All posts by Betina

400 years young.

US17/18-05: Approval of Curriculum Report, Fall 2017

Date of Notice: November 1, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Frances White (Anth); Chair of UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Fall 2017 Preliminary Curriculum report for University Senate review;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED the University Senate approve the Fall 2017 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.

US17/18-04: UO Senate Adoption of Consent Calendar

Date of Notice: November 13, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Senate Executive Committee


DRAFT

Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the University Senate’s bylaws allow for the adoption of internal procedures and special rules of order (see Sections 3.1 and 3.2); and

1.2 WHEREAS  a mechanism known as a Consent Calendar will expedite meetings by consolidating apparently non-controversial action items such as, but not limited to, minor university policy changes or enactments, the adoption of reports, or similar matters; and

1.3 WHEREAS a Consent Calendar is a common tool used by parliamentary bodies;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the University Senate hereby adopts, as a special rule of order, the use of a Consent Calendar as follows:

2.1.1 The Senate Executive Committee may place a matter on the Consent Calendar.

2.1.2 Any Senator may question an item’s inclusion in the Consent Calendar prior to the final vote. The President shall ask the Senator to explain the objection and then shall ask if someone else wishes to second the objection. If so, an item shall be removed and shall come before the Senate for consideration instead as a regular, debatable motion under the Senate’s normal rules of order.

2.1.3 The Senate shall vote en bloc and without debate on any items on a Consent Calendar, except for any item that has been removed in accordance with paragraph 2.1.2.

2.1.4 Senators shall receive at least 5 calendar days’ notice of items placed on a Consent Calendar before that Consent Calendar may come before the Senate for approval. Such notice can be via email, via the Senate website and blog, or via other practical means for communicating with Senators. Such items shall also be listed in the Senate Agenda.

UO Common Reading Program

Common Reading at the UO has been a campus-wide program in Undergraduate Studies since 2014.  Its goals are building community, enriching curriculum, and engaging research through the shared reading of an important book.

The selected book for 2017-18 is Louise Erdrich’s The Round House. Guest scholars and artists as well as UO faculty, staff, and students have been engaging with the book and its associated themes and contexts.  Curricular resources are available for faculty using the book in classrooms as well as discussion groups throughout campus (See https://commonreading.uoregon.edu/roundhouse/). A list of past, current, and upcoming public events for the academic year can be found at https://commonreading.uoregon.edu/events/.

The Common Reading Selection Committee for 2018-19 invites input from Senate members on the current shortlist of nominated books based on the theme of transborder/transnational. A call for book nominations on this theme was sent throughout campus networks in October, and 46 nominations were received. Reviewing the nominations through the lens of the selection criteria, the committee determined that 12 of the nominations should go forward for the next round of review. Committee members are currently learning more about each of these books.

As part of the committee’s review process, we invite all Senate members to share insights on the list provided below. Comments can be shared via commonreading@uoregon.edu by Monday, December 4. Selection criteria are available at https://commonreading.uoregon.edu/about-the-common-reading/.

Common Reading Book Nominations currently under review.

1)      Exit West by Mohsin Hamid

2)      The Best We Could Do by Thi Bui

3)      Home Fire by Kamila Shamsie

4)      This Muslim American Life: Dispatches from the War on Terror by Moustafa Bayoumi

5)      Salvage the Bones by Jesmyn Ward

6)      Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi

7)      No Longer At Ease by Chinua Achebe

8)      A Tale for the Time Being by Ruth Ozeki

9)      Lucky Boy by Shanthi Sekaran

10)   Under the Feet of Jesus by Helena Maria Viramontes

11)   They Leave their Kidneys in the Fields: Illness, Injury, and “Illegality” Among US Farmworkers by Sarah Bronwen Horton

12)   The Land of Open Graves: Living and Dying on the Migrant Trail by Jason De Leon

US17/18-03: Confirmation of Committee on Committees members

Date of Notice: November 8, 2017

Current Status: Approved

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Senate Executive Committee


Motion

Section II

2.1 Hearing no objections, the University Senate confirms the following members of the Committee on Committees (CoC):

John Bonine, (Faculty) Law
Ben Brinkley (OA), CASIT
Lowell Bowditch (Faculty), Classics
Chris Chavez (Faculty), SOJC
Ali Emami (Faculty), Business
Rob Kry (Faculty), Music
Gordon Sayre (Faculty), English
Mike Strain (Research Faculty), CAMCOR
Holly Syljuberget (OA), Business Affairs
Chuck Theobald, LISB Staff
Annie Zeidman-Karpinski, UO Libraries

Bill Harbaugh, Ex Officio
Mariann Hyland, Ex Officio
Betina Lynn, Ex Officio

US17/18-02: Resolution to Support the UO Student Collective

Date of Notice: November 15, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Resolution

Sponsor: Arian Mobasser, Student Senator


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the following is one of the official values of the UO: “We value our diversity and seek to foster equity and inclusion in a welcoming, safe, and respectful community”; and

1.2 WHEREAS students have repeatedly approached the UO Administration with demands and concerns about policies and patterns of practice that jeopardize the well-being, safety, and success of students; and

1.3 WHEREAS the Administration at the UO has not adequately prioritized the demands of its students to address these concerns; and

1.4 WHEREAS the Administration as retaliated against student protesters and student dissent by actively pursuing student conduct charges and imposing sanctions on students for protesting; and

1.5 WHEREAS the Student Conduct Code reads: “The primary mission of the Student Conduct Code is to set forth the community standards and procedures necessary to maintain and protect an environment conducive to learning and in keeping with the educational objectives of the University of Oregon. Founded upon the principle of freedom of thought and expression, an environment conducive to learning is one that preserves the freedom to learn — where academic standards are strictly upheld and where the rights, safety, dignity and worth of every individual are respected.” [Emphasis added]; and

1.6 WHEREAS the retaliation described in 1.4 causes stress and anxiety to students, disrupts their academic efforts, and functions as repression of dissent and free speech; and

1.7 WHEREAS the Student Conduct process has been carried out with clear bias; the students were declared guilty by the administration on public news outlets before charges were made; and

1.8 WHEREAS the Student Conduct Code reads that students accused of violations can expect the procedural protection of “[being] informed of the information upon which a complaint is based,” yet students were denied information regarding how the conduct process was initiated; and

1.9 WHEREAS the Student Conduct Code outlines a “student’s right to assistance” and that this may include an attorney, yet the university has yet to offer reasonable options in lieu of ASUO legal representation or advising, which has been withheld; and

1.10 WHEREAS the student conduct hearings offered occur behind closed doors, do not include a scribe or other form of reliable record-keeping, disallow recording, and relay on a decision-making body of a single person; and

1.11 WHEREAS hate crimes have increased by nearly 40% in Eugene, Oregon between 2015 and 2016, roughly half of which were racially motivated, as per the City of Eugene 2016 Hate and Bias Report; and

1.12 WHEREAS White Supremacist groups have been allowed and welcomed on the University of Oregon campus by the Administration; and

1.13 WHEREAS White Supremacist speech is a direct threat to members of our university community, especially marginalized demographics;

Section II

2.1 BE IT RESOLVED that the UO Senate urges the Administration to cease the Student Conduct disciplinary charges process and pledges to support student protesters during the disciplinary appeals process; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the UO Senate supports the pursuit of collective student action and ongoing conversation with the UO Student Collective regarding avenues for creating meaningful structural change; and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the UO Senate denounces White Supremacist speech and organizing on campus as a direct threat to the university community; and

2.4 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the UO Senate shall urge President Schill to pledge that he will use his position of power to deny White Nationalists and hate groups a platform on this campus to the best of his ability.


Related Documents:

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 15, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

4:00 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, November 1, 2017

4:00 P.M.   New Business

4:45 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:45 P.M.   Reports
4:45 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Proposed Changes to the Student Conduct Code

Below is a draft of proposed changes to the Student Conduct Code. The Board of Trustees, in their Delegation of Authority Policy, has taken control of student conduct policy from the faculty. The Student Conduct Committee mentioned below, which is appointed by the UO President, does provide for some faculty input, but it has not yet been constituted:

  1. The Student Conduct Code shall be responsible for recommending to the Board of Trustees of the University of Oregon policy or administrative changes in any aspect of the Student Conduct Program.

a. The committee shall be appointed by the President and shall consist of four faculty members to be recommended by the Committee on Committees and four student members to be recommended by the ASUO. Faculty and student members shall serve staggered, two-year terms and may be reappointed, up to three consecutive terms, or a maximum of six years. The President may appoint temporary members to assure full Committee membership during summer session or at other times as are necessary.

b. The Director of Residence Life or designee, the Director of Student Conduct and Community Standards and the Director of the Office of Student Advocacy shall be non-voting, ex-officio members of the Student Conduct Committee


Draft document of Proposed Changes to the Student Conduct Code

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 1, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate Vice President Bill Harbaugh
  • Remarks: Senate President Chris Sinclair
  • Remarks: Provost Banavar

3:30 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, October 18, 2017

3:30 P.M.   Business/Reports

  • Discussion: Expedited Tenure Process; Boris Botvinnik  (Math), Chair of Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC)
  • Report: Dean Andrew Marcus, College of Arts and Sciences
  • Report: Honors Task Force ;  Josh Snodgrass (Anth) and Jeremy Piger (Econ)

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:30 P.M.   Reports
4:30 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:30 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US17/18-01: Expedited Tenure Process

[Scroll down to see expedited tenure policy synopsis for a selection of comparators]

Date of Notice: October 4, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Boris Botvinnik (Math), Faculty Personnel Committee


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the University of Oregon occasionally seeks to hire tenured full professors from other colleges and universities, and, in even fewer cases, seeks to hire researchers who are not faculty but are nevertheless outstanding in their fields; and

1.2 WHEREAS the standing of such possible new tenured faculty is verified in part by previous peer reviewed tenure and promotion processes or, in the case of researchers, by the national and international research community; and

1.3 WHEREAS the faculty of the tenure-home unit of the possible new faculty reviews each case and votes to approve the appointment, tenure, and rank of the candidate; and

1.4 WHEREAS the Faculty Personnel Committee of the University Senate represents the faculty in every promotion and tenure review case; and

1.5 WHEREAS the current system of review requires that any new hire, regardless of rank, be evaluated by the full tenure and promotion process, and

1.6 WHEREAS this system puts the University of Oregon at a competitive disadvantage when attempting to hire such faculty;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate establish an expedited tenure review process that conforms to the following rules:

2.2 If a unit faculty votes to hire a new faculty member with indefinite tenure and the rank of full professor and the Provost and the Dean of the relevant School or College agrees with the hiring recommendation, then the faculty and the Dean can forward the possible new faculty member’s dossier to the Faculty Personnel Committee for an expedited promotion and tenure review; and

2.3 The expedited review shall be conducted by a subcommittee of the Faculty Personnel Committee consisting of five members (with one member selected as chair by the subcommittee) and will include three faculty from the College of Arts and Sciences (one from each division) and two representatives from the faculty of the other schools and colleges. The members of this committee, to be called the Expedited Tenure Review Committee (ETRC), will be selected annually by the FPC; and

2.4 The ETRC will be “on call” through the academic year and the summer term to review cases and make recommendations to the Provost. The ETRC will meet at least once each fall with the Provost to discuss process and standards and select a chair for the year; and

2.5 The ETRC, upon completion of its review, will either recommend to the Provost that the possible new faculty member should receive indefinite tenure and the rank of full professor or require that the faculty member be reviewed by the full promotion and tenure process; and

2.6 The ETRC will determine what materials should be considered in their review, but such materials should generally include the candidate’s cv, all relevant research materials, a quantitative assessment of the candidate’s work and impact if available, and at least three five external evaluations, three of which may be letters from application process and at least two of which must be external evaluations (by letter or by a phone call conducted by a member of the ETRC). The latter two evaluators must be selected by the committee from a list of possible evaluators prepared by the hiring department(s) and not including anyone listed among the candidate’s references. The ETRC may request other information as it sees fit through the dean of the relevant school or college.

2.7 Materials collected for each review will be available to all members of the FPC and FPC members may provide comments to the ETRC until the ETRC concludes its deliberations and makes its decision on the case.

2.8 The results of the ETRC reviews will be listed in the annual report of the FPC.


Financial Impact: The process potentially saves time and other resources expediting the review of cases that are likely to be approved by a full review.

 


Expedited Tenure:  Miscellaneous Policies and Practices at Other Universities

 

University of Maryland

Policy Title: Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of Faculty – Expedited Appointments

https://pdc-svpaap1.umd.edu/policies/documents/APTManual.pdf (see page 15)

Policy Statement:

“In cases where a unit has identified a potential faculty hire it has reason to believe is highly competitive and warrants an expedited review (sometimes referred to as a “target of opportunity” appointment), the review process can be streamlined. To qualify for this streamlined process, candidates would be nominated by both the Chair and the Dean and approved by the Provost’s Office. Such candidates normally would hold tenure and the comparable rank at another institution. The streamlined process could also be used for scholars considered for administrative positions.

Appointments at this level for consideration of tenure could substitute three evaluative letters from the search process for the three external reviewers nominated by the candidate, and the candidate’s CV submitted in connection with the search may be used, and need not be signed.

The review process would proceed as follows:

  • the first-level review would take place per current practice in that unit;
  • a review by a three-person ad-hoc committee formed by the Dean (composed of current College APT Review Committee members);
  • a review by the College Dean; and
  • a review by the Provost and final decision by the President.

For non-departmentalized Colleges, the review at the campus level should include a review by an ad-hoc committee formed by the Provost with a minimum of three persons drawn from members of the current University Appointment, Promotion and Tenure Review Committee.”

Penn State University

Policy Title: Promotion and Tenure Procedures and Regulations (full policy attached)

“An initial appointment at the rank of associate professor or professor may be made with grant of tenure, with the approval of the Executive Vice President and Provost and the President of the University in accord with University guidelines that prescribe immediate tenure reviews.” (See “Guidelines for Immediate Tenure Reviews”)

University of Virginia

Policy Title: Promotion and Tenure – Section 9: Expedited Review

 Policy Statement:

“Whenever possible, faculty promotion and tenure or new faculty hires should have tenure status reviewed or granted through the processes described above. When this is not possible and a rapid decision to hire with tenure is needed or a retention counter-offer with promotion and/or tenure must be made quickly, an expedited review may take place in accordance with the procedures described below.”

Expedited Review Procedures:

These procedures make it possible for faculty review to be completed in a compressed time period; they are not intended to bypass normal review processes.

Promotion and tenure review requires:

  • in schools with departments, departmental faculty review,
  • chair recommendation to the dean,
  • school-level faculty review,
  • recommendation from the dean to the provost, and
  • review by the provost’s committee.

In expedited review, the chair and dean may appoint a sub-committee consisting of no fewer than three faculty members who are members of the department or school promotion and tenure committee or who usually participate in these decisions. The subcommittee reviews the nomination and provides the chair or dean with a decision in no more than three days. Once the provost receives the dean’s recommendation, the provost reviews the nomination and makes a decision as quickly as possible, generally within two weeks.

Materials submitted in a dossier for expedited review should be similar to those normally included in a promotion dossier, including a complete, detailed curriculum vitae. Three outside, arms-length letters, are acceptable, provided they address the candidate’s suitability for the faculty rank and tenure. A candidate’s cover letter or research plans may substitute for the usual statement in the dossier. While it is not necessary to include letters from UVA faculty colleagues or students, it is essential to include evidence of the faculty member’s teaching effectiveness. A summary of teaching evaluations from the University or the prior institution, teaching awards, and other documentation may provide evidence of effective teaching. Incomplete dossiers will delay review.

Montana State University

Policy Title: Expedited Tenure Review at Hire

http://www.montana.edu/policy/faculty_handbook/standards_timelines.html

Policy Statement:

“The finalist for a tenurable faculty or administrator position who holds tenure at an accredited institution of higher education with comparable tenure standards is eligible for an expedited tenure review at the time of hire. With the agreement of the finalist, the provost will authorize the administrator of the relevant primary academic unit to forward the finalist’s application materials and any supporting materials to the unit’s promotion and tenure committee for consideration.

The primary review committee will forward their recommendation for successive consideration by the primary review administrator, the intermediate review administrator (if applicable), and the provost. The provost will assess the application materials and previous recommendations, and make a recommendation to the president.

If the president approves the award of tenure at hire, they will forward that recommendation to the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education for consideration by the Board of Regents at the next appropriate Board meeting. If the decision of the Board is favorable, the effective date of tenure will be recorded as the date of hire.”

University of Arizona

 Policy Title: Off-Cycle Review of Promotion and Tenure or Continuing Status

http://facultyaffairs.arizona.edu/off-cycle-review-promotion-tenure-continuing-status

Policy Statement:

“In exceptional circumstances, due to retention or pre-emptive situations, it may be necessary for department and colleges to review cases for promotion and tenure or continuing status outside the normal University review schedule.  The Department Head, with the endorsement and approval of the College Dean must seek permission from the Provost or his/her designee to initiate a candidate’s review outside the normal University cycle.  The Department Head and College Dean must articulate the circumstances prompting the request for an off-cycle review.

Having received permission to conduct an off-cycle review, both the Department and the College must follow their normal review process for reviewing promotion and tenure or continuing status.  This includes requesting and providing the requisite number of letters from external reviewers as set forth in the University of Arizona P&T and CS&P guidelines.

The College forwards the recommendations and appropriate documentation to the Office of the Provost. The Provost, with the Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, will determine the final outcome of the review.

The agreement to offer expedited reviews is not to be included in offer letters to potential hires.  Only the Provost or his/her designee can approve the initiation of a candidate’s promotion and tenure or continuing status review outside of the normal University cycle.”

Arizona State University

Policy Title: Tenure – Expedited Review for Tenure

Policy Statement:

Current Faculty

The university reserves the right to conduct an expedited review for awarding tenure to a faculty member when such action will serve the best interests of ASU. The decision to conduct an expedited tenure review is an exception to the regular tenure review described above and will be approved only in extraordinary circumstances, which could include, but are not limited to:

  • the decision of the university to respond to an offer of other employment to a current faculty member whom ASU desires to retain
  • the receipt of an extraordinary award or honor by a faculty member that is likely to generate offers of employment or brings distinction to the individual and the institution
  • and other circumstances that the provost of the university determines warrant expedited tenure review.

ASU has no obligation to consider or approve an expedited review at the request of the faculty member even for the circumstances listed above. For information about the expedited review procedures, see P4, “Expedited Review for Tenure-Eligible Faculty Process Guide.”

Every effort will be made to conclude an expedited review within 21 calendar days following the initiation of the review or as soon as possible thereafter.

Decision

The president of the university will make the decision to award or deny expedited tenure and appropriate faculty rank and will notify the provost of the university and dean orally as soon as possible after decision is made. The dean will notify the unit head and the faculty candidate as soon as possible thereafter. The president will provide a written notice of the decision within ten days to the same university administrators and the unit head and faculty member.

UC Santa Barbara

APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION POLICY

Professor Series

The [tenure and promotion] case may also be referred by the Chancellor to an ad hoc review committee. If such referral occurs, the review committee is appointed by the Chancellor or designated representative, upon nominations provided by the Committee on Academic Personnel. The members of the review committee will normally be of rank at least equal to that proposed for the individual to be reviewed. The Chancellor shall transmit to the review committee the recommendation file, including any information received subsequent to the department review, and a copy of the latest version of the President’s Instructions to Review and Appraisal Committees In accordance with these instructions, taking into account all the available evidence, the review committee shall make its evaluation of the case and submit its recommendation to the Chancellor who thereupon forwards the report and accompanying file to the Committee on Academic Personnel. The latter committee, on the basis of all available evidence, submits a comprehensive report and recommendation to the Chancellor. The ad hoc review committee and the Committee on Academic Personnel reports should not identify individuals who have provided confidential letters of evaluation except by code.

 

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – October 18, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Chris Sinclair
  • Remarks: Invited Students
  • Remarks: Provost Banavar

3:30 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, October 4, 2017

3:30 P.M.   Business/Reports

  • Business: HECC; Frances White (Anthropology), Chair of Academic Council
  • Business: Responsible Reporting; Darci Heroy (Title IX Coord.) & Missy Matella (General Counsel’s Office)
  • Business: Academic Freedom, Bill Harbaugh (Economics), Senate VP
  • Report: Update from Chief Carmichael (UOPD Chief) and the UOPD Student Assistants
  • Business: Senate Procedures

4:50 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:50 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

CORE Education Task Force

Core Education Task Force

Accreditors want us to have a faculty committee responsible for supervising the “Core Education” requirements of the university. Core Education is taken to include general education requirements, multicultural requirements, required writing courses, and BA/BS requirements. This may also include first year programs such as FIGs (Freshman Interest Groups) and ARCs (Academic Residence Communities). The Senate needs a task force to specify the scope of such a committee and how it relates to the existing academic committee structure.

Charge: Continue reading CORE Education Task Force

Diversity, Power, Agency Task Force

The Diversity, Power, Agency task force (DPA) has been asked to review the Multicultural Requirement (MCR) and make recommendations for updates/revisions. The following are excerpts  from the task force’s conversations thus far. This project is ongoing and feedback is encouraged. Continue reading Diversity, Power, Agency Task Force

Senate Meeting Agenda – October 4, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Chris Sinclair
  • Remarks: New Provost Banavar
  • Remarks: President Schill

3:45 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, June 7, 2017

3:45 P.M.   New Business

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:31 P.M.   Reports
4:32 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

IDEAL Framework Implementation

September 14, 2017

Bill Harbaugh
Senate Vice President

Dear Bill:

I hope that your summer has been restful and that your preparations for fall term are going smoothly.

As we look forward to the implementation stage of the Diversity Action Plans (DAPs), we are preparing an ecosystem of support that will facilitate the new programming as well as policies, partnerships, and innovations in our schools, colleges, and administrative units. The first step in this process is to reconfigure the University-Wide Diversity Committee (UWDC) as an infrastructure for IDEAL implementation, which will involve establishing and staffing a new committee and subcommittee structure. At that stage, we will need the participation of faculty, staff, GEs and students who are interested in this work. Attached, please find a table that we are using to guide the next phase of this process forward. The table lists the working groups being formed and their charges. The groups were selected based on tactics that appeared across multiple units’ DAPs.

I write today to ask for your assistance in identifying and recommending colleagues from the UO Senate, who can assist us in carrying out the next steps/working group charge for the following tactics:
* Climate Survey Development and Analytics
* Implicit Bias Professional Development*
* Evaluating Existing Workshops, Professional Development Programs/Gap Analysis*
* Recruiting Processes, Outlets, and Retention Tools*
* Professional Development Pilot Programs
* Leadership Succession Planning*
* Onboarding and Training for New Employees and New Supervisors*
While recommendations for service on any working group is welcome and appreciated, those groups flagged with an asterisk (*) are in the greatest need of membership.

As you recommend colleagues, please also suggest the capacity in which they might serve (committee member, chair, co-chair, etc.) Be assured that each of the committees and subcommittees will be staffed and supported by a DEI team member. It is our intent to ensure that meetings are carried efficiently and make the best use of committee members’ time and expertise.

It will be wonderful to get your feedback by September 30, 2017 so that we can include it in the proposed work plan for President Schill. Once we get approval from him, we will move forward to establish our working groups so that they are ready to begin meeting fall 2017. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Yvette M. Alex-Assensoh
Vice President for Equity and Inclusion

CC:      Chris Sinclair
Lesley-Anne Pittard
Vickie De Rose
Kelly Pembleton
Samantha Zysett


Working Group Charges

IAAC Mtg – Update: Location change

The Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee’s June 12, 2017 meeting today at 3 P.M. has been moved to EMU 140 (Rogue Room)

Agenda:

Student-athlete travel – next steps

Academic performance of Student-Athletes – discussion of reports provided by IR and the FAR
Time demands – depending on how much time we have left, we can start a discussion of the time student-athletes are required to devote to activity directly related to their sport

Senate Meeting Agenda – June 7, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 + 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 PM

3:05 PM   Call to Order

  • Intro, announcements; Senate President Harbaugh
  • Year-end wrap up; UO President Schill

3:20 PM:  Approval of Minutes, May 24, 2017

3:21 PM : New Business

  • US16/17-29: Approval of Curriculum Report, Spring 2017; Frances White (Anth), Chair of UOCC
  • Announcement of Election results & Confirmation of committee appointments
  • Election for 2017-2018 Senate Vice President & President Elect (Conducted by VP Sinclair)
    • Candidate statement: Bill Harbaugh, Economics
    • Other nominations, if any,  from the floor
  • UO Senate Award for Shared Governance, Transparency, and Trust – Diane Dietz, Register Guard
  • UO Senate Classified Staff Leadership Award – Kurt Willcox, University Senate
  • UO Senate Wayne Westling Award – Jennifer Freyd, Psychology
  • UO Senate Officer of Administration Leadership Award – Lisa Raleigh, College of Arts & Sciences
  • Two recognition awards

4:26 PM: Open Discussion

4:27 PM:  Reports

4:28 PM: Notices of Motions

4:29 PM: Passing of the Gavel to new President Chris Sinclair

4: 30 PM: Adjourn

Senate Awards Reception:

  • Part #1 – Refreshments and Snacks in the Crater Lake Room, 4:30 – 5:15 PM
  • Part #2 – Drinks and hors-d’oeuvres at the Faculty Club*, Senate awardees and guests welcome . 5:00 on, with a toast at 6PM.
  • Enter through the front door of the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art

 

US16/17-29: Approval of Curriculum Report, Spring 2017

Date of Notice: May 1, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Frances White (Anthropology), Chair of the UO Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Spring 2017 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate Review, with the following amendments:

Approved:
Anth 243
Anth 274
EDLD 626
EDLD 631
EDLD 638
EDLD 643

Add admin actions:
KRN 403 Thesis (1-6R) [Pass/no pass only] Repeatable.
KRN 503 Thesis (1-6R) [Pass/no pass only] Repeatable.

Corrections:
GRST 621-should be listed with 4 credits, not 3
Anth 278-remove “effective spring 2017”

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate approves the Spring 2017 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.


Related Documents

Spring 2017 Preliminary Curriculum Report

Spring 2017 Final Curriculum Report

UOCC Guidelines for approval of undergraduate online/hybrid classes

Call for Applications: Knight Campus Funding Opportunity for UO Student Outreach Programs

Sent on behalf of Patrick Phillips, Acting Executive Director of the Phil and Penny Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific

Summer 2017 Knight Campus funding opportunity for UO student outreach programs offering professional development and mentoring to underrepresented groups in STEM fields.

The Knight Campus welcomes applications from groups seeking financial support for programs that encourage students to engage in scientific training with an emphasis on programs that encourage individuals from underrepresented groups in the STEM fields. The programs we envision supporting will have an element of student-governance in the programming and implementation while including significant faculty input and oversight. The programs can be focused on undergraduate and/or graduate students. We expect the programs to have a well-articulated approach to developing a social and academic community aimed at recruiting, engaging and retaining students in scientific fields; some form(s) of a mentoring program (peer, faculty, external); practical research opportunities and professional development training.

All submissions must provide evidence of significant faculty engagement. Awards of up to $30,000 will be made based on the needs articulated in the proposal. See eligibility and application guidelines below.

The Knight Campus will accept applications through Friday, June 2, 2017 at 5pm via email only – accelerate@uoregon.edu. Applicants will receive a response no later than Thursday, June 15, 2017. Questions should be posed via email to Moira Kiltie kiltie@uoregon.edu.

Eligibility Criteria

  • The program must benefit matriculated (or recently admitted) UO undergraduates and/or graduate students.
  • The program must have a primary goal of enhancing the sciences through the development of academic and social environments that attract, retain, and inspire students from diverse backgrounds.
  • The program must have an element of student leadership and decision-making in planning and program implementation. Programs can be fully student-governed. The program must have at least one UO faculty member affiliated and actively involved in programming, implementation and oversight.
  • Programs must provide written evidence of institutional acknowledgement at the departmental/dean level. If space or other resources are required beyond what is requested in the proposal, the proposal must indicate how those needs are to be met and the institutional acknowledgement should address this issue as relevant.
  • Programs that are currently active with existing sources of funding must show how the Knight Campus funding will significantly increase the program’s impact and scale.
  • Proposed programs without current sources of funding must indicate other sources of potential support and status of request for additional funding if relevant.

Application Instructions

  • Provide lead contact name(s) for the program. At least one must be a UO faculty member.
  • Provide a one-page brief on the program highlighting the mission, goals and programmatic elements that will lead to the development of a successful program enhancing the sciences through creating academic and social environments that attract, retain, and inspire students from diverse backgrounds.
  • Provide a brief outline of the program costs including the period for which the costs will occur. Clearly indicate the amount requested from the Knight Campus.
  • List all faculty affiliated with the program and their department affiliation.
  • Provide information regarding additional funding sources and status of current outstanding requests for additional funding.

REMINDER: Application deadline is Friday, June 2 at 5pm. All applications should be submitted by email to accelerate@uoregon.edu.

Senate Meeting Agenda – May 24, 2017

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms); 3:00-5:00 pm

3:00 pm    Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks, Senate President Bill Harbaugh (Sexual Violence, signed, to take effect 9/15. Update on plans to implement, and extend to other reporting.
  • Jessie Minton, new CIO
  • President Schill

3:35 pm    Approval of Minutes, April 26, 2017

3:36 pm    New Business

3:56 pm    Open Discussion

  • CAS shared governance update, Senate VP Chris Sinclair

3:59 pm    Reports

  • Senate Curriculum Committee and CAS CC (Frances)
  • BERT
  • FPC report, David Frank
  • Core Education Task Force Intro
  • Diversity Action Plan status
  • Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR) – annual written report; Tim Gleason
  • Athletics Director (AD) – annual written report; Rob Mullens

4:39 pm    Notice(s) of Motion

4:40 pm    Other Business

Executive Session:

Vote on Awards

5:00 pm    Adjournment

US16/17-27: Department Status for the Cinema Studies Program

Date of Notice: April 24, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Type of Motion: Legislation

Sponsor: Academic Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS The Academic Council met on April 24, 2017 and reviewed the proposal that the Cinema Studies (CINE) program be made into a department; and

1.2 WHEREAS the Cinema Studies Program (CINE) has functioned as an inter-unit structure in the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Design, and the School of Journalism and Communication; and

1.3 WHEREAS a review team for Academic Affairs and a faculty survey in 2016 identified a number of challenges including the need for internal governance and high service load on program faculty holding appointments elsewhere; and

1.4 WHEREAS the current structure lacks curricular autonomy in the offering of classes in the program and other curricular matters that arise from CINE’s dependence on courses contributed from many departments; and

1.5 WHEREAS the Cinema Studies faculty voted in favor of departmentalizing on January 19, 2017; and

1.6 WHEREAS the Academic Council endorsed the Cinema Studies Program be given departmental status;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREBY MOVED that a Department of Cinema Studies be created, effective July 1, 2017.


Related Documents

Cinema Studies Department Proposal

2017 UO Board Faculty Trustee nominees

5/8/2017 update:

Dear Senators: Here is the latest info I have on the Faculty Trustee nomination process:

On Behalf Of CAPPS Lindsey D * GOV
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 2:14 PM
Cc: Angela Wilhelms <wilhelms@uoregon.edu>; MOLLER Mary * GOV <Mary.MOLLER@oregon.gov>
Subject: Thank you for applying – University of Oregon Board of Trustees

Good morning,

Thank you for applying to serve on the University of Oregon Board of Trustees. We will be appointing this position over the next few months, with Senate Confirmation to follow in September of this year. In the meantime, we will soon reach out to schedule individual interviews with each candidate. We are not seeking additional applications at this time.

Thank you,

Lindsey Capps

Chief Education Officer |

Education Policy Advisor to Governor Kate Brown

Senate Pres Harbaugh

3/14/2017:

Dear UO Community:

Here are the application materials and statements for the 5 nominees for UO Board Faculty Trustee. The Senate leadership will poll the faculty members of the Senate this week on the nominees and we will send that information to the Governor’s Office, along with our recommendations.

Bill Harbaugh, Senate President & Econ Prof.


Lillian Duran (Associate Professor of Special Ed & Clinical Sciences) Application Materials

Statement: As the first generation in my family to attend college I am acutely aware of the challenges many young adults must overcome to be able to pursue higher education. The University of Oregon represents opportunity, hope, and prosperity to thousands of students every year and it employs and produces some of the most renown scholars in the country. I am honored to be a new faculty member in the Department of Special Education and Clinical Sciences and am excited at the opportunity to serve the University on the Board of Trustees. My interest comes from a desire to support the continued excellence of the institution and to support innovation and growth as the university continues to evolve to remain a leader in higher education. I was a special education teacher for 10 years before pursuing my PHD. My area of research focuses on developing educational assessments and interventions for young children who speak languages other than English at home. I am dedicated to supporting, diversity, equity, and inclusion both in my professional and personal life and I will bring this dedication and focus to the Board. I appreciate this opportunity to be considered for the Board of Trustees and look forward to many years ahead as an active and engaged member of the UO community.

Marina Guenza (Professor of Chemistry) Application Materials

Statement: The University of Oregon is in a moment of transformation, facing many challenges but also many emerging opportunities. With a new governance structure in place, a dynamic President, and a newly hired Provost, and with the development of the new Knight campus, the University of Oregon is experiencing an exciting moment of transformation and grow. Establishing the right balance between supporting research excellence and providing a first rate education within current economic constraints is one of the many challenges that our University faces. In a continuously changing environment, faculty, staff, administrators, and students are working together to make the U of O an excellent, inclusive, and welcoming place to work and to study. In this framework, the Board of Trustees is an essential component to the institution, as it provides support to the work of the President.  As a member of the Board, I will have the opportunity to bring the voice of the faculty into the many complex governance challenges, while facilitating the connection between the university’s governing body and its shared governance institution. It would be a honor for me to serve.

Laura Lee McIntyre (Professor of School Psychology) Application Materials

Statement: I am a professor in school psychology and head of the Department of Special Education and Clinical Sciences at the University of Oregon. My research focuses on promoting positive child and family outcomes for children with developmental and behavioral problems through family- and school-based interventions. I have been at the University of Oregon since 2009 and have served on the University Senate, University Faculty Personnel Committee, Research Advisory Board through the Office of the Vice President for Research, and nationally as president of the American Psychological Association’s Division on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities/Autism Spectrum Disorders. I have won awards for my research, teaching, and service. Through my engagement in leadership and service at UO, I have learned more about the strengths and challenges of our academic programs, departments, schools and colleges, and university at-large. For example, I currently serve on the University Senate and the University Faculty Personnel (FPC) Committee. Both of these positions have expanded my perspective of university wide issues that are germane to the health and functioning of our university. Issues pertaining to promoting research excellence through rigorous promotion and tenure evaluation (through my work on the FPC) to issues of academic matters, transparency, and shared governance (through my work on the University Senate) are at the heart of these committees. I have both national leadership experience and local board of director experience. To that end, I understand the important fiduciary responsibility associated with the UO Board of Trustees. I believe that my extensive University of Oregon service, commitment to excellence in higher education, and focus on issues of equity and inclusion make me a strong candidate for this position.

Barbara Mossberg (Professor of Practice, Honors College) Application Materials

Dear Governor Brown and Oregon Community,

I deeply appreciate and am excited by the opportunity to explore with you the possibility of my serving in the role of Faculty Trustee for the University of Oregon Board of Trustees. Towards that end, I am attaching my Statement of Interest, a curriculum vita, and resume (which is the on the official pages of the University of Oregon Clark Honors College Core Faculty). This latter is a short bio, teaching philosophy, excerpted cv and teaching info of interest to prospective students, parents, and advisors. 

I would be happy to meet with you or anyone engaged in the decision about this appointment, in person, or in whatever forms are most convenient, including on line. I would also be happy to provide you with additional materials, including references from our students, colleagues, staff, and parents of my students (who write and meet with me); since I have colleagues from my earliest days at the university in the 1970s and 1980s, colleagues through the past forty years, and new peer relationships now in the last few years, I can include examples for you from each category. I also can provide you examples of published work on arts and sciences approaches to higher education leadership and work with governing boards, and narratives of my work to represent the culture of UO.  I stand by to help however I can in this process.

One of the things I most love about this opportunity to serve UO by engaging productively and collaboratively with our Board is bringing to bear the experience Oregon first launched me in–the interaction with our community in business, civic leadership, education, arts, media, law, healthcare, and culture–around a common cause of the greatest solution for society, higher education. I know from my over forty years in our community and representing higher education that we face a host of issues. However, for dealing with the most critical and urgent needs of democratic society, we have solutions that involve the most conscientious, generous, civic-minded, creative, earnest, and devoted citizens from every sector, at every level, and these coalesce in higher education. 

I see enormous stakes in the governance of UO, and I would love to serve at this threshold moment for the University as we move into the emergent science initiatives, increased dedication to diverse and inclusive learning culture, support for creative and innovative curriculum, and greater engagement across disciplinary and cultural lines. It is a tremendous moment for the University in identifying resources and will. I have represented Oregon so long, the state and character of our people, that you will forgive my optimism and belief that there is a reason Henry David Thoreau said in the 1840s as he developed a groundwork for the inextricably connected civil liberties and human rights, and environmental legislation: “I will walk towards Oregon.” There is something here that makes for national models and hope. I would love to help give voice to this.

Joe Sventek (Professor of Computer Science) Application Materials

Statement: In a career spanning nearly 40 years, I have held both technical and financial leadership roles in industrial and academic settings. Since arriving at UO in September 2014, I have led major initiatives for the VPRI and Provost, and have been a Wise Head adviser to the CAS Dean, in addition to my roles as Professor and Head of the Computer and Information Science Department. At HP Laboratories, I successfully created a new company to produce products based upon research in my unit, thus creating jobs and tax revenue in the state of California; this startup company, TimesTen Performance Software, was acquired by Oracle for ~$500M in 2005.  From my leadership positions in academia, I have gained an excellent understanding of the strategic challenges facing universities, in general, and UO, in particular. I also have direct experience with shared governance, having been a member of Senate at my previous institution. All through my career, I have tried to benefit my unit while contributing to the success of the overarching enterprise. If given the opportunity, I will bring all my skills, experience, and energy to being an effective trustee, as well as work with the Senate in order to represent UO faculty concerns in board deliberations.

Zoltan Varga Candidate Statement 2017

I was born and raised in Germany (Hungarian descent), studied at the University of Basel, Switzerland, where I obtained my Diploma and PhD in Cell Biology/Neurobiology. I was a post-doc in Prof. Westerfield’s laboratory at the UO between 1995 – 1999, then returned to the University of Freiburg, Germany, Department of Biology/Developmental Biology, as Junior Research Group Leader. In 2004, I returned to Eugene to work at the Zebrafish International Resource Center. I also serve on the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the UO.

Jack Boss Candidate Statement 2017

Jack Boss is Professor of Music Theory and Composition in the School of Music and Dance, and has been teaching at the U of O since 1995. His research focuses on analyzing the music of Arnold Schoenberg. His book “Schoenberg’s Twelve-Tone Music,” published by Cambridge University Press in 2014, was given the Wallace Berry Award by the Society for Music Theory.

David Jacobs Candidate Statement 2017

David Jacobs is the music director of the University of Oregon Symphony and teaches graduate courses in conducting. He has presented internationally and published in peer-reviewed journals relating to musical hermeneutics, semiology, and pedagogy. As a partitioner, he is credited on three commercially released recordings and has conducted professional orchestras on three continents.

Emily Farrell Candidate Statement 2017

Emily Farrell joined the University of Oregon School of Law as Associate Director for Career Planning and Professional Development in 2016. She was previously a general legal practitioner, whose specialty areas included trusts and estates, probate, business, real estate, and landlord/tenant law. While Emily greatly enjoyed managing a successful legal practice, she returned to the University of Oregon because she is passionate about sharing her experience in order to help facilitate continued growth and success of students, alumni, and the University as a whole.

Emily returned to Lane County in 2003 and is extremely dedicated to her community. She has volunteered consistently for the past number of years with Lane County Legal Aid and Advocacy Center’s Senior Law Clinic, presently serves on the Board of Directors for both the HIV Alliance and Lane County Bar Association, and has enjoyed working with the Oregon State Legislature.

As a “Double-Duck,” Emily earned both her undergraduate and Law degrees from the University of Oregon.

Charles Butler Candidate Statement 2017

I am an instructor in the School of Journalism and Communication completing my second year at the UO. Prior to coming to the UO, I was an adjunct journalism instructor back east at Lehigh University and Ursinus College. I have been a magazine writer and editor for much of my career. I have written for the New York Times, Runner’s World, and Fortune, among other publications. I have written two sports-oriented books. One with Olympic swim coach Bob Bowman (of Michael Phelps fame) and one with a triathlete who suffered life-threatening injuries before returning to competition. — Charlie Butler

Susan Sokolowski Candidate Statement 2017

Susan Sokolowski, PhD, has over 25 years of performance sporting goods experience, working cross-functionally between footwear, apparel and equipment in creative and strategic roles. Her work is holistic in nature, where consideration of the athlete’s body form, performance, psychology, sport, materials and styling are addressed to develop game-changing innovation solutions. She is specifically focused on issues surrounding design of products for special populations, including women, children, and disabled athletes. Susan has been recognized internationally for her achievements in design and innovation, including over 35 utility and design patents, awards from the United States Olympic Committee and Volvo, and featured product design at the Design Museum London. A motivational coach and mentor, Susan is committed to inspiring students in product design, development and business. Susan is a graduate of the University of Minnesota (PhD), Cornell University (MA) and the Fashion Institute of Technology (BFA).

Recent news/press: UO duo’s design makes final round of Department of Defense research competition; New sports product design students already creating, fabricating, winning; UO product design teams take top prizes at QuackCon; Women’s Olympics uniforms topic of UO professor’s research; cUriOus: Students Designing Sports Gear (Jefferson Public Radio), Playing on the Team: Sports Branding and Design

Seth Lewis Candidate Statement

Seth Lewis is the founding holder of the Shirley Papé Chair in Emerging Media in the School of Journalism and Communication, having joined Oregon in 2016. Previously, he was an associate professor at the University of Minnesota. His research and teaching focus on the social implications of media technologies, particularly in the context of journalism.

Lara Nesselroad Candidate Statement 2017

I am a big fan of people being supported in being their best selves, and in helping augment the voices of people who are not being heard. That’s true in pretty much any context, and is probably more relevant than information about my work and educational history, but I am an UO alum (English, 1992) and I’ve been staff and then OA since 1991.

Miriam Bolton Candidate Statement 2017

I have previously served on the OA Council (four years; three as chair); Served on the Senate Executive Committee (three years) and on the Campus Planning Committee (three years). In addition, I was the 2015 University Senate award for Distinguished Service and Leadership. My experiences across campus as an employee and a non-tradition student provides a unique perspective. I believe that I can be of service to the President and Provost on the Faculty Advisory Committee.

John Bonine Candidate Statement 2017

I am willing and interested in continuing to serve as Senator from the Law School. I have served on the University Senate Executive Committee for several years, advising various Senate Presidents in our bi-weekly meetings. I regularly volunteer for ad hoc working groups and committees set up by the Senate or administration, including ones involving reporting of sexual assault, confidentiality of student medical information, writing of the University Constitution, academic freedom, and others. I consider service to be an important part of my contribution to the law school and university.

McKay Sohlberg Candidate Statement 2017

McKay Moore Sohlberg is the director of the Communication Disorders & Sciences program in the College of Education. In that position I am the academic advisor to 60 graduate students annually and am interested in service that allows me to apply skills to help students and faculty work collaboratively and fairly to solve issues that arise in the course of study and work.

Deanna Linville-Knobelspiesse Candidate Statement 2017

Deanna Linville is an Associate Professor in Counseling Psychology and Human Services as well as the program director for the Couples and Family Therapy graduate program. She has been at the University of Oregon since 2003 and has been actively involved in service to her home department and college as well as at the university level. Deanna is an intervention researcher focusing on reducing health disparities and developing/testing innovative solutions to issues impacting families such as eating disorders, violence and chronic illness. Deanna is an advocate for ensuring a quality educational experiences for all students as well as shared governance at all levels of the institution.

Rich Margerum Candidate Statement 2017

I have been at the University of Oregon since 2001, where I am a Professor and Head of the Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management (PPPM). My research focuses on collaborative governance, particularly as it relates to metropolitan planning and environmental management. I have served on the University Senate since 2012 and served on numerous committees at the School and University levels.

Joshua Razink Candidate Statement 2017

After graduating with a Master’s of Science in 2011 from the UO I became the lab manager and then director for the Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) lab in the Center for Advanced Materials Characterization at Oregon (CAMCOR). CAMCOR is a high tech extension service under the office of the Vice-President of Research and Innovation (VPRI). I have also served as a member of the representative assembly for United Academics since its inception.

Greg Bryant Candidate Statement 2017

As the current NTTF Research Senator, I’ve spent two years working towards genuine shared governance on issues of importance to the whole community. This included resisting tendencies towards managerialism and administrative asymmetric action, and instead promoting principles of broad community collaboration, operational transparency, and personal agency.

Kathy Stroud Candidate Statement 2017

Kathy Stroud has been the Geography/Maps/GIS subject librarian at Knight library for more than 6 years. She has a Masters in Library and Information Science from the University of Maryland where she also completed Master’s Level coursework in Geography. She received her BS in Biology/Ecology from Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. Prior to becoming a librarian she worked as an environmental scientist in the Washington, DC area. She is interested in promoting a diverse, welcoming, sustainable environment at the UO. Service on the Environmental Issues Committee would take advantage of experience working in environmental impact and assessment.

David Ketchum Candidate Statement

David is the Head, Access Services at UO Libraries. He has over 16 years of academic library experience spanning access services, technical support, reference, and instruction. David volunteers at the Edison Elementary School library in Eugene, and is professionally active. He has presented at numerous international, national, and regional conferences, and is a member of several professional organizations and round tables including the American Library Association, Association of College and Research Libraries, and the GLBT Round Table. David also serves on the Northwest Interlibrary Loan and Resource Sharing Conference Board, as well as the Editorial Advisory Board for the “Advances in Library Administration and Management” publication. His professional interests include library management, resource sharing, and assessment, and he spends much of his free time adventuring in the mountains with his kids.

Anita Weiss Candidate Statement 2017

As a professor of International Studies, my expertise lies in comparative development, gender & development and political Islam. I will be in Pakistan the second half of fall term and all of winter term on a Guggenheim Research award – so if elected to the IAC, can attend meetings through October and then again in Spring. I will happily follow issues through the internet and weigh in on matters while I am away. I have long believed we need to build better bridges between Academics and Athletics at the UO, and have enjoyed my prior service on the IAC.

Colin Koopman Candidate Statement 2017

I served as a humanities faculty representative on UO Senate from 2014-2016. During that time, I spearheaded successful legislation on data policy issues in concert with UO’s Chief Information Security Officer and our former VP for Information Services. I also worked with a team of fellow senators to craft legislation on a suite of curriculum policy issues. If elected, I look forward to returning to the Senate in September following my sabbatical break year. If elected, I will bring to the Senate a focus on enhanced institutional transparency and an attention to crafting legislation that is clear, fair, and equitable. My research focuses on issues of deliberative democracy, information privacy, and data politics.

Margaret Sereno Candidate Statement 2017

I am a member of the Psychology Department. My research, in the area of Cognitive and Perceptual Neuroscience, involves behavioral, brain imaging, and computational studies investigating the neural-basis of spatial, shape and fractal perception, as well as navigation and map reading. My background in Art inspires many of my research questions. Given the interdisciplinary nature of my research, I collaborate with colleagues across campus, nationally and internationally.

Tom Greenbowe Candidate Statement 2017

Thomas Greenbowe has developed and implemented a blended guided-inquiry approach to teaching and learning general chemistry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) and Process Orineted Guided Inquiry (POGIL) formats. Over the past forty years, he has facillitated over seventy workshops for science teachers and chemistry faculty in the USA and internationally, including Canada, New Zealand, Croatia, and United Arab Emirates. His chemical research education group’s web-based computer simulations are being used by over 2,000 chemical educators and their students around the world. Over the past twelve years, he has served as a Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) and SWH workshop facllitator for chemistry faculty across the USA. He has 36 years experience working with chemistry teaching assistants (graduate students) to provide effective classroom and laboratory instruction. Greenbowe and his colleagues have published over 50 papers about chemical education issues and research in the Journal of Chemical Education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Journal of College Science Teaching, and the International Journal of Science Education and has received NSF and DOE funding to support his research. Over the past forty years he has presented over 1,000 invited talks at professional meetings. Greenbowe was elected Chair-elect (2007), Chair (2008), and Immediate Past Chair (2009) of the Division of Chemical Education, American Chemical Society. He was elected Chair of the 2009 Gordon Research Conference on Chemical Education Research and Practice. He served as the General Chair of the (2004) 18th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education and is the co-Program Chair for the 2020 26th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education. Greenbowe served as on the ACS Board of Trustees Examination Institute (2007 – 2009), served on several ACS General Chemistry Exam committees, including the Laboratory Practical Exam Committee, and served as the Chair of the 1995 ACS General Chemistry Examination and the 2015 ACS General Chemistry Conceptual Examination. He served as a member of the College Board, Advance Placement Chemistry Test Development Committee (2007 – 2012). He has served as an AP Chemistry Reader, Table Leader, and Question Leader (2008-2016), including serving as Question Leader on the 2016 AP® Chemistry Reading. His efforts in assessment of chemistry have directly impacted over 500,000 students.

Thomas Greenbowe has received several major awards and recognitions for his teaching and contributions to chemistry education: 2014 American Chemical Society George C. Pimentel Award in Chemical Education; 2014 American Chemistry Society Northeast Section James Flack Norris Award for Excellence in the Teaching of Chemistry; 2013 American Chemical Society Fellow; 2013 American Chemistry Society Mid-West Regional Anne McNaley Volunteer Award.

Mike Price Candidate Statement 2017

I have been an NTTF instructor at the University since 2005, and took on the assistant department head role in 2009. I take seriously the University’s mandate to provide high quality instruction to undergraduate and graduate students and am happy to serve on inter-departmental committees that further this mission, as well as the University’s other critical responsibilities to our academic community.

William Blood Candidate Statement 2017

My name is William (Billy) Blood and I joined the University of Oregon (UO) as Assistant AD of Budget & Finance in September 2016. Prior to becoming part of the UO family, I was the Associate AD of Internal Affairs & CFO for Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU). The following link provides further information regarding my professional experience (http://www.goducks.com/staff.aspx?staff=628). I am very interested in serving on the Ombuds AAG and University Senate committees. After reviewing each opportunity, I feel my experience would positively impact and contribute towards each committees’ goals. While at FGCU I served on the Staff Advisory Council (SAC), which is similar to the OA Council at UO. I served in the Treasurer and Vice President roles for SAC and was responsible for creating the Professional Development Program that provides funds for colleagues who cannot afford to attend development opportunities (http://www.fgcu.edu/SAC/pdp.html). I also served on University committees appointed by the Provost including the Safety & Facilities Committee, Budget Committee, and the Planning & Budget Council (http://www.fgcu.edu/Provost/pbc.html). Currently I serve on the Community & Inclusion Committee and Sustainability Committee for Athletics and would love the opportunity to serve the campus community through the Ombuds AAG and University Senate. Thank you for your consideration and Go Ducks!

Paula Seeger Candidate Statement 2017

As a library worker, I strongly believe in dissemination of information and communicating shared governance activities with those I represent. Since I am new to the UO campus, I bring fresh eyes and an attitude of curiosity to question “the way we’ve always done things” in order to transform into more efficient and transparent operations and service. My previous experience with university governance at other institutions has prepared me for the camaraderie I hope to enjoy at UO.

Stacy Williams-Wright Candidate Statement 2017

I am a dependable, solutions driven director with deep knowledge of university finance and budget, research core facility administration, payroll and human resources administration, supervision/operations management, and project management. I have spent the last fifteen years at the University of Oregon and have been fortunate to grow through serving in five positions with progressively responsible experience during these years. Prior to UO service I worked in corporate, legal and academic settings; including assisting the Dean of the OSU Honors College in Corvallis. I currently serve on the Faculty Advisory Council as I was asked to fill in after an elected OA stepped down. I would enjoy continued service in this position and to serve a full term to help provide feedback as needed in the exciting and challenging situations we will face in the next two years at the institution.

Marie Swarringim Candidate Statement 2017

I’ve worked at the UO for nearly 9-years starting as an Office Specialist working my way up to an Executive Support Specialist. I have lived in Lane County my entire life and care deeply about the University of Oregon and the surrounding community. My child is student at the UO as well so I have a great interest in the UO being a top University that’s welcoming to everyone. I believe it’s a privilege to serve on UO committees and a great opportunity to give back to the University.

Terry McQuilkin Candidate Statement 2017

An employee of UO Libraries since 2000, I manage the day-to-day operations in Knight Library’s Audio & Video Room and provide specialized reference assistance in the area of music. As a member of the Lending Services unit, I help train student assistants and permanent employees, and maintain some of the library’s public web pages.

During my 17 years of employment at the University of Oregon, I have served on numerous library committees; I also served on the UO’s Committee on Sexual and Gender Based violence. I take a strong interest in a wide range of university-wide issues. I have attended numerous UO Senate meetings as an observer, and regularly read the Senate minutes. When appropriate, I have reached out to the classified staff senators to ask questions, share concerns and suggest actions. If elected or appointed to a committee to the UO Senate, I pledge to be proactive in dialoging with classified staff members throughout the UO community.

Before joining the staff of UO, I earned a graduate degree in music at the University of Oregon. I also serve as a part-time instructor (NTTF) in the School of Music & Dance.

Stephanie McGee Candidate Statement 2017

My career at the University of Oregon began in Human Resources where I worked in Employee and Labor Relations gaining an understanding of the campus culture and climate. I am now an Internal Auditor with the Office of Internal Audit. Both of these positions provided me the ability to gain a broad understanding of the campus community as well as challenges and opportunities faced by staff on campus. I value my work for the university because I have a lifelong commitment to higher education.
I have been an elected Officers of Administration (OA) representative on the University Senate on campus since 2015 and am seeking to continue to represent and be a strong voice for OA’s into the new term. I am honored to have been chosen to serve as a voice for OAs across campus. So far, I have been an active participant in the Senate serving on the Executive Committee, Senate Budget Committee, Rules Committee, President’s Ad Hoc Budgetary Advisory Committee, Senate Nominating Committee, and evaluating the election policies and procedures for the Senate via an informal Elections Committee. I continue to provide input to the creation of the Senate Handbook. In all of these roles, I have represented the University of Oregon OA’s to the best of my ability and have been an active voice in committees. During this time, I advocated for the inclusion of OA representation on committees without current representation from OAs.
As a member of the campus community with a BBA in Accounting and a JD in law, I understand and enjoy working on policies and budgets. I am extremely familiar with Robert’s Rules of Order, which the Senate currently uses to conduct business. I have become very familiar with both the Constitution, which grants the University Senate authority, and the Bylaws, which outlines the processes and procedures that the Senate will use to operate.
I desire to continue to advocate and represent OA’s in new Senate business as well as the opportunity to bring some works to conclusion. It is essential to have an OA voice on the Senate and I would welcome the opportunity to continue the work I have already started on behalf of OAs. I believe I can continue to be a strong and effective advocate for all of us. Thank you in advance for your support.

Janelle McCoy Candidate Statement 2017

McCoy also enjoyed a distinguished career as a mezzo-soprano, performing with leading orchestras, including the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra under the baton of such celebrated conductors as Robert Spano, Donald Runnicles, and the late Robert Shaw. Early in her vocal career, she was the recipient of numerous Young Artist awards. She served cantorially in Ft. Myers, FL for several years, and continued in that role at synagogues in Philadelphia and Chicago.

Keith Frazee Candidate Statement 2017

I currently serve as an OA senator, and I am seeking reelection to continue representing OAs. My position with Orientation Programs provides me an intersection with many different academic and administrative departments throughout the UO, which gives me a wide perspective to represent OAs in the senate. I’ve learned a great deal, and I’d like to continue to serve the university in this way.

Cheryl Ernst Candidate Statement 2017

As a designated Ops, AEI spans both extensive student services and academic programs. We house the largest concentration of international students on campus in Agate Hall, and we continually seek ways to ensure that their needs are being met. As ED, I work closely with faculty and staff in the AEI and with our many partners across the UO campus. We operate as a UO department but also have to view ourselves through an entrepreneurial lens.

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 26, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake Rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 pm    Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • Elections and awards; Chris Sinclair
  • Update: School of Journalism and Communication Dean Molleda

3:25 pm    Approval of Minutes, Apr 12, 2017

3:30 pm    New Business

4:10 pm    Open Discussion

4:11 pm    Reports

  • Accreditation; Ron Bramhall
  • Science Literacy Program, Elly Vandergrift & Judith Eisen
  • Grievance policies and procedures, Mariann Hyland, Bill Brady/Nancy Resnick
  • Faculty workload policies; Michael Dreiling (Sociology & United Academics) and David Cecil (United Academics)
  • Diversity Plans; Bill Harbaugh (Economics)
  • BERT TF report; Chris Chavez (Journalism)

4:58 pm    Notice(s) of Motion
4:59 pm    Other Business
5:00 pm    Adjournment

 

US16/17-24: Email Spam Filters

Date of Notice: April 11, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Resolution

Sponsor: N. Christopher Phillips (Math)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS Spam is a continuing email problem.

1.2 WHEREAS mainstream spam blocking, commercial and otherwise (including that used by University of Oregon Information Services) misses many relatively low volume spammers, such as those primarily targeting academics.

1.3 WHEREAS there are thousands of scan journals which publish almost anything if paid a high enough fee, many of which advertise themselves in spam not blocked by University of Oregon Information Services.

1.4 WHEREAS spam from scam journals sometimes fools graduate students, postdocs, and young faculty into thinking that the journal is legitimate, and fools them into damaging their career prospects into publishing in these journals,

1.5 WHEREAS the Scientific Spam DNSBL (URL: http://www.scientificspam.net; information: http://www.scientificspam.net/?page_id=6; lists: bl.scientificspam.net and rhsbl.scientificspam.net) does list many spammers targeting academics, including many scam journals, and including spammers not blocked by University of Oregon Information Services.

1.6 WHEREAS the University of Oregon Information Services does not provide technical support for individual users to use any DNS blocklist at all.

1.7 WHEREAS the University of Oregon Information Services has refused a request for such support, and refused a request to add the Scientific Spam DNSBL to the spam blocking options available to University of Oregon email users.

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the University of Oregon Senate strongly urges Information Services to include spam blocking via the Scientific Spam DNSBL as a spam blocking option for its email users.

2.2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the University of Oregon Senate strongly urges Information Services to provide technical support for individual users wanting to use publicly available DNS blocklists of their choice via .procmail.

US16/17-23: Committee Term Limits Omnibus

Date of Notice: April 6, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Chris Sinclair (Math)


Motion

Section I

  • WHEREAS the Committee on Committees recently did an audit of committee service term limits and found many to be obsolete or prevent those with experience and qualifications to serve ; and
  • WHEREAS various committees were polled as to their preferences with many choosing to forego and/or alter these types of membership parameters;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED the University Senate modify the term limit rule for the Undergraduate Council to be considered a guideline, rather than a policy, to allow for flexibility as needed; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED the Committee on Committees recommends that the University Senate abolish service term limits for the following committees:

  • University of Oregon Committee on Courses
  • Scholastic Review Committee
  • University Library Committee
  • Study Abroad Programs Committee

College Diversity Plan drafts: CAS, SOMD, Law, …

The Division of Equity and Inclusion is currently reviewing draft Diversity Plans from various units around campus, in response to this call from President Schill:

Provost Coltrane and I will ask each dean and vice president to immediately begin conversations within their schools and departments with our faculty members, students, and staff members of color. The IDEAL plan calls on each school to develop plans on an annual basis. I will ask that each school and administrative unit accelerate the process and report back to me in 90 days with a set of steps they plan to take to promote diversity, combat racism in their units, and promote inclusion.

Units were asked to identify tactics, measures, resources, and lead personnel over a three-year timeline. The plans also identified specific target groups, such as students, faculty, staff, administrators and alumni for each tactic.

The Senate has asked the Office for Equity and Inclusion for copies of the drafts, but have not had a positive response. However we have been able to get the following drafts from several Deans and others. If you don’t see yours below, please send it to the Senate for posting.

College of Arts & Sciences:

Executive Summary
Humanities
Natural Sciences
Social Sciences

Snippet from Soc Sci:

School of Music and Dance:

Executive Summary
Diversity Action Plan

Snippet:

Law School:

Diversity Action Plan

Snippet:

College of Education:

Diversity Action Plan

Dear X: Letters from the Classroom

Please join us for a special spring event that we hope will serve as a powerful launch for UO’s efforts toward core curriculum re-design: “Dear X: Letters from the Classroom.” The performance of actual letters from UO students and faculty offers a unique and concrete anchor for discussion about transforming our undergraduate education.

Students: bring your friends, bring your instructors!

Faculty, advisors, staff: bring your colleagues, bring your students!

This conversation is for all of us.

April 18, 4-6pm in the Global Scholars Hall (GSH 123)
You can reserve your spot here (and forward the link to others you invite):
http://bit.ly/2kH1ttg
Learn more about trED here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opE30c0t9LI&t=16s

US16/17-22: Proposal to Eliminate the Y Grade

Notice of Motion: March 24, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Frances White (Anthropology), Co-Chair of Academic Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the “Y” grade, which means “No basis for grade (recorded by the instructor) or “There is no basis for evaluating the student’s performance”, is intended to be used only in the very specific situation in which a student registers for a course but never attends or participates in any part of the course; and

1.2 WHEREAS in practice the “Y” grade is not always used for that specific purpose and other uses can cause students to lose financial aid; and

1.3 WHEREAS a “Y” grade, because it has no effect on student GPA, does not provide the student or institution with information to prompt intervention when it might be needed; and

1.4 WHEREAS most other institutions of higher learning use the “F” grade for students that register for a course and either never attend or participate, or attend and participate in only part of the course but doesn’t complete the course;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the “Y” grade is eliminated as an option in the University of Oregon grading system; and

2.1.1 A grade of “F” will be recorded when a student registers and either never attends or participates, or attends and participates in part of the course but does not complete the course requirements; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED when a grade of “F” is recorded in the online grade roster, a new capability will be developed to allow the user to select one of two options that either the student did not attend or participate, or to enter the last day of attendance or participation; and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER MOVED when students who have an open misconduct case past the grading deadline, faculty record the grade the student would have earned if they are found not responsible for academic misconduct as this approach is in line with a principle of due process. Faculty can change this to a different grade if warranted by a finding that a student is responsible for academic misconduct.


Related Documents

Proposal to Eliminate the “Y” Grade

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 12, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • Elections; Senate VP Chris Sinclair
  • LCB update; Dean Nutter (Business)
  • Call for Senate Award Nominations; Kurt Willcox (Senate)

3:25 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, March 15, 2017

3:30 P.M.   New Business

4:20 P.M.   Open Discussion

4:21 P.M. Reports

  • Grievance policies and procedures; Heather Quarles (Romance Languages)
  • Budget Metrics; Lisa Freinkel (VP for US) & Elliot Berkman (Psychology)
  • Course evaluations update; Bill Harbaugh (Economics)

4:58 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:59 P.M.   Other Business

5:00 P.M.   Adjournment

 

US16/17-21: Change to Article 3.11 Modification of the Senate By-Laws

Date of Notice: April 5, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsors: Stephanie McGee, OA Senator
Amanda Hatch, OA Senator
Keith Frazee, OA Senator
Laura Lee McIntyre, Faculty Senator
Craig Parsons, Faculty Senator


Motion

Section I

1.1. WHEREAS, the University Senate is a highly respected partner in shared governance at the University of Oregon, and;

1.2 WHEREAS, the Bylaws of the University of Oregon Senate provide the rules, processes, and procedures of the University Senate; and

1.3 WHEREAS, modifications to the governing documents of the University Senate should be held to the highest standard, and;

1.4 WHEREAS, Article 3.11 of the Bylaws of the University of Oregon Senate does not clearly define “two-thirds affirmative vote of the University Senate.”

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED, that Article 3.11 of the senate bylaws be amended as follows:

“3.11 Modifications to the Senate By-Laws. These by-laws may be altered by a two-thirds affirmative vote of the prescribed University Senate membership. Temporary alterations, such as allowing a visitor the right to the Senate floor, may be presented directly within a Senate meeting. Permanent modifications to these by-laws shall be proposed in the form of a formal motion and shall follow the procedures for motions as set forth in Article 3.7.”


Background and Rationale:

Article 3.11 of the Bylaws of the University of Oregon Senate states the “by-laws may be altered by a two-thirds affirmative vote of the University Senate.” The “two-thirds” requirement is not universally understood, interpreted by some to mean two-thirds of the members in attendance and by others as two-thirds of the total membership. This amendment provides the clarification that by-laws may only be modified by a “two-thirds affirmative vote of the prescribed University Senate membership.”

The Bylaws clearly state in Article 3 § 3.2 that the Senate shall follow Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised to govern the University Senate.  Section 3.2.1 states that any “deviations from Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised may be decided by the Senate and shall be presented to the Senate in the form of a motion and shall require a two-thirds affirmative vote to be adopted.”

Modifications to an organization’s governing documents should be held to the highest standard. Specifically in amending a previously adopted bylaw, we should make sure that the rights of all members continue to be protected.  The best way to insure this is to prevent bylaws from being changed without every member being able to weigh in on the proposal.  Robert’s Rules states that to amend the bylaws, the minimum vote required should be two-thirds of those present with previous notice or if notice is not given then a minimum of the majority of the entire membership.  The bylaws should not be changed as long as a minority greater than one-third disagrees with the proposal.

Interpreting Article 3.11 to mean that bylaw amendments can be approved by two-thirds of members in attendance, effectively means that as few as 19 senators (2/3 of a quorum) can amend the Senate’s governing documents. Nineteen senators represents approximately 1/3 of the total senate membership, creating an opportunity for a small number  (a minority) of senators to make substantive changes to carefully considered and well-established senate processes. Two-thirds of the “prescribed University Senate requires that 36 affirmative votes are necessary to amend the bylaws.

Voting Numbers Breakdown:

Quorum required in meetings            28        of         54 Senators (51.9% of membership)
2/3 of quorum in meetings                 19        of         54 Senators (35.2% of membership)
2/3 of prescribed membership           36        of         54 Senators (66.7% of membership)

 

US16/17-20: Major Declaration Policy

Date of Notice: April 4, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Alison Schmitke (Education), Chair of Undergraduate Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS, the Student Success Advisory Council and the Undergraduate Council are engaged in discussions regarding efforts to support student success in areas related to academic and curricular issues.

1.2 WHEREAS, the charge of the Undergraduate Council includes:  (1) Review and promote the objectives and purposes of undergraduate education and assure that all policies and procedures, curricula, personnel and teaching decisions that affect undergraduate education are consistent and defensible with the institution’s undergraduate education mission as defined in the University’s Mission Statement and Statement of Philosophy, Undergraduate Education; (3) Formulate, monitor, and respond to general academic policies, especially those which have impact on undergraduate programs across the University.

1.3 WHEREAS, there is no current policy addressing the timing of declaring a major.

1.4 WHEREAS, the Undergraduate Council passed the Policy on Major Declaration on February 16, 2017.

Section II

2.1  BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the Policy on Major Declaration be implemented starting Fall 2017.


Related Documents

Major Declaration Policy Proposal

Invitation to serve on the University Senate and university committees

Dear colleagues,

Achieving academic excellence is a top priority for the University of Oregon. We are energized by our new leadership, historic philanthropy, and extraordinary faculty hires as they drive us toward even greater excellence. An important way we can continue improving teaching and research quality on our campus is through faculty service in a healthy shared governance structure.

As a result, we encourage you to serve the UO through participation in the University Senate or on a university committee. We know faculty members are busy, and appreciate the myriad of demands on your time. Yet, we encourage you to consider service with one or more of these important bodies. To learn more about these opportunities, we invite you to join us at a University Senate reception on Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 5:00 pm in the EMU’s Crater Lake Room.

There will be light catering, brief introductions by President Schill and Senate President Harbaugh, as well as an opportunity to mingle and ask questions about the various service opportunities available to you.

There will soon be an online form available where you can indicate areas of interest and self-nominate for elected positions, so please keep your eyes open for that.

Sincerely,

Michael H. Schill
President and Professor of Law

Scott Coltrane
Provost and Senior Vice President and Professor of Sociology

Bill Harbaugh
Senate President and Professor of Economics

Chris Sinclair
Senate Vice President and Professor of Mathematics

Search for Divisional Dean in CAS Social Sciences

Dear UO Community:

March 22, 2017

To:                     CAS Social Sciences Faculty
From:                W. Andrew Marcus, Tykeson Dean of Arts and Sciences
Subject:            Divisional Dean for the Social Sciences

Professor Carol Stabile, Interim Divisional Dean for Social Sciences, will be leaving her position with the University on June 30, 2017 to take over the headship of the Department of Women’s Studies at the University of Maryland. She has displayed a tremendous commitment to academic excellence while also retaining a keen understanding of the difficult choices we must make in these times of budgetary constraints. I have learned a great deal from Carol during her time in the dean’s role; a time that has seen some tremendous hires within the Social Sciences Division and the launching of an internal cluster on African American Studies. I am particularly grateful for her contributions to our college given the last minute manner in which I approached her about the position and her knowledge that this would be a temporary role. All of us in the dean’s office have been beneficiaries of Carol’s wealth of experience, direct problem-solving approach and good humor. Simply put, we will miss her.

I am now seeking your advice and comments in identifying our next Divisional Dean for Social Sciences from among our current faculty. Candidates:

  • Must have broad experience with academic administration, preferably as department head, although center and program directors may apply,
  • Should hold the rank of full professor, although in rare cases, associate professors with strong administrative experience will be considered, and
  • Must have talents and academic values that are consistent with the highest goals and aspirations of our faculty and

I have appointed an advisory committee of CAS faculty to review nominations and applications and provide consultation to me for this selection. As is standard practice, the committee has two heads from within Social Science and one from outside the division. The committee includes Jocelyn Hollander (Chair), Frances White and Li-Shan Chou. I am grateful that they have agreed to screen applicants and evaluate their qualifications for the position.

I hope to select an incoming Divisional Dean for Social Sciences by the beginning of May so that we can plan for a smooth transition.  The new Divisional Dean will begin a three-year term on July 1, 2017.

Applicant letters should be no longer than three pages in length and address:

  • Qualifications for the job,
  • Reasons for wanting to serve as Divisional Dean,
  • Major challenges you envision the division encountering in the near future,
  • Your philosophy regarding helping the division become ever better, and
  • How you would promote diversity, especially among faculty, within the division and the

Please send nominations to me as soon as possible. Application letters should be sent to Miriam Bolton (mbolton@uoregon.edu), along with a current c.v., no later than Friday, April 14. If you are interested in the position and wish to speak with me before you apply, please let me know.


Position Description:

The Divisional Dean (DD) position is the primary designee/delegate for the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences in almost all matters involving the administration and oversight of departments and programs in the DD’s assigned division (humanities, natural sciences, or social sciences).  The DD is the first contact for department and program heads for all Dean-level issues, coordinates Dean-level decisions with the Dean and the Dean for Faculty and Operations, and then helps communicate these decisions to departments and programs in their division.

Strategic Vision. The DD takes the major leadership role in working with department heads, faculty, and other Deans to identify and articulate the strategic vision for the future of the division and the College.  The DD is an ambassador for their division and the College-at-large. Examples of key activities connected with this responsibility are:

  1. Envisioning the future of the division in the context of the university’s mission and statewide and national forces affecting public higher education
  2. Working with divisional faculty and heads to understand strengths and challenges within the division and communicating those findings across the division and to university leadership
  3. Advocating for changes within departments and the College that sustain and enhance divisional departments’ national prominence and their attractiveness to students
  4. Leading the division during times of stress, which can range from severe budget constraints to GE strikes to outside political pressures
  5. Developing strategies for effective space use
  6. Serving as a divisional and college ambassador and advocate to groups within the university, including University Senate committees, Academic Affairs, Facilities Planning, and University Communications
  7. Serving as an ambassador to external members of the university community, including alumni, prospective students and their families, and funding agencies and foundations
  8. Collaborating with University Development staff to develop a vision for fundraising efforts and helping with those efforts
  9. Representing CAS and the Dean’s Office at key CAS- and University-wide events, particularly those connected to departments and programs in one’s division
  10. Participating in University-level committees (as assigned by the Dean) that are important to CAS and the future of the university, including such bodies as the Academic Leadership Team (ALT)

Management. The management issues coordinated by the DD are broad and diverse but are mainly connected to personnel and budget allocations:

Personnel

  1. Department head and program director appointments
  2. Department head and program director training on appropriate procedures as needed
  3. Department head and program director point person for addressing unusual issues within the university as they occur
  4. Faculty hiring, including negotiating start-up packages, allocation of endowed chairs and professorships, and faculty partner issues
  5. Faculty leaves, including sabbaticals, fellowships, or leaves for personal or medical reasons
  6. Faculty and OA review, including promotion and tenure review
  7. Retirements, resignations, and tenure-reduction program agreements
  8. Retention counter-offer arrangements
  9. Faculty grievance (formal and informal) decisions, and support with mediation of other personnel issues
  10. Merit, equity, and other salary increase oversight for faculty and OAs
  11. Annual CAS awards and grants evaluation and selection Budget
  12. Budget allocations to departments and programs
  13. Resource allocation requests by departments and programs
  14. Disbursement of a modest discretionary account for special requests
  15. Resource allocation for other CAS-level programs, such as CAS program grants and allocation of CAS endowment funds for undergraduate scholarships

Other Duties. Divisional Deans are often assigned other duties, as needed.  These can include:

  1. Overseeing and mentoring University-wide candidates for a particular distinguished scholarship
  2. Overseeing the Dean’s Advisory Committee and coordinating the Dean’s staff in preparation of promotion and tenure cases
  3. Serving as the primary contact and coordinator for graduate education in the College
  4. Serving on high-level University committees and bargaining teams, including ex officio membership on committees relating to each division

 

US16/17-19: A Resolution in Support of Transgender Students

Notice Given: 03/10/2017

Current Status: Approved 03/15/2017

Motion Type: Resolution

Sponsor: Alison Gash (Political Science)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the University of Oregon affirms that our core values include “equity and inclusion in a welcoming, safe, and respectful community.”

1.2 WHEREAS the Senate and our academic community and peers across the country are concerned about the recent increase in hate crimes and inflammatory language around the United States, including at the University of Oregon.

1.3 WHEREAS there have been repeated examples of threats against women, LGBTQAI-identified individuals, specific ethnic and religious groups, and immigrants during and after a divisive presidential election.

1.4 WHEREAS President Schill’s Nov. 15th message to the campus community maintains that “we condemn any threat or effort to intimidate anyone at the university. We are a community of scholars. Efforts to divide us based upon the color of our skin, our nationality, our immigration status, our abilities, our diversity of thought, our gender, or our sexual orientation must be called out and stopped.”

1.5 WHEREAS, the Departments of Justice and Education issued a “Dear Colleague” letter on May 13th, 2016 requiring that “a school must not treat a transgender student differently from the way it treats other students of the same gender identity.”

1.6 WHEREAS, the letter defines gender identity as “an individual’s internal sense of gender. A person’s gender identity may be different from or the same as the person’s sex assigned at birth.”

1.7 WHEREAS, ORS 659.850, similarly, prohibits gender identity discrimination in the state’s educational settings.

1.8 WHEREAS, on February 23rd President Trump issued new guidance on Title IX rescinding the May 13th language regarding transgender students.

1.9 WHEREAS, on February 28th the University of Oregon’s Title IX Coordinator posted language on Around the O re-affirming the university’s policy to continue to honor their commitments to transgender safety, equality and dignity:

Federal change in transgender protections will not affect UO

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE, the Senate of the University of Oregon, affirms the rights of transgender students to seek the benefits of a University of Oregon education with safety and dignity; and

2.2 THEREFORE, the Senate of the University of Oregon affirms the rights of transgender students to enjoy all the benefits, privileges and protections offered to any University of Oregon student or faculty member; and

2.3 THEREFORE, the Senate of the University of Oregon REQUESTS that President Michael Schill issue an email to all campus members publicly re-affirming the University’s commitment to transgender student safety, equality and dignity.

Senate Meeting Agenda – March 15, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • PAC12-ALC; Senate VP Chris Sinclair
  • State budget situation; ASUO President Quinn Haaga

3: 15 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, March 1, 2017

3:15 P.M.   New Business

4:20 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:21 P.M.   Reports

  • RRWG policy update – plan to vote April 12; (Merle Weiner/Missy Matella)
  • Grievance policies and procedures; Heather Quarles (RL & UAUO), Mariann Hyland (VPAA) and Bill Brady (HR).
  • Senate Task Force on the Bias and Education Response Team & call for resolution on Academic Freedom (Final report); Chris Chavez (Journalism)

4:58 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:59 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US16/17-18: New Policy Proposal: Recognition Naming of Academic Unit

Notice Given: 02/27/2017

Current Status: Approved 03/15/2017

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Bill Harbaugh (Economics)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the naming, or renaming, of an academic unit is considered a major event in the history of the institution, requiring due consideration, appropriate due diligence, and consultation; and

1.2 WHEREAS currently there is no UO policy providing guidance and structure for this process;

1.3 WHEREAS the UO Board of Trustees has sole authority to name any campus, school, college, department or equivalent in recognition of an individual or organization;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate approves the newly proposed Naming Academic Units policy as outlined in the Related Documents.


Related Documents:

Policy Concept Form

Draft Policy Proposal

US16/17-17: Proposed Changes to Honorary Degrees policy

UPDATE: New


Date of Notice: 02/27/2017

Current Status: Approved April 12, 2017

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Bill Harbaugh (Economics)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the process of awarding honorary degrees has become confusing and overly proscriptive over time; and

1.2 WHEREAS some technical changes are needed to remove obsolete references to OUS; and

1.3 WHEREAS final approval of Honorary Degrees rests with the UO Board of Trustees;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate approves the proposed Honorary Degree Policy changes as outlined in the related documents.


Related Document:

Policy Concept Form

Redline Policy Proposal

Clean Policy Proposal

Summary of Changes

New 17 pt chart – Redline

New 17 pt chart – Clean

US16/17-16: Approval of Curriculum Report, Winter Term 2017

Date of Notice: February 15, 2017

Current Status: Approved 03/15/2017

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Frances White (Anthropology), Chair of UO Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Winter 2017 Preliminary Curriculum Report for the University Senate Review;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate approve the Winter 2017 Curriculum Report as submitted by the Committee on Courses.


Related Documents:

Winter 2017 Preliminary Curriculum Report

Winter 2017 Final Curriculum Report

Dreamers Open Forum: Important Updates on Executive Orders

Faculty and staff invited to open forum on recent immigration rules changes.

UO faculty and staff are invited to an open forum to discuss the many challenges associated with recent federal changes in immigration rules. The event will be held on Tuesday, March 7 at the EMU Gumwood Room, 4:00 – 5:30 P.M.

Representatives from UO Human Resources, Academic Affairs, Federal Affairs, International Affairs and a local immigration law specialist will hold an open forum to provide insights and a formal space for faculty and staff to air concerns.

This event is open to all in the UO community.

Those interested in attending can RSVP through the UO Events Calendar.

University of Oregon Resources
Immigration FAQs

Update on Status of Executive Order
For Students
For Departments
For Employees
Responses to Immigration Enforcement
Allies and Supporters of UO’s Global Community
Allies and Supporters of UO DREAMers


Presidential Executive Order
White House: Office of the Press Secretary
1) Revised Travel Ban   (3/6/17)

2) Implementing Immediate Heightened Screening and Vetting of Applications for Visas and Other Immigration Benefits
…..(3/6/17)

For more information about DHS and the executive order, please visit: https://www.dhs.gov/executiveorders

Statement from APLU

APLU Statement on New Executive Order Temporarily Banning New Visas for Citizens of Six Countries (3/6/17)

Washington, DC – Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) issued released a statement regarding President Trump’s new executive order that temporarily prohibits the issuing of new visas to citizens of six countries.

Senate Meeting Agenda – March 1, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.    Call to Order

3:05 P.M.    Approval of Minutes, February 15, 2017

3:06 P.M.    Report

  • Selection of common reading books and faculty/senate input; Lisa Freinkel

3:22 P.M.    Announcements

  • Introductory Remarks, Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • Upcoming Senate and Committee Elections, Senate VP Chris Sinclair
  • University Update: Budget and Budget Planning, UO President Mike Schill

4:20 P.M.    New Business

  • Honorary Degrees policy update proposal; Angela Wilhelms
  1. Policy Concept Form
  2. Redline version
  3. Clean version
  4. Summary of Changes
  • Naming Academic Units policy proposal; Angela Wilhelms
  1. Policy Concept Form
  2. Draft Policy

4:30 P.M.    More Reports

  • Student Evaluations Task Force update; Bill Harbaugh, (Economics)

4:40 P.M.    Open Discussion

4:58 P.M.    Notice(s) of Motion
4:59 P.M.    Other Business
5:00 P.M.    Adjournment

Dreamers, Ducks & DACA Info-Session

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

12:00 – 1:00 P.M.

Cedar and Spruce rooms (EMU 231 & 232)

Purpose: Info-Session by UO Dreamers Working group

The info-session will be led by Ellen McWhirter (Counseling Psychology) and the UO Dreamers Working Group. It will present strategies for supporting UO undocumented, DACAmented, and students from mixed status families.

Brown Bag Lunch

Sponsored by: The Center for Latino/a & Latin American Studies (CLLAS)

US16/17-15: Student Misconduct and Teaching Evaluations policy proposal

Date of Notice: January 18, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Policy Proposal

Sponsor: Huaxin Lin (Math)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS academic honesty is an integral for maintaining an effective learning environment; and

1.2 WHEREAS to maintain an academically honest environment instructors must report academic misconduct to Student Conduct and Community Standards; and

1.3 WHEREAS accurate student course evaluations play a vital role in departmental governance and university hiring, retention, and promotion policies; and

1.4 WHEREAS a student who has been been accused of academic misconduct has an inherent conflict of interest regarding course evaluations; and

1.5 WHEREAS concerns about student course evaluations may deter faculty members from reporting academic misconduct, and thereby create a conflict of interest where none otherwise would exist; and

1.6 WHEREAS the current course evaluation system does not allow the university to retroactively remove student course evaluations after reports on those evaluations have been prepared;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that if a student has been accused of misconduct related to a class WITHIN ONE WEEK of the end of the final exam period shall have his/her numerical and narrative course evaluations for that class STRUCK FROM THE RECORD and from all averages of student evaluations; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the Registrar’s Office shall take all necessary actions to enforce this policy; and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the Registrar’s Office shall enforce this policy beginning in the Fall Quarter of 2017;

2.4 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that when the Registrar’s Office considers recontracting the course evaluation system, the ability to remove student evaluations retroactively, for a period of at least one quarter, shall be a priority.


Related Documents:

Power Point Statistical Data

Senate Meeting Agenda – February 15, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 ( Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.    Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks, Senate President Bill Harbaugh
    • Update on TPM
    • Update on administrative response to US16/17-07: Student Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Violence Complaint and Response policy proposal, Senate President Bill Harbaugh

3:20 P.M. Approval of Minutes, February 1, 2017

3:25 P.M. New Business

4:40 P.M. Open discussion

4:55 P.M. Notice(s) of Motion

5:00 P.M. Adjourn

 

US16/17-14: Repeal of US12/13-38: Term Limits for Senate Committees

Date of Notice: 01/18/2017

Current Status: Approved 02/15/2017

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Committee on Committees


Motion

Section I:

1.1 WHEREAS, the Committee on Committees has difficulty filling seats on committees; and

1.2 WHEREAS, some committees require multiple years for members to become proficient with the policies and procedures germane to the operation of those committees;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED, that the University Senate hereby repeals US12/13-38: Term Limits for Senate Committees


Related Documents:

Senate Committees with Term Limits – 02/08/17

This legislation would repeal the ‘umbrella’ term limits that were passed under motion 12/13-38.  Several committees have term limits specified in their charge/enabling legislation.  Were the repeal to pass, the following committees would still have the term limits.

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – February 1, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks, Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • Senate VP Chris Sinclair, Upcoming Senate & Committee Elections
  • Mattie Orrit, Exec Coord for PAC12 Academic Leadership Coalition

3:20 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, January 18, 2017

3:25 P.M.   New Business

4:00 P.M.   Open Discussion

4:20 P.M.   Reports

  • Retention; Doneka Scott (Undergraduate Studies)
  • “Rhabdo” incident; Tim Gleason (Journalism), Faculty Athletics Representative

4:58 P.M.   Notices(s) of Motion

“Condemnation of the university’s findings regarding political expression by faculty members.” Ofer Raban (Law)

4:59 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M. Adjourn

 

US16/17-13: Amendment to the Credit-Bearing General Limitations to the Bachelor’s Requirements

Date of Notice: 12/15/2016

Current Status: Approved 02/01/2017

Motion Type: Policy Proposal

Sponsor: Academic Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS, classes that focus on student engagement opportunities such as career, professional and personal development, and opportunities for community and social involvement can be valuable learning experiences; and

1.2 WHEREAS, these classes cannot be regularized as credit-bearing under the current class review process; and

1.3 WHEREAS, an amendment to the credit-bearing general limitations to the bachelor’s requirements will create a new category for these types of courses and set limits on their bearing credit towards the bachelor’s degree;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED, the University Senate approves to amend the credit-bearing general limitations to the bachelor’s requirements to create a new addition of category “d” of Point 4 of the “General Limitations” as follows:

Point 4. A maximum of 24 credits may be earned or accepted as transfer credits in the following areas (a, b, c, and d) with not more than 12 credits in any one area.

a) Lower-division professional-technical courses

b) Physical education and dance activity courses

c) Performance in music (MUP), except for majors in music

d)Applied and/or experiential courses, courses focusing on academic support skills or career/professional development courses; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED, for clarity, Point 7 of the “General Limitations” will be revised as follows:

Point 7. A maximum of 12 credits in TLC (University Teaching and Learning Center) courses and a maximum of 12 credits in FE (field experience) courses, whether earned or transferred, may be counted towards the bachelor’s degree. These limits (12 credits in TLC; 12 credits in FE) are independent of the limits of category 4(d).


Related Documents:

Amendment to the Credit-Bearing General Limitations to the Bachelor’s Requirements

US16/17-12: New Program Proposal: M.A. in Language Teaching Studies

Date of Notice: 12/21/2016

Current Status: Approved 02/01/2017

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor:
Graduate School; Scott L. Pratt, Dean
Graduate Council; Lara Bovilsky, Chair
Graduate School; Sara Hodges, Associate Dean


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS, the Graduate Council is charged by the University Senate to “advise the Dean of the Graduate School on matters pertaining to graduate study at the University of Oregon”; and

1.2 WHEREAS, the Graduate Council has responsibility for “providing for the maintenance of high standards of graduate instruction”; and

1.3 WHEREAS, the Graduate Council and the Graduate School have fully reviewed and endorsed the proposal for a new Master of Arts program in Language Teaching Studies and recommend that the Provost forward it to the University of Oregon Board of Trustees, the statewide Provosts’ Council, and the Higher Education Coordinating Commission for approval;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate approves the recommendation of the Graduate Council and the Graduate School.


Financial Impact:


Related Documents:

M.A. in Language Teaching Studies (LTS) program proposal

LTS Syllabi

LTS Faculty

External Review

US16/17-04: Revise Charge and Name of IAC Committee

Complete Motion

Update 11/30/2016:

Yesterday the Senate voted down an amendment which would have kept the IAC as the Senate watchdog over athletics, and voted overwhelmingly to dissolve the IAC immediately, and replace it with a Presidential Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee.

Continue reading US16/17-04: Revise Charge and Name of IAC Committee

US16/17-11: Clarify and Codify the University Committee on Sexual Orientation, Attraction, Gender Identity and Expression

Date of Notice: 11/28/2016

Current Status: Approved 02/01/2017

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Committee on Committees


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS, the Senate recently updated their bylaws to revise the membership, charge, and name of the University Committee on Sexual Orientation, Attraction, Gender Identity and Expression; and

1.2 WHEREAS, there has been significant confusion about the official and finalized version of the name, reporting structure/classification, membership, and charge of this committee;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED, the Senate hereby confirms the name of the committee as the University Committee on Sexual Orientation, Attraction, Gender Identity and Expression; the committee’s charge and responsibilities, membership structure and appointment of new members; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED, the Senate hereby confirms this committee will report to the University Senate; and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER MOVED, the Senate hereby confirms the committee’s charge and responsibilities, membership, meeting structure, and appointment/confirmation of new members, as outlined in the revised 17 pt. chart (please see Related Documents);


Related Documents:

Updated 17 pt. chart for University Committee on Sexual Orientation, Attraction, Gender Identity and Expression (SOAGIE)

Revised 17 pt. chart for SOAGIE_Jan. 31, 2017

Senate Meeting Agenda – January 18, 2017

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M. Call to Order

Introductory Remarks: Bill Harbaugh (Economics), Senate President

Approval of Minutes: November 16, 2016 and November, 30, 2016

3:10 P.M. New Business

  1. Discussion: US16/17-12: New Program Proposal: M.A. in Language Teaching Studies; Sara Hodges, Associate Dean of Grad School,  Scott L. Pratt, Dean of Graduate School and Lara Bovilsky (English), Chair of Graduate Council
  2. Discussion: US16/17-13: Amendment to the Credit-Bearing General Limitations to the Bachelor’s Requirements policy proposal; Frances White (Anthropology), Co-Chair of the Academic Council
  3. Discussion: Change the Policy on Policies to state that the UO President has the authority to enact temporary policies on other than an emergency basis?
  4. Discussion: US16/17-11: Clarify and Codify the University Committee on Sexual Orientation, Attraction, Gender Identity, and Expression
  5. Discussion: Repeal committee service term limits?
  6. US14/15-66: Hiring of Academic Executive Administrators; Senate Executive Committee (Please review Current Policy)
  7. US14/15-67: Review of Academic Executive Administrators; Senate Executive Committee (Please review Current Policy)

4:20 P.M. Reports

  1. Presidential Response to US16/17-07: Student Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Violence Complaint and Response policy; General Counsel, Kevin Reed
  2. Report: Bias Response Team task force ; Chris Chavez(Journalism), Chair of BERT Task Force
  3. Report: Roger Thompson on admissions (Enrollment Management et al.)

4:58 P.M. Notice(s) of Motion

4:59 P.M. Other Business

5:00 P.M. Adjourn

 

US16/17-07: Student Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Violence Complaint and Response policy proposal

Complete Motion

Continue reading US16/17-07: Student Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Violence Complaint and Response policy proposal

US16/17-06: Confirm Revised Committee on Committees Membership

Date of Notice: 10/01/2016

Current Status: Approved 11/02/2016

Motion type: Legislation

Sponsor: Chris Sinclair (Math), Chair of CoC


Motion

Section I

1.1   WHEREAS, the Senate recently updated their bylaws  to revise the membership of the Committee on Committees to include Classified Staff members and Officers of Administration;

Section II

2.1  BE IT THEREFORE MOVED, the Senate hereby confirms the appointment of the following new members to the Committee on Committees:

Chuck Theobald, Lewis Center for Neuroimaging
Ben Brinkley, CASIT
Holly Syljuberget, Business Affairs


Financial Impact: Cost Neutral

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 30, 2016

DRAFT

Location: EMU 145 & 146 CRATER LAKE Rooms
3:00-5:00 PM

3:00 PM  Call to Order

Introductory Remarks:

Bill Harbaugh (Economics & Senate President)

Approval of Minutes for Nov 16, 2016 – (postpone until Jan 18)

3:10 PM New Business

  1. Vote: US16/17-10: Approval of Curriculum Report, Fall Term 2016; Frances White (Anthropology), Chair of UO Committee on Courses
  2. Vote: US16/17-04: Revise Charge and Name of IAC Committee; Andy Karduna (Human Physiology)

3:40 PM Reports

  1. Update on Accreditation update: Ron Bramhall (AVP for Academic Excellence).
  2. IFS & PAC12-ALC: Robert Kyr (Music)
  3. Governor’s Campus Safety Workup Report; Robert Kyr (Music)
  4. IT Reorganization; Greg Bryant (College of Ed)

3:55 Open Discussion

A “facilitated conversation” on General Education; Charles Blaich and Kathy Wise from the Wabash Center of Inquiry (http://www.liberalarts.wabash.edu/).  They have conducted empirical research designed to learn what teaching practices, programs, and institutional structures support liberal arts education, and develop methods of assessing liberal arts education. Sponsored by Lisa Freinkel and Ron Bramhall.

Slide Presentation

4:55PM  Notice(s) of Motion
4:57PM  Other Business
5:00PM  Adjournment

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 16, 2016

DRAFT (revised Wednesday 11/16/2016)

Location: EMU 214 (REDWOOD Auditorium); 3:00-5:00 pm

Call to Order (3:00 PM)

Introductory Remarks, Senate President Bill Harbaugh

Approval of Minutes from Oct 19, 2016 and Nov 2, 2016

New Business (3:15 PM)

1. Vote: US16/17-05: Graduate Online & Hybrid Courses policy proposal; Scott Pratt (Philosophy & Graduate Council)

2. Vote: US16/17-07: Student Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Violence Complaint and Response policy proposal; Merle Weiner (Law) & the Senate Responsible Reporting Working Group

State of the University update (3:40 – 4:00)

Mike Schill (UO President)

More New Business

Motion to suspend the rules and allow debate and vote on both:

3. US16/17-08: Reaffirming our Shared Values of Respect for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; Senator Pedro Garcia-Caro (Romance Languages) et al. 

4: US16/17-09: Declaring UO a Sanctuary Campus; Lynn Stephen (Anthropology) et al.

Open Discussion

Reports (4:45 PM)    

1. Update on Accreditation update: Ron Bramhall (AVP for Academic Excellence).

2. IFS & PAC12-ALC: Robert Kyr (Music)

3. Governor’s Campus Safety Workup Report; Robert Kyr (Music)

4:55 pm    7.   Notice(s) of Motion

 4:57 pm    8.   Other Business

5:00 pm    9.   Adjournment

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 2, 2016

DRAFT

Location: Gerlinger Lounge; 3:00-5:00 pm

3:00 pm        Call to Order

1.1      Introductory Remarks, Senate President Bill Harbaugh

3:05 pm        Approval of Minutes

2.1      Oct 19, 2016

3:10        State of the University

3.1      A brief update from President Schill

3:30 pm        Reports

Update on UO Board of Trustees: Susan Gary, Kurt Willcox, and Will Paustian

3:45 pm    New Business

4.1   Vote: US16/17-06: Approve Revised Committee on Committees Membership; Chris Sinclair (Math), Senate Vice President

4.2   Vote: US16/17-04: Revise Charge and Name of IAC committee; Andy Karduna (Human Physiology), immediate past chair of IAC

4.3    Vote: US16/17-03: New Program Proposal: Spatial Data Science and Technology (Geography); Allison Schmitke (Education), Chair of Undergraduate Council and Chris Bone (Geography)

4.4    Discussion: US16/17-07: Student Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Violence Complaint and Response policy proposal; Merle Weiner (Law), Chair of Senate Responsible Reporting Work Group

4.5     Discussion: US16/17-05: Graduate Hybrid and Online Courses policy;  (Graduate Council)

4:50 pm    Open Discussion

5.1   Gen Ed Reform introduction

4:57 pm    Notice(s) of Motion

4:58 pm    Other Business

4:59 pm    Adjournment

US14/15-67: Review of Academic Executive Administrators

Date of Notice: 08/01/2014

Motion type: Policy Proposal

Current Status: Notice Given

Sponsor: Senate Executive Committee


Motion

BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate approves the “Interim Policy” — Review of Academic Administrators — as presented (see Related Documents) and its redlined version (see Related Documents), which will now be converted from temporary to permanent status.


Continue reading US14/15-67: Review of Academic Executive Administrators

US14/15-66: Hiring of Academic Executive Administrators

Date of Notice: 07/01/2014

Motion type: Policy Proposal

Current Status: Postponed until 01/13/2016

Sponsor: Senate Executive Committee


Motion

BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate approves the “Interim Policy” — Hiring of Academic Executive Administrators — as presented in the following document (see Related Documents) and its redlined version (see Related Documents), which subsequently, will be converted from temporary to permanent status.


Continue reading US14/15-66: Hiring of Academic Executive Administrators

US16/17-05: Policy on Graduate Online & Hybrid Courses: Student Engagement

Date of Notice: 10/07/2016

Motion Type: Policy Proposal

Current Status: Approved 11/16/2016

Sponsor: Graduate Council

Continue reading US16/17-05: Policy on Graduate Online & Hybrid Courses: Student Engagement

US16/17-03: New Program Proposal: Spatial Data Science & Technology (Geography)

Date of Notice: 08/30/2016

Motion type: Legislation

Current Status: Approved 11/02/2016

Sponsor: Alison Schmitke (Education), Chair of the Undergraduate Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS, the Undergraduate Council is charged by the University Senate with “reviewing, evaluating, and enhancing the quality of the University’s academic programs;” and

1.2 WHEREAS, the Undergraduate Council has the responsibility to “monitor, help shape, and approve new undergraduate programs (majors, minors, certificates) and changes to existing programs;” and

1.3 WHEREAS, the Undergraduate Council has fully reviewed and endorsed the proposal for a new Bachelor’s degree in Spatial Data Science & Technology (Department of Geography) and recommend that the Provost forward it to the University of Oregon Board of Trustees, the statewide Provost’s Council, and the Higher Education Coordinating Commission for approval;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate approves the BA and BS degrees in Spatial Data Science & Technology


Related Documents:

Spatial Data Science & Technology Proposal

Spatial Data Science & Technology Exec Summary

US16/17-02: Change to the Senate Bylaws regarding the Committee on Committees membership

Date of Notice: 09/21/2016

Motion type: Legislation

Current Status: Approved 10/19/2016

Sponsor: Senate Executive Committee


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS, many committees are staffed by persons from all Senate constituencies; and

1.2 WHEREAS, Classified Staff and Officers of Administration have knowledge about members of their respective constituencies, which is useful in filling committee vacancies;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED, that section 5.5 of the senate bylaws be amended as follows:

The Committee on Committees shall generally have 10-12 members from the Statutory Faculty as defined in the University of Oregon Constitution Section 2.2. Senate constituencies, with a majority coming from the Statutory Faculty as defined in the University of Oregon Constitution Section 2.2. To facilitate its work, the Committee membership should represent the broadest possible cross-section of campus academic units including CAS and the professional schools. The Senate Vice President is the chair of the Committee on Committees.


 

 

US16/17-01: Change to the Senate Bylaws for the order of Senate meeting agendas

Date of Notice: 09/21/2016

Motion type: Legislation

Current Status: Approved by the Senate 10/19/2016

Sponsor: Senate Executive Committee


Motion:

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS The Senate Bylaws requires that “The Order of Business” be conducted in a specific sequence, and;

1.2 WHEREAS changes requires a ⅔ vote of the Senate at the start of the meeting any time there is a need to re-order the agenda, such as when accommodating the schedule of a presenter, and;

1.3 WHEREAS Taking such votes is cumbersome and changing an already-posted agenda can be misleading to those who are attending part of the meeting for particular agenda items, and;

1.4 WHEREAS Allowing for prior modification of the order listed in the Bylaws, at the discretion of the President in consultation with the Senate Executive Committee, will be more efficient and transparent by allowing the the published agenda to show the actual order of business.

Section II

THEREFORE: The Senate modifies Article 3.3 of the Senate Bylaws as follows:

3.3 Senate Agenda. The Senate President shall set the agenda for each University Senate meeting in consultation with the Senate Executive Committee. The Senate agenda must be made public and available to the Senate at least 7 6 days prior to the Senate meeting. The Order of Business follows the sequence listed below. Senate meetings will include all items in the Order of Business listed below, however the sequence may be modified by the Senate President in consultation with the Senate Executive Committee. Section 3.3 shall be a Special Rule of Order as defined by Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised.


Background:

Current bylaws, Article 3, from

ARTICLE 3: RULES AND PROCEDURES

3.1 The Senate shall adopt its own rules and procedures. The Senate is free to adopt its own internal rules and procedures (i.e., Senate by-laws) except as explicitly stipulated in the University of Oregon Constitution Section 8.1. These exceptions are noted throughout this document.

3.2 The Senate shall follow Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised. The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the University Senate in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are consistent with these bylaws, the University of Oregon Constitution, and any special rules of order the University Senate may adopt. Senate rules must also adhere to all local, state and national laws.

3.2.1 Deviations from Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised. The Senate may choose to adopt rules that do not conform to Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised. Any deviations from Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall be presented to the Senate in the form of a motion and shall require a two-thirds affirmative vote to be adopted.

3.3 Senate Agenda. The Senate President shall set the agenda for each University Senate meeting in consultation with the Senate Executive Committee. The Senate agenda must be made public and available to the Senate at least 7 days prior to the Senate meeting. The Order of Business follows the sequence listed below. Section 3.3 shall be a Special Rule of Order as defined by Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised.

3.3.1 Call to Order.

3.3.2 Approval of the Minutes. The minutes from the previous meeting shall be brought before the Senate for discussion, revision if necessary, and formal approval by vote.

3.3.3 State of the University. The President of the University or his/her designee shall be granted this period at each Senate meeting to make a presentation.

3.3.4 New Business. New Business is the section of the Senate meeting where motions shall be brought to the Senate floor for discussion, consideration and action. Other action items, such as formal acceptance of the Curriculum Report from the Committee on Courses and motions from prior meetings that were tabled or sent back for revision shall also be presented in this part of the meeting.

3.3.5 Open Discussion. The Senate shall have the opportunity to discuss a topical issue of campus-wide concern during this part of the meeting. No formal action shall occur during the Open Discussion period and motions shall not be brought to the floor for consideration.

3.3.6 Reports. This shall be the section of the meeting when reports from University Standing or ad hoc Committees, Administrative Advisory Groups, Externally- Mandated Boards and other campus constituencies are presented.

3.3.7 Notice(s) of Motion. Notice shall be given for all motions to be discussed and acted upon by the Senate at a future meeting (See Article 3.7 for more information concerning Legislation and Resolutions).

3.3.8 Other Business.

3.3.9 Adjournment.

Sexual Assault Reporting Forum

Sponsored by the Senate Responsible Reporting Work Group

Friday, September 30 from 1-2:30 pm in 150 Columbia

Purpose: to gather student input to help the work group develop a university policy about supporting survivors and reporting sexual assaults

Come to the forum.  Learn what the work group is discussing. Share your perspective directly or anonymously. Join the conversation on this blog.

Agenda:

  1. Introduction of the work group
  2. Review of the key issues and how we’ve gotten to this point

Who on campus should be required to notify our Title IX Coordinator when they learn of a sexual assault?

If you tell an administrator, faculty member, or staff person about a sexual assault, what do you expect them to do?

Do we have enough confidential resources on campus where a sexual assault survivor can get help without having to formally report the incident?

If you experienced sexual assault and someone reported it confidentially, would you  want that confidential person to contact you and offer support resources?

3.           Student comments to the work group.

Information about support resources on campus will be available.