Motion US06/07 – 4 Opposing Military Actions against Iran
Sponsored by: Senator Ali Emami, Finance
For senate action November 8, 2006
WHEREAS,Iran does not represent a clear and present threat to the United States of America, and
WHEREAS,military action against Iran would constitute an act that is illegal under our Constitution, and
WHEREAS,military action against Iran would be viewed by most of the World as unjustified military aggression, and
WHEREAS,untold numbers of people will be killed or mutilated by an armed attack on Iran,
WHEREAS,military action against Iran could provoke armed conflict that would further endanger U.S. troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and could escalate into a World War,
Be it Moved that,
The University Senate of the University of Oregon opposes military actions against Iran and petitions the President of the United States to adhere to diplomatic avenues for resolving perceived disagreements between Iran and the United States.
Motion not voted. Vice President Gordon Sayre ruled the motion was not in the purview of the senate. A challenge to this ruling was defeated by hand vote (17 supported the vice president's ruling of not in the senate's purview; 7 opposed the ruling). See Senate Minutes 13 November 2006for further details.
Motion US06/07-5 – Request Accessibility to Affirmative Action Plans and Summary Data
Sponsored by: Bill Harbaugh, and Peter Lambert, Economics
For Action: November 29. 2006
The Senate requests that President Frohnmayer direct the UO Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Director to undertake the following, in a timely manner following passage of this motion:
(a) File copies of UO Affirmative Action Plans for the years prior to 1997 with the UO archives.
(b) Post the current Affirmative Action Plan, and all available past plans starting in 1992, on the Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity and VP for Diversity websites, at aaeo.uoregon.edu and vpdiversity.uoregon.edu respectively.
(c) Post the annual summary information from the EEO-6 reports on these sites, for all years starting in 1992.
(d) Update this information annually as new EEO-6 reports are submitted, and as new Affirmative Action plans are approved and signed by the UO President.
Motion US06/07-6 – To establish a permanent Senate Committee on Academic Excellence
Sponsored by: Senate Executive Committee
For senate action: November 29, 2006
Be it resolved that the University Senate establish a permanent Senate Committee on Academic Excellence.
This resolution institutionalizes the current Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Academic Excellence.
The committee is to be appointed by the Senate president in consultation with the Senate Executive Committee, is broadly charged to examine issues of academic quality on campus and the relationship between academic freedom and academic excellence, and is to report to the Senate at least once annually. The committee will consist of 8-12 members, the majority of whom will be Senators and instructional faculty members. The Senate president will sit as a member ex-officio, and the chair will be elected by the committee members. Term of service will be two years.
US06/07-7. Motion to establish time periods for students to complete on-line course evaluations.
At such time as the University of Oregon implements an on-line course evaluation system, the window of opportunity for students to fill out course evaluations will be Monday of Dead Week through the Monday following finals week.
1. This rule does not apply to the School of Law. The faculty of the School of Law will establish a similar window of opportunity that suits the needs of their academic calendar.
2. This rule does not apply to summer session. The rules for summer session courses will be established after a course evaluation instrument has been chosen.
Establish full University Senate membership for Classified Staff, including voting privileges
Sponsored by: Nathan Tublitz, biology
For Senate Action: November 8, 2006
Three (3) classified staff shall be elected to serve as Senators in the University Senate. Classified staff Senators shall have the same rights as other Senators, including full voting privileges, and shall abide by all regulations adopted by the University Senate for its members. The Secretary shall arrange for the election of the classified staff Senators following election and eligibility procedures for officers of administration as described in the University Senate enabling legislation sections 3, 4, and 5. These changes are effective as of the first meeting of the 2006-2007 University Senate and brings the total number of voting Senators to fifty one (51).
As noted above, this motion, by Senator Tublitz, has been withdrawn. See the Agenda and Minutesfor the 8 November 2006 Senate meeting for further details. US07/08-9 was subsequently passed 13 February 2008 which extended full voting priviledges to the 3 classified staff representatives.
Motion US06/07-3 -- To Amend US03/04 10 to facilitate the collection of signatures empowering an Assembly meeting with full legislative authority.
Sponsored by: Frank Stahl, Emeritus Biology
For Senate Action: November 8, 2006
Moved to amend the legislation US03/04 10 – Enable the University Assembly to Convene with Full Legislative Authority, as follows:
CHANGE: (h)An annually updated list of the Voting Faculty with campus addresses shall be maintained and linked from the University Assembly Web site. The list shall be headed by the criteria for membership as specified by the charter and the list shall be updated annually, as early in the Fall Quarter as is feasible.
TO:(h)An annually updated list of the Voting Faculty with campus addresses shall be maintained and linked from the University Assembly Web site. The list shall be headed by the criteria for membership as specified by the charter and the list shall be updated annually, as early in the Fall Quarter as is feasible.
A printed Voting Faculty membership list with campus addresses, organized by departments, shall be made available to petitioners by the Secretary of the Faculty upon submission of a petition endorsed by 40 assembly members as specified in US03/04 10 (a).
FOOTNOTE: US03/04 10 (a)Prior to circulating a petition to convene the Assembly with full legislative power, Petitioners will submit the text of their petition, endorsed by at least 40 assembly members, to the Secretary of the Faculty who will forthwith give notification of the petition to members of the Assembly. The announcement shall include the text of the petition and item (b) of this motion.
Motion US06/07-11 – To expand criteria for officers-of-instruction who may serve as University Senate vice president and president
Sponsored by: University Senate Executive Committee, University of Oregon
For Senate action: April 11, 2007
BE IT MOVEDthat Article 5.2 of the Enabling Legislation be amended to state:
5.2 At the December 1995 meeting of the University Senate, as constituted at that time, the senate shall elect from among its second-year officer-of-instruction senators both a president and a vice president/president-elect for the newly formed University Senate that will be seated in January 1996. The terms of office for both shall be January 1, 1996, to May 22, 1996; the vice president shall become president at that time by confirmation of the senate. On May 22, 1996, and thereafter the election of senate officers shall take place at the last meeting of the University Senate each spring. The vice president shall be elected from among the officers-of-instruction who have served on the University Senate in the previous five years (inclusive of the academic year in which they are elected vice president) and will become president at the end of the following year by confirmation of the senate.
Fiscal Impact Statement
The above motion alters Article 5.2 by changing the last two sentences to read (material removed in strike out, material added in bold italics):
The vice president shall be elected from among the officer-of-instruction senators completing the first year of their termsofficers-of-instruction who have served on the University Senate in the previous five years(inclusive of the academic year in which they are elected vice president)and will become president at the end of the following year by confirmation of the senate. The president shall thus hold that position during his or her third year in the senate.
The Executive Committee of the University Senate is sponsoring this motion to increase the pool of potential candidates who can serve as University Senate Vice President and President.
The need for this motion is as follows:
The requirement that a senator may only be nominated at the end of the first year of his or her term imposes overly severe restrictions on who can be nominated to be vice president. The Senate has only 37 Officers of Instruction, of whom only half at any one time will be at the end of their first term. Among the 18 or 19 eligible candidates (assuming all Senate seats are filled), a significant number are untenured faculty who generally cannot assume the service load associated with being Senate vice president and president, others will be on leave or taking sabbatical during the period when they could serve as vice president and president, some may have already served as a Senate officer, and others may decline to serve in that position. There is thus an exceptionally small pool of potential candidates to fill the critical jobs of Senate vice president and president.
It is within the power of the University Senate to change the eligibility requirements for candidates for the Senate Presidency. Article 5.1 of the University Senate Enabling Legislation states that “The senate shall adopt its own internal rules and procedures.”
See also Letter from the Department of Justice 8 March 2007 indicating the UO Senate has the "power to modify provisions of the enabling legislation".
Motion US06/07-12 – to amend US00/01-4 regarding academic calendar and athletic events scheduling conflicts
Sponsored by: Cheney Ryan, philosophy and James O’Fallon, law
For senate action: March 14, 2007
This is an amendment to Senate Resolution US00/01-4, passed April 11, 2001. This was a joint resolution passed by the Oregon State University Senate as well. That joint resolution stated:
The growth of intercollegiate athletics has made the scheduling of athletic events more complex, and conflicts with the academic calendar are almost inevitable. A recent scheduling decision causes special concern: the Civil War football game for 2001 has been scheduled for the Saturday before fall final exams. Such conflicts may be unavoidable, but we should not lose sight of the principle that the academic needs of our athletes and other students are always our top priority.
The combined university senates of UO and OSU therefore made the following recommendations to our Presidents and Provosts: in the future, the academic calendar should be of paramount consideration in the scheduling of athletic events. In particular, we suggest that major events should not interfere with dead week and final exams; in general, we urge a heightened sensitivity to the academic calendar by the athletic departments of our two universities.
Be It Resolved that,
The University Senate reaffirms the suggestion that major sports events should not interfere with dead week and final exams. The decision to schedule major sports events at this time should only be made in exceptional circumstances, with the academic needs of students remaining the top priority.
The decision to schedule major sports events that conflict with dead week or exam week should only be made in consultation with the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee, the Faculty Advisory Council, the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, the Provost, and the President of the University. All parties should be informed of University Senate resolutions relating to this matter.
Financial Impact Statement
The financial impact of consulting the various listed parties is negligible.
Resolution US06/07-13. Concurring with IFS request that the Provosts' Council undertake a formal evaluation of the College NOW! program
Sponsored By: Peter Gilkey and John Nicols, IFS representatives
The University Senate of the University of Oregon concurs with the request of the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate that the Oregon University System Provosts' Council undertake a formal evaluation of how the College NOW! program serves the students of Oregon.
There is no direct financial impact to the present motion since the motion is simply a "request". [NB: there may, of course, be a financial cost incurred by OUS in making such a formal evaluation but it is not currently quantified. Provost Brady may wish to comment further on this matter.]
Resolution US06/07-14 – Scheduling restrictions for football games during weekdays and final exams period
Sponsored by: Nathan Tublitz, Biology
For Senate action: May 9, 2007
The University Senate reiterates the principle, originally stated and approved in two previous Senate resolutions (US00/01-4 and US06/07-12), that the academic calendar shall be the primary consideration in scheduling athletic events.
Specifically, the University Senate resolves that football games shall not be scheduled on the weekend between dead and final exam weeks.
Furthermore, football games shall not be scheduled on weekdays during fall term including exam week unless approved in advance by the Intercollegiate Athletic Committee, the Faculty Advisory Council and the Senate Executive Committee.
The University of Oregon recently revised the football schedule for the 2007 season to accommodate a television request by CBS/ESPN. The Oregon-Oregon State Civil War game was moved to the Saturday prior to exam week and another football game was moved from its normal Saturday slot to a Thursday night.
1) Moving the Civil War game to the Saturday of exam week was originally discussed by the 2000/01 University Senate. The University Senate passed the following resolution ( US00/01-4) on April 11, 2001:
“The growth of intercollegiate athletics has made the scheduling of athletic events more complex, and conflicts with the academic calendar are almost inevitable. A recent scheduling decision causes special concern: the Civil War football game for 2001 has been scheduled for the Saturday before Fall final exams. Such conflicts may be unavoidable, but we should not lose sight of the principle that the academic needs of our athletes and other students are always our top priority.
The combined University Senates of UO and OSU therefore make the following recommendation to our Presidents and Provosts: In the future, the academic calendar should be of paramount consideration in the scheduling of athletic events. In particular we suggest that major events should not interfere with dead week and final exams; in general we urge a heightened sensitivity to the academic calendar by the Athletic Departments of our two universities.“
2) The above resolution ( US00/01-4) was apparently ignored by the University Athletic Department when they rescheduled the 2007 Civil War football game for the Saturday prior to exam week. In response, the University Senate passed the following resolution ( US06/07-12) on March 14, 2007:
“Be it resolved that the University Senate reaffirms the suggestion that major sports events should not interfere with dead week and final exams. The decision to schedule major sports events at this time should only be made in exceptional circumstances, with the academic needs of students remaining the top priority.
Further, the decision to schedule major sports events that conflict with dead week or exam week should only be made in consultation with the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee, the Faculty Advisory Council, the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, the Provost, and the President of the University. All parties should be informed of University Senate resolutions relating to this matter.”
3) The University of Oregon University Senate is a member of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA), an alliance of 54 Division IA faculty senates whose aim is to promote sports reform. The COIA’s 2005 Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics White Paper specifically addresses this issue in Section 4.3.6:
“ 4.3.6. An institution shall not schedule athletics competitions during final exam periods on that school’s campus; conferences shall develop their schedules to accommodate the final exam calendars of all member institutions.”
4) The COIA’s 2005 Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics White Paper also addresses the issue of weekday athletic events in section 4.3.3:
“4.3.3. In recent years athletics schedules have expanded in at least the following additional two ways, which impinge on the academic schedule: 1) seasons have been expanded at the beginning and at the end, particularly with regard to the proliferation of post-season conference tournaments, 2) athletic events have increasingly been scheduled on weekdays. The Coalition urges the NCAA and the conferences to begin reversing these trends. We recognize that for some universities and in some sports, this goal may remain elusive and that the process may require as long as a decade to accomplish.”
Calculating the fiscal impact of this resolution is difficult, in large part because of the unique aspects of each individual scheduling situation. The Athletic Department clearly uses revenues from televised football games to bolster its financial position. Passage of this resolution may, in some situations, reduce the maximum possible revenue available from televised football games. Any potential fiscal impact should be viewed in the larger context of the primacy of our institutional mission and our responsibility to provide the best possible education for our students.