are going to be off topic or being distracting.

Randy Sullivan: There is a problem in how governance flows between the administration and the Senate. The administration develops a policy all the way and then tries to run it through the Senate. That sets things up for conflict. The president needs to be able to interact with the Senate at all levels, including with the committees. It has to be porous and trusting. If that had happened in this case, we would not have seen what we did.

Jennifer Freyd: I want to respond to the question you initially put out there about whether the conversation should have been shut down. I was shocked to hear that people thought it was too angry. My impression was that the discussion revealed a strong need to talk about the strike. The room was full of stake holders. Everyone is affected by what is happening - deeply affected. It goes right to the core of what they are doing. We are struggling with our ethical responsibilities. Once it was revealed that there was a need to talk about this, I think it would have been detrimental to shut that down.

It is demoralizing and disturbing when we just get a message from on high dictating what we need to do.

There is an important difference between discussing substance and discussing people. We could be doing more to articulate that and set standards.

Bonine: As president, maybe you can mandate that no one mention anyone else by name. there should be no personal attacks. Did we have any personal attacks? I didn’t see any, but some people thought there were.

Mandy Chong: Are you still looking for input on whether or not to respond?

Bonine: I believe in our power, but I also believe in respecting others’ power. How about saying, “We respectfully recommend…”?

Hubin: I would say that the constitution calls for a response. These are my thoughts about the dynamics of the situation.It will be particularly troublesome if the president doesn’t respond.

Bonine: “If the Senate were to try to avoid the pain that this strike may cause….” That almost seems like taking sides.

Mandy: I think this speaks for whether we want to have our students and their education be our first priority or have the strike be.

This strike is emotional and it’s going to be that way, but you have to take it out of that context and come up with a plan.

Rob: Thanks. This has been helpful. Please look at the remaining agenda and give feedback.

Ombuds Confidentiality

Bonine: What is the ombuds standard? I’m concerned that not having full confidentiality could lead to disclosure in the case of rape. The ombuds website and office will have to have notices about confidentiality. If this remains the policy, the ombuds will have to alert people that “If you tell me anything and it is an emergency, I may have to tell it anyway”.

Kyr: Whatever the final language, it has to be understandable.

Bonine: It’s important that we maintain the International Ombuds standard.

Kyr: Let the sponsors of the motion hear this and see what they think.

Senate Process and Scheduling

Kyr: Back on task. Is there any legislation/resolution that should not be on here or should be moved?

Bonine: We need to keep legislation before resolutions. I know the fossil fuels people have been patient, but we have kept Student Conduct Code changes waiting awhile.

After some discussion, there is a straw vote over the order of the agenda. There are 7 votes for putting legislation before resolutions and 2 for maintaining the proposed order.

Freyd: Given that the senate only meets 2-4 hours in a month, is there a reason why we don’t do electronic voting on these things? We could even set a very high bar, like it has to have 80% to pass, otherwise it needs to be discussed.

Bonine: Maybe on resolutions we could vote electronically, if the resolution had been online for a while, or if it has been on the agenda but we didn’t get for it…

Kyr: Moving on…. Does the body approve of scheduling eight Senate meetings during Winter Term? We need to focus our efforts on actual legislation - action items. We should front load more meetings and then have the option of taking meetings off the schedule in the spring.

After discussion, the Senate Exec approves this plan. There will be eight Senate meetings in the winter. For every two Senate meetings, there will be one Senate Exe meeting, three of which are already scheduled.

Responding to Board Chair Lillis

Kyr: On which of his ten points do you think that the Senate can be especially helpful? Or any points that he missed?

Margerum: Number 6 – the university’s endowment. The money’s not coming from the state. We can’t increase the tuition. A lot of these things are at that top Board level.

Sullivan: Actually, I think we need to be in on that. When the donor doesn’t designate where their funds are going  - academic or athletic, it usually goes athletic. We should be putting together packages with faculty who are on the Senate. We can’t be hitting up the same people every time. We have to look to some non-traditional donors. There’s lots of room for collaboration on that.

Miriam Deutsch: That ties into Number 4 directly - misunderstanding of research. When students participate in research - at all levels, what is the impact of that research on the student’s earning ability? Doing it from Day One drastically affects their path. We need to educate everyone about this - donors, the community, and Ducks fans. We need to find the right hooks. They have to be rooted in what we do here, which is research. If we can overcome Number 4, that helps the other pieces fall together.

Kyr: Without an understanding of our research, what are donors going to do? They are going to give their money to something they understand.

Freyd: Number 4. Every time I hear the word “brand” for academics, I cringe. It seems like superficial advertising and marketing. Maybe what we could be doing is educating the world and community and Oregon about what we do. I’m struck by the fact that we only have one science writer to do the press releases. He’s always overworked. We need more people to write stories that have truth to them. We have 90 PR people and 1 science writer!

Deutsch: I agree. What matters is where you put your resources and efforts.

Bonine: That’s why all the money is going to athletics. That’s what’s out there! If our research were in the news and out there that would avert some of the problems!

Harbaugh: We can suggest that the university reallocate some of its resources toward writing about research.

Kyr: I think Chuck Lillis wants us to be ambassadors for the university and carry this message out to the state. How would we do that?

Sullivan: Number 7. We’ve lost four presidents since I’ve been here. I don’t recall their leaving being based on the faculty. He never actually said that.

Freyd: Messaging about our identity is driving the ‘best and brightest’ away.

Meeting adjourned at 5:07 pm.

Attendance (13 are noted as attending, but only 10 are named and two of those are guests.):

 

Senate Executive Committee Members 2014-2015

Name

Unit

Present

Absent

Excused

Rob Kyr

Senate President

X

 

 

Randy Sullivan

Senate Vice President

X

 

 

Margie Paris

Immediate Past President

 

 

 

TBD

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Richard Margerum

Faculty Senator - PPPM

 

 

 

Bill Harbaugh

Faculty Senator - Economics

X

 

 

Jennifer Freyd

Faculty Senator - Psychology

 

 

 

TBD

NTTF

 

 

 

Teri Rowe

OA Council Chair

X

 

 

Debbie Thurman

OA Senator

 

 

 

Theodora Ko Thompson

Classified Staff Senator

 

 

 

Mike Strain

Officer of Research Senator

 

 

 

TBD

Student Senator

 

 

 

Beatriz Gutierrez

ASUO President

 

 

 

Rudy Zaronsinski

ASUO University Affairs Coordinator

 

 

 

John Bonine

Law

X

 

 

Miriam Deutsch

Physics / FAC Chair

 

 

 

Mandy Chong

Erb Memorial Union

X

 

 

TBD

Senate Executive Coordinator

 

 

 

Paul Simonds

Parliamentarian

X

 

 

Guests: Frank Stahl, Dave Hubin

Dec 8 Senate Exec Minutes

Senate Executive Committee Meeting
Monday December 8, 2014
5:00-7:00 pm
Frohnmayer Music Room 178

Attendance information is inexact and can be found at the bottom of this page.

Minutes:

Senate President Kyr called the meeting to order at 5:12

President Kyr started by asking the Senate Exec to respond to the motion.

John Bonine: The resolution has been drawn without any consultation with leaders of the university and the Senate. The resolution is bypassing even the trustees’ executive committee. It proposes to bypass the Policy on Policies. The resolution has nothing regarding the Senate in it. It promises that the Senate will be there, but it will mean nothing. I’m quite upset to see what has come up at the last minute. There is a lack of process or transparency here.

Kyr: The University has 864 policies that need to be realigned. We insisted that the Senate needed to be written into this jurisdiction. The Senate was never mentioned and the flow chart did not align with university standards. The professors are entitled by the constitution to have jurisdiction in these policies.

Policies are always run by the University Senate according to the Policy on Policies that also has a flowchart that details that involvement. We should be a faculty in unity with the administration, devoted to shared governance with shared constituencies working together.

We asked in public settings multiple times that we be included in this flowchart and even specified where.

Bonine: The problem is that this legislation went directly to the Board of Trustees. Suddenly it was very concrete. We could have discussed it if it had gone through the proper motions. On the bright side, I think this is fixable. What we need to do is to take this off of the Board agenda and deal with it in March, so we can develop a constituency. Right now there is a lack of trust and we need the time to fix that. There was a frustrating lack of consultation here.

Jennifer Freyd: What worries me right now is that there is a fundamental lack of understanding about what makes a great university. I learned about this on Friday - found out about it through the grapevine. I spent the weekend trying to figure out what to do with the understanding that there are six days to fix it. This is not how the university should function. We are operating like the military. There is a chain of command and we get directives. Great universities push from the ground up. I don’t know why we do this. I don’t only worry that we’ll loose accreditation. I worry that we’ll lose faculty and graduate students. We are imploding. Let’s not do this. Let academics come from the faculty. It’s how every great university works and it’s how we should work.

Randy Sullivan: I agree with John and Jennifer. In addition, I am concerned that while Coltrane’s letter specifies that we need to do this temporarily, the Board motion does not specify that this is a temporary measure. Let’s sit down and come up with a temporary expedited procedure. If we have to cut some corners to get this policy through quickly, fine, but let’s make sure we include something that brings it back for further review.

Michael --------: If we look at the immediate problems that the university faces with this policy and the Board’s resolution, these are problems that can be fixed without trampling on shared governance. It can even restore trust by using shared governance. I need the value of shared governance to be in there if I am going to be committed to the committee. If I don’t have that reassurance that it was grounded in this governance, the whole thing is moot. This resolution repeals the policies Rob has already mentioned. It destroys the linchpin between the faculty and the university constituency - and the Senate and the UO president. If you snap that without replacing or revising them, we are facing a major problem. It destroys trust. Tonight we need a commitment to move forward. Seriously. The Board can move forward in March. We can facilitate moving forward.

Carla McNelly: This is really difficult for me. In 2001, classified staff joined the senate to make it truly shared governance. It took us 8 years to get voting rights on the senate. We are committed to this. It would be a shame to see this go away.

Marc Alfano, Assistant Professor in Philosophy: The idea of having this promise to the Senate of shared governance be unwritten is fatuous. An unwritten comment is not worth anything.

Jon LaRochelle, Bargaining for the GTFF: We’re 100% committed to helping the Senate maintain shared governance.

Colin Koopman, Assistant Professor for Philosophy: I want to pick up on Jennifer’s statement on shared interest. None of us pursued these career paths for the sake of money. We know we are good at what we do, but we are here because we care about what we do and we are drawn to university culture. We can contribute to our field and the education system here. If the university, if the Board takes this step, we are not going to be in a good position to attract top talent. If those PhD’s come here and learn within a few years that we used to have shared governance, but not anymore, that in effect, “You can do your work here, but your voice doesn’t count”, then they are going to leave here fast. The Senate is the one place where they can collaborate openly with the administration. The top talent is going to slip away if this happens.

David Espinoza: How is this fixable? It’s been mentioned, but how?

Bonine: The president can contact the Board and ask them to take it off the agenda. Ultimately it is probably up to Chuck Lillis. We need to make sure that the Senate is involved early on the flow chart.

Kyr: But there is a question. What’s wrong with the constitution? Why can’t we follow through with the document that already exists? It’s been unanimously ratified. Why are we playing around with it?

John Davidson: I appreciate being a part of a public university. For me, the university serves several purposes, such as training people to be whole human beings and training people to be participants in a democratic republic.

Richard Margerum: We probably don’t care about 700 of those policies. We can pass them along pretty quickly. There’s no reason to fear that things are going to be held up by the Senate.

Kyr: What is wrong with the Policy on Policies? It is working perfectly fine.

Dianne Dugaw: I’ve been here 25 years and been on the senate three times. I remember 2011 and working out those lengthy policies we are talking about. The current Board has not even been in place for a year. It doesn’t make sense for them to undo this in just 6 months. The Board does not understand how complicated and legal some of these issues are. I want to encourage the new Board to go a little more slowly with more consultation.

Michael _____: One more thing. We need to acknowledge what is going on in relationship to the GTFF struggle. The erosion of trust they are experiencing does not come from nothing. This has got to change course. I hope things move in a new direction.

Scott Coltrane: We’re in quite a situation. There are a couple of large forces moving. The new Board is certainly one of them. We’re in a broken place. Things are not going well. The new Board is trying to figure this out. We do have a new unionized environment. And this is different than other environments. We’re learning how to do these things. And there is new leadership. Quite a revolving door. It is difficult and is about a combination of things, including scarce resources.

Anyways, I don’t attribute evil intent to the Board. There was a lack of info and clarity. They have their own ideas of how to move forward and they only move once a quarter. I think their intent was to delegate authority to the president in the same way they did in the spring. It’s been rocky, but I don’t think their intent was to take away rights and undermine the constitution. We need to take time to get the language right. They may not have the appreciation for the Senate’s method of debate that we do.

Why is shared governance so important for the university? We need to help the Board understand that. They should not be managing the campus. Daily operations should be given to the campus. They should be finding a president. How can we carve out a handful of policies that the Senate can tackle? They are a bunch of inherited policies and it is going to take awhile to get through. We need to move forward more quickly. I agree with John Bonine that academic matters are the matters of the faculty. The Senate should not be cut out of the flow chart. Only about 8% of the policies are not academic. The Senate has never seen these despite the Policy on Policies. There is a lot that goes on that needs to be integrated. Having the Senate president at that first meeting allows that person to identify what is needed for discussion. Anything academic, go for it! There are some fuzzy parts of these policies. The Board might think it simpler to do things one way.

The flow chart is still in draft form. The flow chart identifies a lead for every single policy and that will be the Senate. Anyways, I don’t think the intent is to undermine the Senate. I will be happy to portray to the president of the Board that there is profound distrust between the two. But I agree that this is fixable.

Micheal Stern: I live in the world of textual interpretation and for a long time we have not dealt with the intent. I don’t care about the intent. What commitment do we have from you that you will keep the constitution that defends shared governance intact?

Coltrane: In this process for reviewing the policies, we will also incorporate sharing governance.

Stern: Couldn’t the administration advocate to keep things the way they are and keep shared governance involved? Is the administration willing to advocate for the continuation of the Senate as is? I’m asking that the resolution be cancelled.

Bonine: It absolutely should be cancelled. It should not say ‘supersedes’. It should encourage shared governance.

Kyr: The president of the university is the president of the faculty. As such, we need you to advocate for the faculty and for the university through the faculty and the constitution that defends us. We need you to do this.

Gordon Sayre, Professor of English and Folklore: The writing of this resolution is sloppy.

Stern: I’ve heard about this “new unionized environment” many times. SEIU, GTFF,… they’ve been around for years. United Academics is the new union. It is not a fair thing to say this “new unionized environment” is responsible, because it isn’t new.

The advisory committee has the expertise to work through these 800+ policies. This process is already in operation. It already flows. What this resolution does do is get rid of that crucial link between faculty having conversations through the Senate and the president. Until we can say that has to go, there won’t be any legitimacy to the process that follows. Superseding the constitution will break down trust in very fundamental ways.

Freyd: How did we get to this point in these few days? Has the Board been educated about the nature of our accreditation? Has it read and understood those rules… the role of faculty in academics? Does the Board have an understanding of what the AAU states?

Tell us how this resolution got created. It’s almost as though you were saying this was something that the Board created.

Bonine: Clearly, this draft has been in Johnson Hall for a few weeks. When we talk about collaborative effort, it is not the Senate failing to cooperate. Why didn’t we know?

Harbaugh: Regarding the “new unionized environment”, I was opposed to it, but I changed my view after the incidents with previous presidents. We have a faculty union as the result of what has happened to us by the Board and administration. I also want to point out that your presidency and Gottfredson’s have done some things to subvert shared governance.  You need to take more on yourself to strengthen these policies.

John Ahlen: I worked on the Board’s delegation of authority policy. We worked in a similar way. It appeared on the Board agenda with very short notice to us. We stepped up to the plate. We have high expectations of you and we can’t keep meeting like this. We need you to step up.

Stern: I honor that you are sitting in a hot seat right now. We have some specific suggestions that if they are relayed will help us move forward. An alternative can be set right now. We can come up with a way of proceeding without taking away from established policies.                                      

Angela Wilhelms (University Secretary): There were compliance issues with having 850-ish policies on the books and needing to go through them in an efficient manner. The new proposal for the Policy on Policies is not meant to be inhibiting.

Bonine: But it blatantly negates these policies. It is really quite radical in the language, maybe not in the intent. We need language that respects the role of the faculty.

Kyr: I’d like to call a Senate meeting on Wednesday for more discussion, so we can draft the legislation or resolution as we wish. It is not fair to deny the voice of the Senate at this critical juncture in our university.

Bonine: I would like to have a Senate meeting on Wednesday where the administration and Angela have announced prior to the meeting that the policy has been withdrawn until March. The Senate is not trying to destroy the university.

What resolution would we put forward? We could vote to negate and that would make national news.

Freyd: I do think we should meet on Wednesday. Our accreditation is at risk. I actually think we could lose it if this is not resolved.

Harbaugh: In favor, but worried that we will get language from the Board or from Coltrane that sounds like a compromise and we’ll end up with a very bad deal.

Mandy Chong: I think a meeting would be a good place for all the voices to come together. This is finals week. Getting people to go is not going to be easy. People who do show up will have a statement. The contrary side of me wants to make sure that we pull together specific statements.

Kyr: 1) We need to affirm the role of the UO President as head of the faculty. This has not been affirmed between us and the Board. 2) We need a motion to postpone. 3) We need to affirm or reaffirm the UO Constitution, the Policy on Policies, and set forth positive engagement. These are three important streams of thought that summarize the thoughts of today.

Angela: It is not bypassing the executive committee of the Board. They don’t have the ability to second motions. The understanding is that it would be discussed by the full Board instead of just a subset.

Kyr: Can you tell us who drafted it?

Angela: I was involved as were some Board members, the General Counsel’s office, administration, etc. It was discussed by executive leadership. Other vice presidents and staff were engaged.

Angela: The resolution is to be a new standing policy - a Policy on University Policies.

Freyd: How the hell did we get this resolution? Who wrote it? At a public institution, this should be publically accessible. It feels like people are not being fully accountable. We need to think about this as we discuss on Wednesday.

Kyr: I call the vote on holding a University Senate meeting next Wednesday.

[Voting by show of hands.]

Kyr: The vote carries. The Senate will meet from 3 – 5 pm on Wednesday. We will be in touch about a place. I would like to ask the Senate Exec to make themselves available over the next 48 hours for consultation. If you have suggestions for wording and such, please send them to me.

Ron Bramhall, Undergraduate Council: The Undergraduate Council established an Academic Integrity Task Force as a result of the GTFF strike. This group has met over the past few days. We have met with administrators, Financial Aid, and the Registrar. We are investigating how we might manage final grades and maintain academic integrity. There is no real solution to that situation, except for ending the strike. Given that, we have agreed on some basic principles. 1) Only the true instructor of record will maintain the grades. There is very clear instruction of what that is and what they can or cannot do. 2) No true instructor of record will be disciplined for ailing to report a grade. 3) No faculty member will need to engage in behavior at the behest of the administration that would violate their academic integrity. The true instructors of record maintain their courses and control their integrity.

Instructors have some options. 1) They can give a provisional grade that can and will be changed when proper grades are completed. 2) They can assign a grade based on the student’s work to date, if it is a good representation of their performance. 3) The instructor can avoid grading entirely by assigning an ‘X’ grade. This could have a financial impact for some students. We are providing this information. Instructors will need to make their decision on their own.

Kyr: The will of the Senate could be helpful in stating a clear purpose and function and relationship with the administration in that regard.

Doug Blandy: The task for report confirmed some of the responsibilities. The “X” grade will hurt people, especially low income people. When an X or other grade is being assigned, there has to be some kind of evaluation on why the X occurred.

Barbara Altmann: There are very few people who do this. It is careful and investigative. You must check in with the student and the professors and we have 30 days to do this.

Freyd: How much of it might be offset by having a new grade, “Z”, meaning that the student participated fully but due to circumstances, the instructor could not assign a grade?

Altmann: You would still have to resolve the grade within the 30 days.

Blandy: There are strict federal guidelines for these things.

Altmann: it’s not just one particular grade; it is when all of them are effected

_______: Why not enlist people to help investigate the X grades, instead of having someone try to provide a letter grade for students they have not been grading all year?

Altmann: I really wish that could be the case. We only have three people doing this, because it is such a complicated process. There are federal procedure and it can’t just be a two-day training job. I honestly don’t think it is feasible. I wish it were.

Kyr: I suggest that we look into this further. We can look at other institutions that have faced this situation and see what exemptions have been given or even if they can be given.

AAA Faculty Member: Let’s talk about grading. To call in people who are not involved in the classroom is the first problem I have. When I give a final exam, it is the culmination of the course. For us to have any integrity in our teaching, we need to have a grading system in which the continuity is an intellectual continuity, not just a continuity of grades. Second, the reason why I thought it was a tactic in negotiating the strike is because that is a conflict between the administration and the GTFs that needs to be hashed out. This now shifts the problem to the faculty and the undergraduates. GTFs are legitimately withholding their labor, but this cheats the students by not letting their knowledge coalesce in a final exam. That is a big problem for me. When I have a graduate student I work with as a GTF, it is a mentoring process. It is cultivating and perpetuating the academic standards we live with. We need to deal with this in a way that the students have their education.

Altmann: You are exactly right. Relationships among colleagues are deeply stressed by this situation. Ethical responsibility has to be present on both sides of the negotiations.

AAA Faculty Member: Ten weeks is very short. We need to keep the integrity of what a final exam does. A grade is in a sense accompanied by instruction and commentary.

Freyd: I want to go back to this “Z” grade. I need to be honest with my students. I need an honest grade I can give to my students. We should investigate it further.

Altmann: We will investigate it further.

Bonine: We need to know if it is already possible to give a provisional grade.

Kyr: Thank you.

Adjourned at 7:59pm

Attendance:

Senate Executive Committee Members 2014-2015

Name

Unit

Present

Absent

Excused

Rob Kyr

Senate President

X

 

 

Randy Sullivan

Senate Vice President

X

 

 

Margie Paris

Immediate Past President

 

 

 

Ron Bramhall

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Richard Margerum

Faculty Senator - PPPM

X

 

 

Bill Harbaugh

Faculty Senator - Economics

X

 

 

Jennifer Freyd

Faculty Senator - Psychology

 

 

 

TBD

NTTF

 

 

 

Teri Rowe

OA Council Chair

X

 

 

Debbie Thurman

OA Senator

 

 

 

Theodora Ko Thompson

Classified Staff Senator

X

 

 

Mike Strain

Officer of Research Senator

 

 

 

TBD

Student Senator

 

 

 

Beatriz Gutierrez

ASUO President

X

 

 

Rudy Zaronsinski

ASUO University Affairs Coordinator

 

 

 

John Bonine

Law

X

 

 

Miriam Deutsch

Physics / FAC Chair

 

 

 

Mandy Chong

Erb Memorial Union

X

 

 

TBD

Senate Executive Coordinator

 

 

 

Paul Simonds

Parliamentarian

X

 

 

Guests: Frank Stahl, Dave Hubin, Chuck Triplett, Frances Bronet, Scott Coltrane, Angela Wilhelms

Nov 12 Senate Exec Minutes

Senate Executive Committee Meeting
Wednesday November 12, 2014
3:00-5:00 pm
Ford Alumni Center Room 403

Attendance information is inexact and can be found at the bottom of this page.

President Kyr called the meeting to order at 3:05 pm.

Approval of minutes: The temp is still working on the last set. We’ll keep that on hold.

Review Agenda for November 19 Senate Meeting

Bill Harbaugh raised the issue of how academic standards were handled during the GTFF strike and the motion on this issue from Gordon Sayre. President Kyr noted that this discussion would require a suspension of the rules.

Randy Sullivan proposed under New Business that the standing committee reports be pushed back, so the Senate could follow the three week rule in its Bylaws. However, he did support holding an election to fill committee vacancies right away.

Student Conduct Code Motions

John Bonine reviewed the four Student Conduct Code motions. He suggested that the Senate listserv be used to send out copies of each of them. Sullivan suggested the creation of a Senate Blackboard account to facilitate discussion among senators. Bonine felt the motions have been posted online for quite a while, which has afforded senators sufficient time to review them. Sullivan suggested that senators with amendments should have to write them down and run them to the front of the room. That way the person will get clear on their wording before the words leave their mouths.

Ombuds Confidentiality Resolution

Bonine asked where things are with the administration’s review of confidentiality in the operation of the Ombuds office. President Kyr said the discussion is ongoing, but he knows they want to present the issue to the Board of Trustees on Dec. 12.

Sullivan and Bonine offered some thoughts on what role the Board of Trustees might legitimately play in dealing with this issue.

President Kyr noted that Carla McNelly is the main contact person on this resolution. He said the resolution is in its final form. It just hasn’t been posted on the Senate website yet. This resolution has the broadest co-sponsorship we’ve seen. There are a bunch of people who do not want to go to the Ombuds Office until it is confidential.

Time Limits on Senate Discussion

After agreement was reached on the order for the agenda, Bonine raised a concern about how long it would take to complete everything. He recommended there be strict time limits set for each item. 

President Kyr suggested the following:

1. GTFF – 15 minutes.

2. Standing Committee – 7 minutes

3. 4.7 – 5 minutes

4. Fossil Fuels – 5-7minutes

5. Student Conduct Codes – 10 on each (4.2-4.5)

President Kyr noted that if Chuck Lillis and Scott Coltrane are given 35 minutes to talk about 75 minutes will have elapsed before the student conduct code discussion begins. He suggested that he announce at the beginning of the meeting what the limits are going to be and what the procedure will be to extend them.  Paul Simonds recommended putting the limits on the screen, so everyone will know what is going on. He also noted that under Robert’s Rules of Order senators have priority in speaking.

Teri Rowe asked how the time limits could be extended if a visitor feels strongly about something, but doesn’t get a chance to speak. President Kyr assured her that he would make sure this was possible.

Announcement about the LMS Review Project

President Kyr reported that Helen Chu, Director of Academic Technology and head of the LMS Review Project, aka the “Are we going to keep Blackboard or not?” Project, wants to make a public announcement at the Senate meeting about their group’s preliminary recommendation. This will be followed by an announcement through the Provost’s Office to the student body. We don’t have a lot of details at this point. Kyr recommends that this be the first item under New Business.

Standing Committee on Sexual Violence and Survivor Support

SEC members reviewed the motion that would set up the standing committee.

Miriam Deutsch suggested that the term be two years instead of one and that half the committee be elected every year.

Bonine: What about the ASUO? Will they want to do two years?

Beatriz Gutierrez: They should probably stay one year. We already made appointments and sent them to Lisa.

Gutierrez: Can we add another student appointment – someone from OASA, the organization against sexual assault? This would be in addition to the graduate and undergraduate student.

Sullivan: OASA can elect someone to join.

Gutierrez: I don’t think it was ever an ASUO program. It’s always had grad students and faculty involved.

Rowe: We need to add an OA Council representative.

Bonine: I suggest that the ASUO president be entitled to appoint two people. Sexual assault is primarily a student issue. We should have that population better represented.

Kyr: Should the University Senate president be an ex-officio member?

Sullivan: If they want, they can invite the Senate president to be on it.

Open Committee Meetings

Kyr: Let’s go forward with the committees mentioned in the legislation and make their meetings open. We can discuss confidentiality.

Sullivan: The Faculty Advisory Committee is the main bone of contention. Thursday, November 20th is when they will next meet, which is after the next University Senate meeting.

Deutsch: We should have a conversation about this between the Senate leaders and the FAC members with no one else in the room. FAC meets on Mondays from 11 am – 1 pm. We could reserve an hour and a half for this discussion. This would provide maximum input from the committee.

Kyr: Who would get invited? Randy Sullivan is convening this meeting. He and I can bring this up with the FAC to establish the proper channel for this meeting.

There was further discussion about the FAC recognizing the authority of the Senate and the fact that the legislation that was passed included no language about delaying implementation.

Senate President Kyr adjourned the meeting at 5:07 P.M.

Attendance:

 

Senate Executive Committee Members 2014-2015

Name

Unit

Present

Absent

Excused

Rob Kyr

Senate President

X

 

 

Randy Sullivan

Senate Vice President

X

 

 

Margie Paris

Immediate Past President

 

X

 

TBD

Academic Council Chair

 

 

 

Richard Margerum

Faculty Senator - PPPM

 

X

 

Bill Harbaugh

Faculty Senator - Economics

X

 

 

Jennifer Freyd

Faculty Senator - Psychology

 

X

 

TBD

NTTF

 

 

 

Teri Rowe

OA Council Chair

X

 

 

Debbie Thurman

OA Senator

 

X

 

Theodora Ko Thompson

Classified Staff Senator

X

 

 

Mike Strain

Officer of Research Senator

 

X

 

TBD

Student Senator

 

 

 

Beatriz Gutierrez

ASUO President

X

 

 

Rudy Zaronsinski

ASUO University Affairs Coordinator

 

X

 

John Bonine

Law

X

 

 

Miriam Deutsch

Physics / FAC Chair

X

 

 

Mandy Chong

Erb Memorial Union

 

X

 

TBD

Senate Executive Coordinator

 

 

 

Paul Simonds

Parliamentarian

X

 

 

 

Guests: Dave Hubin, Chuck Triplett, Franklin Stahl