All posts by Betina

400 years young.

Senate Meeting Agenda – June 10, 2020

Location: Zoom (Please find link below the agenda)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.  Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron
  • Remarks; Senate Vice President & President-Elect Elliot Berkman

3:10 P.M. Approval of the Minutes

May 13, 2020

3:15 P.M. State of the University

  • President Michael Schill

3:40 P.M. New Business

Gina Biancarosa ( College of Education, Senator), Jay Butler (Business Affairs, Senator), Jen Reynolds (Law, Senator), Pedro Garcia-Caro (CAS – Romance Languages, Senator), Suzie Stadelman (University Counseling Center, Senator), Mark Whalan (CAS – English, Senator), Monique Balbuena (Honors College, Senator), Chris, Chavez (Journalism, Senator), Beth Harn (College of Education, Senator), Volya Kapatsinski (CAS – Linguistics, Senator), Hans Dreyer (CAS – Human Physiology, Senator), Sam Stroich (EMU Outdoor Program, Senator), Zhuo Jing-Schmidt (CAS – East Asian Languages & Literature, Senator), Melissa Brunkan (Music, Senator), Akiko Walley (College of Design, Senator), Keith Zvoch (College of Education, Senator), Eileen Otis (CAS – Sociology, Senator), Stephanie Prentiss (Business Affairs, Senator), Kristy Bryant-Berg (CAS – English, Senator), Anne Wood (CAS – Biology, Senator)

4:10 P.M. Awards

  • Classified Staff Award:
    • Cimmeron Gillespie (Campus Planning & Facilities Management), Intro by Steve Mital and Robyn Hathcock
    • Char Fentress (University Health Center), Intro by Allie Heaman
  • OA Award:
    • Herlinda (Linda) Leon (Romance Languages); Intro by Amalia Gladhart & Fabienne Moore
  • Shared Governance Award:
    • Sierra Dawson (Office of the Provost), Intro by Elizabeth Skowron & Jessica Cronce
    • Jennifer Espinola (Law School), Intro by Elizabeth Skowron & Jessica Cronce
    • Chris Esparza (Law School), Intro by Elizabeth Skowron & Jessica Cronce
  • Wayne Westling Award:
    • Kassia Dellabough (College of Design); Intro by Kristin Grieger

4:58 P.M. Open Discussion
4:59 P.M. Other Business
5:00 P.M. Adjourn


Topic: University Senate – June Mtg
Time: Jun 10, 2020 03:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://uoregon.zoom.us/j/303086146

Meeting ID: 303 086 146
One tap mobile
+16699009128,,303086146# US (San Jose)
+12532158782,,303086146# US (Tacoma)

US19/20-19: Approval of Curriculum Report, Spring 2020

Date of Notice: April 8, 2020
Current Status: Approved June 10, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Frances White, Chair of UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Spring Term 2020 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate review.

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate approves the Spring 2020 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UOCC (please see related documents).


Related Documents

UOCC_Spring 2020 Preliminary Curriculum Report

US19/20-18: Resolution Against Racism and Systemic Oppression

Date of Notice: June 2, 2020
Current Status: Approved June 10, 2020 (as amended in red below)
Motion Type: Resolution
Sponsor(s): Elizabeth Skowron (CAS – Psychology, Senate President)
Elliot Berkman (CAS – Psychology, Senate Vice President and President-Elect)
Isaiah Boyd (ASUO President 2020-2021)

Gina Biancarosa ( College of Education, Senator), Jay Butler (Business Affairs, Senator), Jen Reynolds (Law, Senator), Pedro Garcia-Caro (CAS – Romance Languages, Senator), Suzie Stadelman (University Counseling Center, Senator), Mark Whalan (CAS – English, Senator), Monique Balbuena (Honors College, Senator), Chris, Chavez (Journalism, Senator), Beth Harn (College of Education, Senator), Volya Kapatsinski (CAS – Linguistics, Senator), Hans Dreyer (CAS – Human Physiology, Senator), Sam Stroich (EMU Outdoor Program, Senator), Zhuo Jing-Schmidt (CAS – East Asian Languages & Literature, Senator), Melissa Brunkan (Music, Senator), Akiko Walley (College of Design, Senator), Keith Zvoch (College of Education, Senator), Eileen Otis (CAS – Sociology, Senator), Stephanie Prentiss (Business Affairs, Senator), Kristy Bryant-Berg (CAS – English, Senator), Anne Wood (CAS – Biology, Senator)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS we are a nation in crisis; and

1.2 WHEREAS racism has long been and continues to be deeply rooted in our society; and

1.3 WHEREAS the University of Oregon has in the past celebrated racist individuals and institutions and, despite some progress, remains an institution with more work to do including eliminating microaggressions and other forms of exclusion consistently endured by Black students, faculty, and staff; and

1.4 WHEREAS historic and ongoing structural and systemic barriers in our society prevent Black Americans and communities of color from thriving in our country; and

1.5 WHEREAS the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and other public health crises are disproportionately borne by Black Americans and other communities of color; and

1.6 WHEREAS the senseless deaths of Black Americans continue at the hands of those who swore oaths to protect and serve; and

1.7 WHEREAS the senseless deaths of Black Americans continue at the hands of vigilantes, white supremacists, and white nationalists; and

1.8 WHEREAS the murders of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, and David McAtee are only the most recent examples of the brutality of law enforcement and white vigilantes against Black men and women and the devaluing of Black lives; and

1.9 WHEREAS it is each of our responsibilities to ensure we understand the history of our own privileges, racism, and biases and the impact of our actions, or lack thereof, on the Black community, Native people, and other communities of color; and

1.10 WHEREAS decades of scholarship from faculty and students around the globe including many at the University of Oregon have documented but not succeeded in eliminating the pervasive existence, and insidious effects of structural racism; and

1.11 WHEREAS it is our responsibility as an academic institution to study, teach, and learn from the effects of structural racism and white nationalism on Black Americans, all people of color, and the wellbeing of our democracy.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we in the strongest possible terms stand together to condemn the long-standing murder by police and other racially-motivated violence, injustice, and oppression that targets the Black community as well as state violence against peaceful protestors; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all those with privileges and power will take full responsibility to continuously work in partnership with communities of color to recognize, examine, and address our own beliefs, biases, and privileges as we reaffirm our values of justice and equity; and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we will hold our leaders accountable to evaluate themselves and the systems over which they have power to actively combat and dismantle racism and oppression in all their forms and to embrace unity, build bridges between communities, and heal divisions; and

2.4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate Leadership will charge all Senate academic committees with determining how they can best support fulfillment of our obligation to educate the next generation of leaders about these issues. Specific steps the Senate committees should consider taking, in consultation with the academic units, include but are not limited to:

  1. Revisiting their mission and charge to determine if any changes are necessary to appropriately support this work;
  2. Identifying and promoting existing scholarship and curricula, such as the Black Studies minor, that illuminate and mitigate structural racism and oppression and their effects on society, and also determining if there is a lack of such work and then facilitating its development;
  3. Supporting university-wide efforts to create and maintain inclusive learning environments that educate students, faculty, and community members;
  4. Advocating both faculty appointments and structural support for teaching and research that centers on the history of racial oppression and the ongoing and pervasive impacts of structural racism, and active support and retention of faculty, staff, and administrators of color;
  5. Encouraging the teaching of US: Difference Inequality, and Agency courses across all departments, including units that have rarely taught cultural and equity literacy courses and assess the degree to which DIA courses meet their stated purpose;
  6. Considering the addition of a new requirement, such as a course in Indigenous, Race and Ethnic Studies, and other incentives for students to study and participate in experiential learning in the areas of cultural and equity literacy;
  7. Advocating both faculty appointments and structural support for Indigenous, Race and Ethnic Studies and other expert teachers and scholars of race and power, and endorsing the value of faculty teaching development and lifelong learning opportunities about the history of racial oppression and the ongoing and pervasive impacts of structural racism;

2.5  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate will invite an annual report from the Office of the Provost sharing disaggregated student outcomes (enrollment and achievement) across colleges and departments, and that institutional data be regularly disaggregated to help colleges and departments track and improve the achievement gap  for Black students and other students of color compared to white students; and

2.6  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate will invite an annual report from the Center for Multicultural Academic Excellence, the Multicultural Center, the Ombuds Office, the Dean of Students, and the Office of Investigations and Civil Rights Compliance on the kinds of experiences students report in UO classrooms and campus, both ones that increase a sense of belonging and that exclude or negatively impact Black, Indigenous, Latinx, Asian, and Pacific Islander students, to heighten faculty awareness of how their teaching practices differentially impact students; and

2.7  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate urges the university to create an independent civilian oversight process for the University of Oregon Police Department with investigatory and disciplinary authority; and

2.8  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate urges the university to present to the Senate a written analysis of whether the University of Oregon should have a sworn law enforcement agency (i.e., UOPD) or an unarmed public safety structure; and

2.9 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate will encourage the Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History to expedite their work, and to submit bold recommendations on removing or radically recontextualizing aspects of our shared material environment on campus that continue to honor the ideologies of white supremacy and/or settler colonialism; and

2.10 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these will not simply be words on a page but must represent enduring structural change and a willingness to dismantle systems that perpetuate racial inequities to create justice for the Black community. The Senate hereby commits itself to revisiting each action presented in Section II of this resolution by the end of the 2020-2021 Academic Year. This report will be prepared by the Senate Executive Committee and submitted to the Daily Emerald for publication.

 

 

Academic Council Message to Faculty

6-4-20

Dear Colleagues

On 6-2-20, the ASUO Executive began circulating an “Open Letter to the University of Oregon” that expressed great concern about fellow students, especially students of color, and the unprecedented stress they are experiencing as a result of the local and national unrest over George Floyd’s murder, combined with the pandemic. In that letter, they call upon professors and course instructors to make finals “optional and non-grade diminishing” as a show of empathy and support for students. You may already be aware of this as we’ve been hearing from faculty, and we know faculty are hearing from students about this so we wanted to offer guidance on academic options available to you.

Below, we outline the tools available to both faculty and students that provide flexibility for academic coursework during these particularly trying circumstances.

First, we want to acknowledge the extraordinary time we are in, and that this is undoubtedly affecting many students’ abilities to cope with the varying demands in their lives. We also know that this particular moment is having a disproportionately negative effect on Black students, and students of color in ways that few can truly comprehend.

And we know the same is true for faculty and GEs. In pivoting to remote instruction for Winter term finals and all of Spring term, you accomplished a feat that seemed impossible at the time. To accomplish that while dealing with your own challenges from working at home, caring for children or relatives, continuing your own schoolwork, or dealing with loss and uncertainty is nothing short of remarkable. On top of all of that, this national crisis is affecting many of you in ways many of us can’t truly know. As representatives of the Academic Council and as your colleagues, we stand with you and are eager to support you however we can.

With all of this, we aren’t quite done. We know we’ve asked a great deal from you and put boundaries around instruction that some of you disagree with. We are committed to balancing the many competing needs of faculty, GEs, and students. Today, we are coming to you again to ask for your help in supporting our students. For many of our students, you represent a safe space, a tether to some kind of normalcy, a sane voice of leadership or just someone to see and hear them. We are asking that you continue being that pillar of support for your students, and that you find ways in the closing days of this term to respond with empathy and flexibility. In that, we are echoing Provost Phillips’ recent plea for us all to provide comfort and care for our students and for each other. We’d also like to offer some specific guidance in response to the open letter from the ASUO.

While we are not asking at this late date for you to completely rethink how you approach the end of the term for projects or finals, we want to remind you of changes we’ve already made that allow all of us  the flexibility in closing out the term successfully.

The first specific ask is simply to hear your students. In many cases, they just need someone, you, to really hear what they are going through and offer a way through it. If they come to you for help, assume the best in them and listen. And then try to help them find solutions to get through the next thing. For many of your students, you will be the one that gets them through the next tough moment. This recent post from the Teaching Engagement Program provides some helpful ways to engage with students around the recent national events. Know that we ask this of you in the context of what is possible for you, given your situation – we do not mean to ignore the challenges and constraints you face, nor the important role you play in students’ lives.

Next, offer flexibility where it is possible and makes sense in your class. Again, assume the best intentions of your students and find ways to help where possible. To that end, here are some reminders of policies already in place, and suggestions for other ways to offer flexibility:

  • The Academic Continuity expectations in place state the following: “instructors may modify course expectations such that required work is reduced or grading schemes are adjusted provided they can still meet course learning objectives.” This gives latitude for instructors to make changes to the syllabus for the advantage of students even this late in the term.

 

  • Related to the point above, you can modify the final in terms of points, duration, format, or other ways that would ease stress on students. Consider the purpose of the final and how that might be accomplished in different ways.

 

  • You can make the final optional and allow students to accept their grade to date.

 

  • You can reopen closed assignments or extend assignment deadlines to provide opportunities for students.

 

  • You can waive late penalties or waive lowest grades for some assignments.

 

  • You can relax grading criteria, e.g., by lowering grade cutoffs.

 

  • Remind students that they have the P/N option available to them for all courses and have until July 16, 2020 to change from graded to P/N. This option can prevent a negative effect on their GPA.

 

  • As a last resort, you can grant an “Incomplete”. We note it as a last resort because it can create delayed work for faculty and students, and potentially delay students from moving on to higher level classes. We do want to clarify here that the incomplete policy says the following:

An incomplete may be issued when the quality of work is satisfactory, but some minor yet essential requirement has not been completed, for reasons acceptable to the instructor. Faculty and students should develop a contract outlining the requirements and specific deadlines for making up the incomplete. Contracts should be filed in the departmental office through which the course is taught.”

We interpret this to mean that the granting of an incomplete is at the discretion of the instructor. Instructors and GEs might consult with their heads if they offer the incomplete option and clarify who will grade the work when it is submitted.

These represent options for you to respond with empathy and flexibility. We encourage you to let your students know that you have received these messages and how you intend to respond.

We regret coming to you late in the term with this. But as with so much lately, the situation changes daily. Thank you for all you are doing to support our students. Please do not hesitate to reach out to the Academic Council at any time with your thoughts, concerns or questions.

Sincerely,

Members of the Academic Council

Jagdeep Bala
Senior Instructor, Director of Undergraduate Studies, Psychology,
Chair of Scholastic Review Committee

Ali Emami
Senior II Instructor of Finance, LCB-Finance Department,
Chair of Senate Budget Committee 

Dorothee Ostmeier
Professor, German and Scandinavian, Folklore and Public Culture,
Chair of Graduate Council

Mike Price
Senior Instructor, Assistant Department Head, Mathematics,
Chair of Academic Requirements Committee

Jana Prikryl
Instructor/Advisor/Director, Biology and General Science,
Chair of Undergraduate Council

Margaret Sereno
Associate Professor, Psychology,
Chair of University Library Committee

Carol Silverman
Professor, Anthropology,
Chair of Faculty Personnel Committee

Emily Simnitt
Senior Instructor I, English,
Co-Chair of Core Ed Council

Christopher Sinclair
Associate Professor, Math,
Co-Chair of Core Ed Council

Elizabeth Skowron
Professor, Psychology,
Senate President

Frances White
Professor and Dept Head, Anthropology,
Chair of Committee on Courses
Chair of Academic Council

Janet Woodruff-Borden
Executive Vice Provost for Academic Affairs,
Office of the Provost

Ron Bramhall
Associate Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, Office of the Provost,
Provost designee

 

 

US19/20-16: Resolution to adopt an Open Access Scholarship Policy

Date of Notice: May 12, 2020
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion Type: Resolution
Sponsor: David Condon, Psychology
Margaret Sereno, Psychology
Miriam Rigby, Librarian
Beth Harn, College of Education
Andrew Kern, Biology
Franny Gaede, Librarian


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the University of Oregon is a public university dedicated to excellence in research and scholarship; and

1.2 WHEREAS commercial and society publishers have used copyright restrictions to limit the distribution and access to scholarly works; and

1.3 WHEREAS the Faculty of the University of Oregon believe it is important to make the products of that work widely and publicly available for the public benefit.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate endorses a resolution supporting the development of an Open Access Scholarship Policy by the Senate Subcommittee on Open Access in the 2020-2021 academic year, per recommendations outlined in the Related Documents.


Related Documents

Senate Meeting Agenda – May 13, 2020

Location: Zoom (Please see link to meeting below the agenda)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron

3:05 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:10 P.M.   State of the University

  • President Michael Schill
  • Provost Patrick Phillips

3:30 P.M.   Open Discussion (senators may submit questions in advance to senatecoordinator@uoregon.edu and senatepres@uoregon.edu, or at meeting)

  • Academic Continuity Guidelines (April revisions/additions) & Remote Education, Spring & Summer; 2020 Slides
    • Academic Council, Chair (Frances White) & Members
    • Janet Woodruff-Borden, Executive Vice Provost
    • Ron Bramhall, Assoc Vice Prov Academic Exec
    • Kate Mondloch, Interim Dean Grad School
    • Doneka Scott, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education and Student Success
    • Mark Watson, UO Libraries

4:00 P.M.    New Business

  • Updates: Open Access; David Condon, Mark Watson, et al

4:15 P.M.   Reports

  • Core Ed Council; Chris Sinclair/Emily Simnitt
  • SOAGIE; SJ Wilhelm (Community Director, University Housing), Slides

4:25 P.M. Notice(s) of Motion

  • US19/20-16: Resolution to adopt an Open Access Scholarship Policy; David Condon (Psychology), Margaret Sereno (Psychology), Mark Watson (UO Libraries)
  • US19/20-17: Creation of a School of Languages and Global Studies; Zhuo Jig-Schmidt (East Asian Languages & Literature)

4:25 P.M. Other Business

4:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION – AWARDS
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn


Topic: University Senate – May Mtg
Time: May 13, 2020 03:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://uoregon.zoom.us/j/164017529?pwd=eTdyRHk3OXkvcFhCekdrQjRvdk1vQT09

Meeting ID: 164 017 529
Password: 235037
One tap mobile
+16699009128,,164017529# US (San Jose)
+13462487799,,164017529# US (Houston)

Academic Council: Updated Academic Continuity Expectations

The Academic Council met 4-22-20 to discuss academic continuity planning for the duration of the COVID-19 disruption. The Academic Continuity Plan approved by the Academic Council on March 4, 2020 (https://senate.uoregon.edu/2020/03/05/academic-continuity-plan-for-the-coronavirus-health-emergency/) remains in effect until the academic disruption is declared over by the Academic Council except as modified below. The modifications and new expectations below are in effect beginning Summer 2020 and until the Academic Council declares the end of the Academic Disruption or approves new modifications.

(Note: “Instructor” is used in this document to indicate “Instructor of Record”, which may be instructors or GEs.)

Assumptions Guiding These Changes

  • Changes made to Winter and Spring had to consider the fact that we had less time to plan, and were changing expectations for students and instructors that they had not accounted for
  • We know how summer term will operate and have time to plan for that
  • We will know more about how fall term will operate and will have time to plan for that
  • We have policies governing student engagement and contact hours and should follow those as closely as possible
  • Students will be able to make choices about summer and fall courses that account for their specific situation, so we need fewer accommodations and we will insist on our high expectations for courses
  • Some students will still be in less than ideal situations for summer and beyond, and Instructors should try to accommodate them  where reasonable
  • In a non-pandemic scenario, instructors of courses would have been expected to deliver content and engage with students during scheduled class times
  • In a scenario where all or some courses are remote, some instructors will be in less than ideal situations in terms of workspaces, teaching materials, and technology.

Modifications to Current Expectations

The following expectation from the March 4th Academic Continuity Plan is modified by the Academic Council as indicated below:

  • March 4, 2020 language: Requires instructors with attendance or participation polices to modify those such that attendance is not counted in grades and participation points could be made up or waived.
  • April 29, 2020 update: Instructors may count attendance and participation as part of the grade provided they have reasonable ways for students to complete make-up assignments for missed class sessions or participation points without loss of credit. Instructors must communicate these policies in their syllabi. Instructors who are unsure whether they are making reasonable accommodations should confer with their unit heads for guidance.

Continuation of Grading Policy Adjustments

The following grading policy adjustments approved by the Academic Council on March 25, 2020 for Spring term are continued by the Academic Council until modified or disruption is declared over. These adjustments are in effect for undergraduate and graduate courses except for graduate courses offered in the JD and LLM programs in the Law School, which are under a different policy passed by the Law School.

  • The deadline to change grade-optional courses from graded to P/N (pass/no pass) will be extended 30 days after the date that final grades are posted for that term.
  • The option to change from graded to P/N will be available for all courses that are designated as graded only and for grade optional courses.
  • Courses that are designated as P/N only will remain as they are. There will be no additional options for these courses.
  • Any course grade of P will be counted as a P* grade for the purposes of the policies below. This means that courses taken as P/N can count toward graduation requirements. Credits earned in courses offered only as P/N will use the P* designation.
    • Undergraduate: “Students must earn 168 transfer or University of Oregon credits with grades of A, B, C, D, or P*.”
    • Graduate Master’s degrees: “A minimum of 24 credits must be University of Oregon graded (not pass/no pass) credits.”
  • Instructors of record shall maintain letter grades throughout the term and record final course grades for students in all courses).
  • If a student chooses P/N by the deadline, grades will be recorded as follows:
    • Undergraduate: a P grade for a C- or above, and an N grade for a D+ or below.
    • Graduate: a P grade for a B- or above, and an N grade for a C+ or below.
    • Law: a P grade for a D- or above, and an N grade for an F.
  • Departments are asked to waive any requirements that (a) limit how P/N courses count toward the major; that (b) require specific grades for courses that count toward the major; or that (c) serve as prerequisites for other courses. This is especially important for cases where the lack of such a waiver will require students to enroll in an additional term or delay graduation for students. Departments are to report how they want P/N grades from any term during the disruption to count toward requirements to the Registrar’s Office by May 6, 2020. The Registrar’s Office will send a link to a webform for reporting this information. The Registrar’s Office will reach out to departments directly regarding prerequisites.

New Expectations

The following new expectations are approved by the Academic Council as of April 29, 2020 and effective beginning Summer 2020. These expectations follow two principles: first, that we have policies on student engagement and contact hours that instructors should follow, and, second, that we have time for students and instructors to plan for new expectations that will improve remote education in Summer 2020 and beyond.

  • Courses that were originally scheduled for online and coded with “V” (for virtual) shall be taught as planned.
  • It is expected that non-WEB courses shall provide live engagement during the scheduled meeting times as defined by the Student Engagement Inventory for the course. Instructors may make the following adjustments for courses that have to be offered remotely or partially remotely (some face-to-face and some remote):
    • Live engagement can take many different forms. For example, it might include a mix of content delivery, facilitated discussions on Zoom, facilitated discussion board discussions, breakout sessions for students on Zoom, group project time with the instructor available for guidance. The following are not suitable replacements for contact under current policy:
      • Posting of supplemental content materials
      • Announcements
      • Assignments
      • Office hours, online or otherwise
    • Whatever the mix, at least 50% of the live engagement should include planned and structured content delivery or discussion.
    • Where appropriate and possible, instructors should create opportunities for student-student interaction.
    • Whatever the mix, instructors should be available to students during each scheduled class period. If instructors are not going to be available during a scheduled class period, they should treat that as a “cancelled” class meeting and handle that as they would during a regular, non-remote term with appropriate notifications to students and anyone else as required by the department, and appropriate replacement of that instructional time.
  • Instructors should schedule and be available to meet during office hours outside the scheduled class time in accordance with department and/or school/college policies on office hours.

Technology Tools and Software
It is required that Canvas be used for all courses during the academic disruption. Instructors shall publish their Canvas sites and use them to post materials, collect assignments, provide alternatives to lectures/discussions for students who are absent from class, and post grades. Students and Instructors are required by university policy to use their Uoregon accounts for university business including instruction, and must not share their credentials with anyone.

Instructors may use other FERPA-compliant software to supplement Canvas use. These include the UO licensed versions of Office 365, which includes One Drive and Teams, Zoom and Dropbox. You can find out more about acceptable technology tools and software here: https://is.uoregon.edu/remote.

 

 

Ian Winbrock Candidate Statement 2020

As a community organizer and UO Classified Employee, I believe that people have power when they are able to represent themselves. This is particularly true of underrepresented viewpoints, voices and faces that are institutionally marginalized.

I want to represent you and give you a greater voice in the Senate.

The workings of the University system are complex, but our messages don’t have to be.

Classified staff deserve equal representation on everything the University does from investments in our personnel to executive-level search committees, and layoffs. Too long have our voices been excluded or dismissed.

Since 2018, I’ve been a Program Assistant for the Center for Science Communication Research (SCR), partially funded by the Presidential Fund for Excellence. In my role, I’ve managed budgets, created financial projections, written grants, drafted a financial MoU for my Center and coordinated with the office of the President and the Office of the Provost on funding, reporting and finances.

Prior to joining the University I spent five years working in politics and public policy, managing economic and workforce development programs for disadvantaged youth in the City of West Sacramento, CA. I understand politics and the political process, how to navigate systems of power and advocate for the interests to those who cannot advocate for themselves. My full resume is here.

I currently serve on the board of several local non-profits, providing my expertise to manage projects and programs that are mitigating the social, health and economic impacts of COVID-19.

During this time of dire financial uncertainty, we need someone who is: compassionate, understands complex financial modeling and projections, comfortable working with the University Administration and experienced voicing the perspectives and needs of underrepresented voices.

I’d be humbled to be one of your representatives to the Senate and work with you to ensure that all classified staff are represented.

In Solidarity,

Ian Winbrock

Perri Schodorf Candidate Statement 2020

As a department manager, I have a wide range of experience working with various departments across campus. Even though I’ve only been an OA at UO for a couple of years, I have university administrative experience from my previous institutions. At Bellevue College I served as the Assistant Director for International Admissions and was part of the International Student Leadership Council. At Portland Community College I served as the International Admissions Coordinator for all campuses and centers, and was on the Diversity Committee at Rock Creek. I hold an M.A. in German Language & Literature from UO, and an M.A. in Education from PSU with a focus on working with international, permanent resident, and refugee/asylee students. Due to the constantly changing environment within international education, I have a great deal of experience with faculty/staff mediation, organizational restructuring and transition, and updating processes and procedures. In my spare time I like to read, sew, and go to concerts.

Spencer Smith Candidate Statement 2020

I have been affiliated with the UO since 2011 when I enrolled as an undergraduate student. Upon graduation I returned as a classified staff member within University Housing in 2016 before moving into my current OA position as the Financial Wellness Coordinator and Financial Aid Counselor in 2019. In my professional roles at the UO, I have had the opportunity to connect with front line workers, faculty members along with leadership. I have served as a bridge builder between different departments and employee groups. As a member on the OA Council, we need colleagues to listen, advocate and provide solutions.

If elected into the OA Council, I will utilize my strengths–empathy, harmony, woo to represent OA’s and advocate for our employee group and help find solutions. Each of our jobs, may have different day-to-day operations but we are united in one cause—to be ensure that UO students receive a high-quality of education, while ensuring they are safe, inclusive and positively contribute to their communities as a Duck and beyond. Thank you for your consideration.

Samuel Galli Candidate Statement 2020

Hello. My name is Samuel Galli and I work as a Library Tech 2 at the Allen Price Science Commons & Research Library with the UO Libraries. I am running for University Senate – classified staff position, Term 2020-2022. Shared governance is a vital part of the UO campus leadership. Staff bring a necessary perspective to the table that helps to drive decisive action, influence change, and supports the values of not only classified staff, but also students, OAs, and the faculty of our campus.

I have been working at the University of Oregon for nearly 4 years. I have spent that time working to promote and support Classified Staff within my campus unit. Since starting at the Libraries, I have served as a contact with our SIEU Local 085 to get important information and resources to staff working in my area and beyond. The last two years I have served on the Libraries Classified Staff Advisory Committee (CSAC), which serves as a connective bridge between classified staff and Library admin. During this last year, in this role, I’ve sat in and advocated for staff on our Library Council.

I want to take the next step and serve on the University Senate to continue to support Classified Staff across this campus. In these insecure and trying times, having your voice be heard is what makes a difference. I wish to do my part to make this campus and community the best it can be.

Thank you.

Don Daniels Candidate Statement 2020

I am a linguist who conducts field research on the indigenous languages of Papua New Guinea. I have been interested in language and culture for as long as I can remember. I am particularly intrigued by the ways that languages change over time, and the ways they do and don’t vary. This is the focus of my academic research, and it has given me a solid grounding in empirical and theoretical argumentation. Living with and befriending rural Papua New Guineans has also also taught me a great deal about the realities faced by marginalized people around the world, and I would approach serving on the Senate with a view to enhancing outcomes for communities that have historically been marginalized in the university context. I am a junior faculty member, and I would also bring to the Senate the perspective of someone currently at the bottom of the academic ladder.

Avinnash P. Tiwari Candidate Statement 2020

My work as a Career Instructor allows me to focus on serving students in the classroom and especially serving students facing barriers to their education. Currently, I teach Writing Composition courses, including a section for students receiving advising through the Center for Multicultural Academic Excellence where I get to work with primarily first generation students, and serve as the Acting Director of the new Black Studies Program. My position as Politics Chair on our faculty union’s executive council also gives me an opportunity to push for our work as faculty serving students to be better understood and supported in our community and State. My work will always center on students and I believe this perspective can enhance this committee’s engagement in serving our students and honoring our role as a public institution of higher education.

Jessica Cronce Candidate Statement 2020

I am running for the position of representative on the Faculty Advisory Committee and on the UO Senate. Over the full course of my career, I have been a classified staff member, an officer of administration, a graduate student, a pro tempore instructor, a career non-tenure track research faculty member, and (now) a tenured faculty member. These roles/experiences give me a unique perspective on the vital importance of each member of our university community and to the competing priorities that can create challenges (and opportunities) in a resource-limited environment. Since joining the Department of Counseling Psychology and Human Services faculty in 2015, I have served on committees at all levels of the institution, including (currently) the Undergraduate Council, as well as directed the Family and Human Services undergraduate major for 3 years. I am also a member of the UO Provost’s Teaching Academy and the UO Leadership Academy as well as a steward for United Academics, collectively demonstrating my dedication to fulfilling the missions of the University through a commitment to continuous professional improvement and shared governance. In all domains of my work, I am committed to uplifting diversity, increasing equity, and creating more inclusive academic environments. If elected, I look forward to working collaboratively with my colleagues to develop/refine/enact policies that support equity and excellence with efficiency and to representing the views of faculty to the Senate, the President, and other administrative officials.

 

 

Kristin Koch Candidate Statement 2020

Hello, my name is Kristin Koch. I have worked in Housing at the University of Oregon for the past 17 years. During this time, I have had the unique experience of hiring, training, and supervising over 2000 students and staff. This experience gives me a great connection to the pulse on campus, from many different perspectives. Food service employ’s one of the most diverse work groups on campus. Working with classified staff and student staff from a wide range of backgrounds and experience’s.

I am running for a senate position to help shape the policies and procedures for the University of Oregon, in relation to how we can help staff and students set up for success in the future.  The past cannot be changed; the future is yet to be determined.

Henry Wear Candidate Statement 2020

I’m a native of the Pacific Northwest and graduate of the University of Oregon, University of Kansas, and University of South Carolina. I came ‘home’ to the University of Oregon in the Fall of 2019 after spending the previous three years working at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia. At Deakin, I was an Assistant Professor in the Sports Management program and Co-Director of the Sports Management Master’s degree program. My current role with the School of Journalism and Communication is to teach and advise students in both sports communication and public relations. This has led to the development and implementation of two new sports specific undergraduate classes in the school and the ongoing development of a new graduate degree focused on sports media and communication. Prior to my transition to academia I spent time working in college athletics at the University of Kansas and the University of South Carolina, specializing in student athlete academic services. I’ve also worked in professional baseball, spending time with Kansas City Royals in their Media Relations and Communication department, and Major League Baseball’s social media team.

I believe it’s the combination of my academic and professional background that make me a strong candidate for the Intercollegiate Athletic Advisory Committee position. I have worked directly with student athletes at high profile programs at large universities. I have a strong understanding and appreciation of what their lives look like at our university, and the systems and commitments they need to navigate. Through teaching, researching, and working in the sport industry I’m also perpetually aware of trends, institutions, and current events. Having worked with sport leagues and teams at various levels across Europe, Australia, and India, as well as nationally in professional, semi-pro, and amateur sport I have a strong sense of how different types of sport organizations operate and how various stakeholders engage with teams, leagues, and universities. I believe this global, big picture perspective would be an asset to the Intercollegiate Athletic Advisory Committee, and I look forward to contributing in any way I can.

Most importantly I am passionate about this university and community. As an undergraduate student here many years ago I experienced first-hand how impactful this place can be. The university whole-heartedly embraces and values everyone’s voices and contributions to create a community. College athletics plays a vital role in that process, and as countless research has shown, can be a catalyst to bring people together time after time. I am grateful for my education here and am proud to be back working in a place I love so much. I would be honored to contribute to the University Senate in a position where I could leverage my background and experience in a positive way.

Michelle Wood Candidate Statement 2020, IAAC

When I first arrived at UO, I was asked if I would like to serve on the Athletic Committee and I pointed out that I didn’t actually follow sports very much.   A few decades later, my perspective has been changed a lot by a particular few graduate students (you know who you are) and a remarkable encounter with “Coach B”.    I still don’t go to that many games but I have seen what having a premier sports program has meant in the daily lives of my students.  For grad students especially, game days and exciting track events provide low cost relaxation and great camaraderie. So, now I am an enthusiastic fan.  Great teams draw donors and students. That said, athletics is a big source of tension at a University like ours.  Concerns over the treatment of student athletes, issues around priorities and power, and a whole host of critical priorities related to athletics need thoughtful debate and oversight.  As a slow-to-the-table believer in the importance of our very significant sports program, I have become interested in serving on this committee in hopes of representing the best interests of all the students.

Michelle Wood Candidate Statement 2020, Senate

It’s been a great honor and real eye-opener to serve in the University Senate for the past two years.   The Senate has important powers, particularly related to curriculum, and it offers a voice that can speak to administrative power on behalf of faculty, staff, and students with considerable authority.   I’ve found it rewarding to serve as Co-Chair of the CAS Caucus and I’m humbled by the dedication of other Senators.  I’m inspired by their concern for academic freedom, academic excellence, and equitable treatment of all members of the community, It would be a privilege to continue to represent the Natural Sciences faculty in the Senate for another term.

 

Eleanor Wakefield Candidate Statement 2020

I have been a career instructor in Composition and English since 2018; previously, I taught here as a pro tem and as a GE beginning in 2009. In my decade here at Oregon, I’ve been active in both the faculty and graduate employee unions–I’m currently the secretary and chair of the communications committee for United Academics–and have served on departmental and university committees including on the Provost search committee. I also devote myself to improving my own and composition program pedagogy; I am interested in balancing faculty freedom with best practices and clear, simple instructions for accessible, effective instruction. In addition to advocating for good working conditions for faculty and good learning conditions for our students, I care deeply about shared governance and transparency in university decision making. I am also a new parent, so my experience taking leave and returning to the (virtual) classroom has recently given me new insight on many issues related to teaching, service, and evaluation. I am running for these roles with the senate to further contribute my time, experience, and perspective to the faculty and the campus.

Karl Reasoner Candidate Statement 2020

Karl Reasoner is the Sr. Program Manager of the Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program (UROP) in the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation. UROP and its partners provide fellowship programs that support student participation in research and creative scholarship across campus. Karl has expertise in designing and delivering high-impact experiential learning programs and specializes in fostering collaborations/partnerships with disparate units. He hopes to bring his expertise and insight in these areas to committees and looks forward to collaborating with colleagues on important issues and challenges.

Scott Fitzpatrick Candidate Statement 2020

I have been at the UO since 2012 and served as the Director of Undergraduate Studies and Associate Head for the Department of Anthropology, on numerous university scholarship committees, and was on the Faculty Personnel Committee from 2016-18. I look forward to serving the faculty to ensure that due process is followed and that individuals are treated fairly and respectfully in regards to matters of grievance.

Theresa Brostowitz Candidate Statement 2020

I am a proud UO alumna and have worked in higher education for over 10 years in multiple functional areas including University Advancement, Commuter Life, Housing and Residence Life, Retention Initiatives, and Academic and Career Advising. I currently serve as an Academic and Career Advisor in Tykeson College and Career Advising. What I enjoy most about my role as an advisor is helping a student move from confusion and anxiety regarding navigation of university policies to being informed and empowered to make intentional decisions about their educational journey.

I value and champion the streamlining and simplification of university procedures and policies in order to make them more inclusive and accessible for both students and staff. Complex processes can create intended and unintended barriers as they historically have been developed by and meant to benefit individuals with significant dominant culture navigational capital. I believe rigorous standards, quality education, and accessibility are not mutually exclusive. By simplifying and thinking critically about university processes, we can remove oppressive and invalidating barriers and give more staff and students the opportunity to fully realize their potential and contribute to the advancement of the University of Oregon community and communities beyond.

Thank you for your consideration of my candidacy.

Bailey Dobbs Candidate Statement 2020

Bailey Dobbs is an Instructional Designer with UO Online in the Office of the Provost. She has worked for the UO for two years, beginning as faculty support in the School of Law. Prior to UO, she spent 9 years at Oklahoma State University’s Center for Health Sciences performing academic support, developing curricula, and delivering educational content & simulated learning environments in the College of Osteopathic Medicine. She obtained her BA in Psychology from the University of Oklahoma and her M.Ed. in Instructional Design from Western Governors University. She hopes to provide service to the University through the OA Council, helping to identify and resolve issues of concern to fellow OAs.

Sara Mason Candidate Statement 2020

I am in the unique position, as I am both an alumni of the University of Oregon as well as having served in several academic units and divisions. In addition, prior to joining the UO, I spent nearly six years in every department on campus as a generalist in sales and editorial development for a major higher education publisher. As a result, I am very familiar with the university from a number of perspectives. Combining my time in publishing and my first career on campus as a Fundraiser in Development/Advancement for the College of Arts and Sciences and then the School of Journalism and Communication, I have spent ten years on campus. I then had the opportunity to connect deeply with our community as a fundraiser for human services and arts and culture in the non-profit sector. I have now returned to campus joining the Division of Student Life putting my relationship skills to work with employers and alumni at the University Career Center.  These experiences, along with my own identity as a woman with Native American family, whose mother and father had not finished college at the time I entered school, prepare me to bring insight, creativity, heart, and collaboration to the work of the Senate and/or OA Council.

I deeply value higher education and all it provided me personally, professionally, and intellectually. I value what it provides a community and our society through education, research, and service. I also see its gaps, weaknesses, and vulnerabilities in our current culture and economic climate.

If elected I will advocate for equity, inclusion, diversity, opportunity, and a student centered focus in our policies and investments of time, funds, and talent.

Theodora Ko Thompson Candidate Statement 2020

I am Theodora Ko Thompson, a workplace bullying and #MeToo survivor. A proud Double Duck alumna of the School of Journalism and Communication, and the College of Education. I carry my duck pride committed to be a representative voice joining in our senate shared governance, to weigh in the evolving paradigm of unprecedented challenges confronting higher education.

In this unprecedented challenging time it remains ever relevant and important to include all our voices for equity and equality of a diverse campus community, particularly of classified staff who inherently are stakeholders in the decision that are made. It matters that we are included, respected and valued to be serving in all search committees, in taskforces and committees in our common interest for forward thinking ideas toward a clean, green and sustainable future.

In our strive for excellence, Nihil de nobis, sine nobis. Nothing About Us, Without Us – let us strive to excel too in fostering a campus culture of welcoming, healthy, respectful and safe workplace climates and environments universally across campus unit to unit, from department to department.

Lets work together with dedicated intention to make a meaningful difference, for each other: Walk the walk, and walk the talk, with transparency and accountability benchmarked measurements and goals year to year, toward cultural competency and to address the systemic issues of white privilege, racism, workplace bullying and harassment, discrimination and biases in our collective experiences.

Thank you

Theodora Ko Thompson, BA 04, MS 07.

Kristin Reagan Candidate Statement 2020

As a former U.S. Marine and National Guard veteran, I have been passionate about service to others throughout my lifetime.  After spending many years in undergraduate and graduate school, I learned of my love for higher education.  Coming to the University of Oregon had been a dream of mine, as I was born in Oregon and have family here, but spent the last 20 years in the Midwest.  Now I would like to take this opportunity to merge these two passions into one here at home, and begin service on the University of Oregon Senate.

I have been with the UO as a Fiscal Coordinator 2 since August of 2018, and would like to expand my footprint in a greater diameter, meet new people and provide service where it is needed.

Being a female veteran, I have experienced misogamy and discrimination, and the importance of diversity and inclusion throughout our shared community is the basis of our collaborative success.  Additionally, I am driven to assist others that do not have the resources for opportunity that are readily available to others.  Finally, I have much interest in sporting events, competition and athletic development despite gender-specific limitations.

I hold an MBA and have specialized experience in finance and taxation, which would allow me to be of assistance in financial and management issues with the UO Senate.  I also hold a MS in Sports Management, which has given me a unique skill set in sports law and finance.  Also, being a former personal trainer and competitor, I understand the unique skills needed to rise to the highest playing field, and I look forward to bringing these skills to the Senate.

Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to serving the University of Oregon!

Jeff Staiger Candidate Statement 2020

Jeff Staiger has been at the UO for 13 years, first as the Librarian for Romance Languages, and more recently as the Librarian for English, French, Italian, Philosophy and Classics.  He has a PhD. in English from UC/Berkeley, and received his BA in English/Classics from Williams College.  Before becoming a librarian, he taught English at both the high-school and university levels in Pittsburgh.  A member of the American Library Association and the Modern Language Association, he publishes in both the fields of Library Science and Literary Studies.  He is particularly interested in the place of the humanities in the university at a time of rapid change and even crisis in the humanistic disciplines.  He served on the Faculty Advisory Council from 2016-2018.

Kristy Bryant-Berg Candidate Statement 2020

I joined the University of Oregon Senate in April of 2019 after volunteering to fill an unexpected vacancy for a CAS Senate seat. Based on my subsequent experiences serving as a Senator over the past year, as well as several years serving on the University Committee on Courses and the English Department Council, I have found investment in shared governance to be meaningful, challenging, and enriching work. My strengths include being an attentive and inquisitive listener, as well as possessing a diligent work ethic. Having served in a variety of roles at University of Oregon where I began my first teaching work as a graduate student in 2002, I am particularly dedicated to advocating for equity and inclusion for faculty, staff, and students alike. I would be especially gratified to represent CAS Career Instructors’ perspectives and support our university-wide mission of inclusive, engaged, and research-led teaching, whether in face-to-face, remote learning, or online iterations.

Thank you for your consideration,

Kristy

Maureen Procopio Candidate Statement 2020

I have been an employee of the UO since 1998 and an OA since 2002. My loyalty, patience and admiration for the UO has grown with me over the years. As a 20-year employee of University Advancement, my understanding of the institution has been through supporting our philanthropic mission. So that I would not lose sight of UO faculty, staff and other colleagues across campus, I sought committee and learning opportunities to build many cross-campus partnerships and friendships. These have helped me learn and grow through the years.

Decisions about resources, people, and units will be impactful, and must be made with intentionality and compassion. Should I be elected to this role, I would approach it through a lens of strategic partnership, equity and inclusion, and compassionate leadership. My current role involves peer benchmarking and best practice research for University Advancement. This work involves continuous assessment and understanding of our strengths and opportunities for improvement, which I believe will be a great asset as a member of shared governance at the UO. I look forward to serving my colleagues and institution during this time of great need and important partnership. Thank you for your consideration.

Sam Hopkins Candidate Statement 2020

The Clark Honors College is at a critical moment as we launch our new curriculum and settle in to the new faculty business model. I hope to take the knowledge I gained during my time as Associate Dean for Faculty to represent the needs of the Clark Honors College in our university’s faculty governance. As the university tackles big initiatives such as changes to teaching evaluation, ongoing core education revision, and efforts to contend with the coronavirus crisis, the Honors College needs a strong voice in the University Senate.

Alex Bisio Candidate Statement 2020

I am the Lead Processing Archivist in Special Collections and University Archives at the University of Oregon’s Knight Library. I hold a duel masters degree in Library Science, with an emphasis in Archives Management, and History from Simmons College. I have been at the Knight Library since Summer 2017, and held previous positions at the Jesuit Archives and Research Center in Saint Louis, Missouri, the University of California, Irvine Special Collections and Archives, Boston College’s John J. Burns Library, and the Harvard University Archives.
While I have not served at the university level, I serve on committees within the University of Oregon Libraries, and am currently the co-chair of the Grants and Awards Committee. I am also an active member of several regional and national professional organizations, including the Society of American Archivists, Northwest Archivists, Inc., Orbis Cascade Alliance, and the Midwest Archivist Conference.
I am particularly interested in issues of equity in education and research, and hope to focus on projects related to equity as part of the University Senate.

Larissa Ennis Candidate Statement 2020

I am seeking your vote for an Officer of Administration seat on the Faculty Advisory Council of the University Senate, 2020-2022. I will soon be ending my second of two consecutive terms on the Officers of Administration Council, the last two years in the role of co-chair. In my time on the OAC, I have made connections across the institution, learned about the processes for shared governance at University of Oregon, and seen and advocated for opportunities to improve the working conditions for OAs. In my day job, I serve as Associate Director of Community Relations in the Government and Community Relations team, which puts me in direct connection to regional nonprofits, public agencies, and civic leaders.

I would like to shift next to serving on the Faculty Advisory Council, to provide informed and knowledgeable guidance to the President and Provost on “the wide range of university affairs.” Officers of Administration, being the only non-unionized professional employee group at UO, remain underrepresented and at times unheard in decision-making that affects our work lives. I still have plenty to learn, but I have a good handle on the myriad issues that face OAs and can advocate knowledgably and competently for policies that benefit us as well as the broader university. I am open to your questions and suggestions, and I hope you’ll reach out directly if you feel so moved (look me up in Find People; I’d list my email but pretty sure I’d just be inviting bots to fill my inbox with spam!).

Thank you for your vote.

Roy Chan Candidate Statement 2020

I am running for both the Faculty Personnel Committee and the Faculty Grievance Appeals Committee. My reasons for putting myself forward for candidacy are twofold: first, my steadfast belief in and commitment to the role of the humanities in a public university, and second, my concern for equity in regards to faculty who are underrepresented. In regards to the first reason, I believe the humanities constitute a central field of inquiry that adjudicates the constitution of value, with the recognition that multiple systems of value (and various definitions of what comprises equity and justification) are at play at any given moment. I view myself as a fair and reasonable evaluator of and advocate for my humanist colleagues from diverse fields and approaches; whether they are interdisciplinary boundary pushers or steadfast curators of a disciplinary heritage, I promise to consider the work of my colleagues with utmost conscientiousness and appreciation. As for the second, as a gay, first-generation, and working-class faculty of color, I am viscerally aware of the challenges that continue to face our underrepresented colleagues. I have served as a mentor to many such colleagues across disciplines in navigating structural inequities that carry considerable personal distress. Joining Senate committee service will allow me to continue this advocacy in a more official role. My collegial style has always been professional and punctual, light on rhetoric, strong on plainspoken communication. I thank you, my colleagues, for your consideration.

Merle Weiner Candidate Statement 2020

I am interested in serving on the Faculty Grievance Appeals Committee because I am deeply committed to a fair appeals process for aggrieved faculty.  As a law professor, I am very familiar with the appeals process.  I will do my best to give fair and full consideration to every appellant’s case. 

Jane Cramer Candidate Statement 2020

I am an Associate Professor in Political Science and I focus on issues of international security in my research and teaching.  In the past I helped organize our faculty union, and I am a strong believer that the faculty should work to meaningfully help run this University so that it is the best University it can be. I served in the Senate previously and at that time I thought the Senate was able to achieve many very important things related to a high quality education, including such things as a new academic freedom policy, the student-directed employee reporting policy, gender neutral bathrooms and much more.  I think the Senate is also striving to maintain quality education even as we have more on-line classes, and I think this is very important for maintaining UO’s reputation. I look forward to serving again.
–Dr. Jane Cramer
Associate Professor
Political Science

Margaret Alexander Candidate Statement 2020

I am new to academia, teaching my first online class for the University of Washington this past Winter, and joining the University of Oregon Libraries just this January, but I have a long history of working in local government and participating in state and national professional organizations, as well as personal social justice work. I have recently helped to write State library legislation, and to update and expand State Library Standards, and have invested years volunteering in local women’s legal activism. As a professional technology librarian, I am dedicated to ensuring access to information, transparency in governance, and to making heard the voices of those who need support. My fresh perspective will be valuable as we enter a new era post-pandemic, developing new ways of communication and teaching and exploring how to rebuild our community in sustainable ways.

Deanna Linville Candidate Statement 2020

Deanna Linville is an associate professor in Counseling Psychology and Human Services, program director for the Couples and Family Therapy graduate program and a Research Scientist with the Center for Equity Promotion. She has been a faculty member at the University of Oregon since 2003 and has been actively involved in service at all levels of the university, including as a senator and member of the International Scholarship Committee. Deanna is an intervention researcher focused on reducing health disparities and developing/testing innovative solutions to issues affecting families such as eating disorders, obesity, violence and chronic illness. Deanna is an advocate for ensuring quality educational experiences for all students and promoting shared governance so that all voices are valued and respected.

Brady Nittmann Candidate Statement 2020

I arrived at the University of Oregon 4 years ago and currently serve as the Director of Finance in the College of Education. I have a diverse background in University finances and bring a strong analytical lens to my current role.

Since joining the OAC 2 years ago I have advocated to University leadership to bring awareness to the many challenges Officers of Administration face on an institutional level. As the only unrepresented group on campus, it is imperative that we are unified and ensure our collective voice is heard.

I want to play an active role in driving improvement and positive change at the UO. The Officers of Administration Council provides the opportunity to make constructive contributions that will benefit all OA’s and the University as a whole.

Kennedy Sparrow Candidate Statement 2020

Kennedy Sparrow is currently Receptionist for College of Design Student Services. They serve on University Senate Committee Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression, City of Eugene Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee, are an alumnx of Basic Rights Oregon’s Catalyst Transgender Leadership Program and mentor for the 2020-21 cohort, present Gender Inclusion trainings with Basic Rights Oregon, and is organizer and lead host of a monthly Sober Social event with Transponder. In collaboration with a student staff, they installed maps throughout Lawrence Hall providing how to locate ADA-compliant and all-gender bathrooms.

Kennedy’s background is working with 16-24-year-olds experiencing homelessness, and has seen firsthand the interplay of how this affects college students. They continue advocating in collaboration with this population, presenting workshops on Housing First at state conferences and organizing with emerging group PDX Queer Housing. In their role as receptionist, they have the experience of working alongside academic advisors, career advisors, instructors, and graduate and undergraduate students, within which they advocate for trans, disability, and racial justice. Their core values and daily praxis are Harm Reduction, Social Justice, Compassionate Communication, Trauma-Informed Care, Positive Youth Development and Engagement, and Compassionate Communication.

Matthew Norton Candidate Statement 2020

The University of Oregon has provided a wonderful intellectual and professional home for me over the past eight years. I owe it and all of you very much. I hope to honor that debt in part as a member of the UO senate. Our university faces many challenges and pressures, from degree completion rates to providing robust support for research in all areas to the apportionment of our resources among units. We also have many opportunities. The senate has a vital say in how our institution and community respond to these pressures and opportunities alike. I would love to contribute to the senate’s efforts to address these issues and think that I can do so in a way that is principled as well as “collegial and consultative.” Thank you!

Piper Fahrney Candidate Statement 2020

Hi, I’m Piper.  I work in CPFM/Maintenance Support fixing and upkeeping campus buildings and hardscapes.  And yes, I do play the bagpipes.  And that is why I am running for UO Senate.  Not the bagpipes, they are just a distraction: an example.  It is the issue of distractions itself that I wish to bring to the table.  The UO leadership has done a good job, yet as with any large organization distractions and loss of focus tend to creep in.  Some of the other things I bring to the table as blue collar staff are a grounding of why and for whom the University really exists; a vision of how enriching and critical is higher education; fresh views; and a plain, unashamed love of our campus, the students, facility, staff, even the weather.  I believe in our goal. A goal I’ve seen slipping in my five years here.  A goal I want to help re-focus on, build, and keep.  A goal of focused excellence.  Oh, and I’ve a spare umbrella in my work cart if you don’t like the weather as much as I do, and need it.  Thanks.

Dietrich Belitz Candidate Statement 2020

I am a theoretical physicist who has been at the UO for 33 years. I have served many times as member and/or chair of my departmental personnel committee. I served as Physics Department Head from 1998 to 2004, as Associate Dean for Natural Sciences from 2004 to 2010, and as Director of the Institute for Theoretical Science from 2013 to 2019.

Denita Strietelmeier Candidate Statement 2020

My name is Denita Strietelmeier, I am a project manager in the Office of the Dean at Lundquist College of Business. I have been in this position for 2.5 years, and am deeply committed to the University of Oregon, it’s staff, faculty and students. Over my 15 years working in higher ed, I have been exposed to a broad array of challenges related to research, operations, and education/curriculum. I look forward to putting my experience to work representing the university’s diverse group of OA’s, cultivating relationships and collaboration to drive improvement and sound decision-making for the university. Go Ducks!

Frank Hartigan Candidate Statement 2020

Cooking is my third career; beforehand, I spent years learning about every aspect of hotels and voice telecommunications (when there was still such a thing). Since I went to culinary school nearly 20 years ago, I have spent the majority of my working life on college campuses: Gonzaga, Portland State, Eastern Washington, and now Oregon.

I learned way back in the ‘80s that in any organization, the people most directly responsible for the delivery of goods and services get the lowest pay and the least respect. This year, those “essential” people are being asked to literally put their lives on the line to ensure that food gets served, mail and packages get delivered, bathrooms get cleaned, and work orders stay in motion. For this we pay many of them less than $15 an hour, and their voices are little heard in the places where policy is made.

What, then, is my purpose in such renowned company as the University Senate? Easy. To be the voice of the toilet scrubbers and dishwashers, speaking their truth to power. If we have learned anything so far from the pandemic, it is just how essential those workers really are. When the grocer’s shelves are bare, the call does not go out for political scientists, attorneys, engineers, or MBAs, but for the people with calloused hands whose jobs cannot be performed remotely — and who can’t afford to stay home — who will show up and unswervingly get things done.

The world is changing radically before our eyes. Let’s not waste this opportunity.

Joe Li Candidate Statement 2020

Joe (Yingjiu) Li is currently a Ripple Professor in the Department of Computer and Information Science at the University of Oregon. His research interests include Internet of Things (IoT) Security and Privacy, Mobile and System Security, Applied Cryptography and Cloud Security, and Data Application Security and Privacy. He has published over 140 technical papers in international conferences and journals, and served in the program committees for over 130 international conferences and workshops, including top-tier cybersecurity conferences.

Joe Li is interested in running for the seat in the Committee on Sexual and Gender Based Violence – Faculty Position, Term 2020-2022. He is motivated to serve the UO community and explore data-driven approaches to addressing campus problems, including sexual and gender based violence. In particular, he is working with several colleagues across UO toward developing an early cuing system with cyber data collected from multiple sources on UO campus so as to help mitigate various campus problems on a daily basis.

Jacob Glasser Candidate Statement 2020

As a 5 year volunteer a KWVA & SEIU local 085, a 15 year employee of university housing, and a lifetime resident of Eugene; I have always worked to make the University of Oregon more accessible. I believe in the awesome potential of the community of the University. If elected for either classified staff position I will exemplify the university’s core value inclusion by ensuring that all are represented.

Jay Butler Candidate Statement 2020

As a current senator and member of the Senate Executive Committee, I have consistently and unabashedly demanded for equal representation of classified employees on everything from high level search committees to diversity issues. We demand to no longer be excluded, nor disregarded. Our voices should be heard, not ignored. Our viewpoints and contributions are valid and we need to be part of UO’s “Inclusion” policy. I take this extremely seriously.

In Solidarity, Jay Butler

Trainings/Workshops/Committees/Organizations/Affiliations

  • UO Senate, Classified Senator – 2018, 2019, 2020
  • UO Senate Executive Committee – 2019, 2020
  • UO Senate, Environmental Issues Committee – 2018, 2019, 2020
  • VPFM (Vice President for Finance & Administration) Diversity Committee – 2019, 2020, 2021
  • DAP (Diversity Action Plans) Talks I, II, III, IV & V Workshops – 2018, 2019
  • Business Compute Challenge-Departmental Chair – 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018
  • Governor’s Food Drive-Departmental Chair – 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
  • Queer Ally Coalition Workshop & Training – 2019
  • Zero Waste Environmental Partner – 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020
  • Banner 9 – pre-rollout Beta Test Partner – 2018, 2019
  • Contributor: (3) articles to Around the O
  • Contributor: (2) articles to Daily Emerald
  • Board of Trustees Round Table- Classified Representative – 2016
  • CGSBV (Committee on Sexual & Gender-Based Violence) Town Hall – 2018
  • DEI (Department of Equity & Inclusion) Understanding Implicit Bias Workshop – 2017, 2018
  • DEI Showcase Oregon Workshop – 2018, 2019, 2020
  • SRS (Safety & Risk Services) Active Threat Training – 2018
  • Search Advocate Training Workshop – 2019
  • Search Advocate Coaching Committee- 2019, 2020
  • Community of Practice Committee – 2020
  • Served on 4 different Search Committees (2 as a Search Advocate) – 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020
  • SEIU Elections Committee- 2019, 2020
  • Implicit Bias Training Workshop – 2017
  • Office Safety/Bystander Training – 2017
  • Payroll Website Redesign Committee – 2019, 2020
  • VPFA Everyday Inclusion- Led ‘Charged Language’ presentation/talk – February, 2020
  • VPFA Employee Spotlight – March, 2020
  • Sustainability Campus Award- nominated – 2020

Kelly Sutherland Candidate Statement 2020

A university works best as a democratic institution and I look forward to participating more actively in this process through a senate position. I bring to this post an interest in finding links between research and teaching across schools and colleges to the benefit of our students and our community. I have been at the UO for 8 years, first in the Clark Honors College, and now in the Biology Department.

Nicole Dahmen Candidate Statement 2020

Nicole Smith Dahmen is an Associate Professor at the School of Journalism and Communication at the University of Oregon. In the six years that she’s been on the UO faculty she’s served on the Faculty Advisory Council for President Schill, Scholastic Review Committee, Study Abroad Programs, and Scholarship Committee.

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 8, 2020

Location: Zoom (Please see link to meeting below the agenda)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron

3:08 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:10 P.M.   State of the University

  • President Michael Schill

3:25 P.M.   Open Discussion

  • Coronavirus/Remote Work: What’s working well? What are the challenges?With Administrators:
    • Janet Woodruff-Borden, Executive Vice Provost
    • Ron Bramhall, Assoc Vice Prov Academic Exec
    • Cass Moseley, Sr Assoc Vice Pres Research
    • Kate Mondloch, Interim Dean Grad School
    • Doneka Scott, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education and Student Success

3:50 P.M.    New Business

4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn


Topic: University Senate – April Mtg
Time: Apr 8, 2020 03:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://uoregon.zoom.us/j/874934843?pwd=LzNWeW5VcmY2N21BeHFOQ1BuN2VSQT09

Meeting ID: 874 934 843
Password: 338185

One tap mobile
+16699009128,,874934843# US (San Jose)
+13462487799,,874934843# US (Houston)

Dial by your location
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 301 715 8592 US
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 253 215 8782 US
Meeting ID: 874 934 843
Find your local number: https://uoregon.zoom.us/u/ad4qzRuM9

Join by SIP
874934843@zoomcrc.com

Join by H.323
162.255.37.11 (US West)
162.255.36.11 (US East)
221.122.88.195 (China)
115.114.131.7 (India Mumbai)
115.114.115.7 (India Hyderabad)
213.19.144.110 (EMEA)
103.122.166.55 (Australia)
209.9.211.110 (Hong Kong)
64.211.144.160 (Brazil)
69.174.57.160 (Canada)
207.226.132.110 (Japan)
Meeting ID: 874 934 843
Password: 338185

Join by Skype for Business
https://uoregon.zoom.us/skype/874934843

 

US19/20-15: New Program Proposal: Ph.D. in Bioengineering

Date of Notice: March 11, 2020
Current Status: Approved April 8, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Nathan Jacobs (Lecturer/Curriculum Director, Knight Campus), Jim Hutchison (Sr Assoc Vice President, Knight Campus)


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 Ph.D. in Bioengineering 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, on the recommendation of the Graduate Council, the new doctoral degree in Bioengineering is approved (please see related documents for program specifics).


Related Documents

Program Proposal – Ph.D. in Bioengineering
Due Diligence
UO-OSU Partnership Agreement
LOS-Joint Bioengineering Program to Graduate School
OSU-UO SPC Early Notice


OSU BIOE Grad Handbook
Berkeley BIOE Grad Handbook

US19/20-14: Policy on Search Procedures for Academic Administrator Positions

Date of Notice: March 18, 2020
Current Status: Approved April 8, 2020
Motion Type: Policy Proposal
Sponsor: Elizabeth Skowron, Senate President
Elliot Berkman, Senate Vice President
Bill Harbaugh, Immediate Past President


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the University of Oregon does not currently have a policy on search procedures for hiring academic administrators with university-wide and unit-specific academic responsibilities; and

1.2 WHEREAS decisions around hiring processes reflect a university’s values around shared governance, professional excellence, rational decision-making, efficient and responsible management of resources, transparency, and affirmative action, diversity, and inclusion; and

1.3 WHEREAS searches for new academic administrators conducted with broad participation from faculty and the university community provide an appropriate voice for the university community in such decisions, lead to more informed decision-making, and help to position new hires for success by increasing community buy-in; and

1.4 WHEREAS Policies that outline hiring procedures for academic administrators are currently in place in many other AAU institutions; and

1.5 WHEREAS these procedures outline a set of guidelines grounded in best practices whilst also providing flexibility;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approves the Policy on Search Procedures for Academic Administrator Positions delineated in the Related Documents for immediate implementation; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that unless expressly renewed or modified by the Senate as Legislation signed by the University President, the policy shall automatically expire seven years after the effective date of the policy.


Related Documents

Policy – Search Procedures for Academic Administrator Positions

UO Senate Message – Coronavirus update & planning

Dear UO Senators,

We are facing unprecedented times created by the novel COVID-19 pandemic. As you know, the University of Oregon is closely monitoring the global outbreak and is working in close coordination with local, state, and federal health officials to guide decisions about university operations. We encourage you to visit the UO COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Information website often for information, answers to frequently asked questions, and links to important resources.

Senate leadership is working with the Administration, to ensure that solutions and supports provided to faculty and students reflect the input of broad representation across campus.

We thank our Academic Council for its extraordinary efforts to create guidance on academic continuity planning, and the Office of the Provost for developing resources to facilitate high-quality remote instruction even in these difficult times (e.g., Academic Continuity Resources and Guidance for Faculty and Instructors). The Senate will do its best to support these efforts and the work of other administrators and faculty who are working to ensure operations are running as smoothly as possible for our students.

Within the University Senate, we are preparing behind the scenes to transition upcoming Senate meetings from in-person meetings in the EMU to a remote format for the foreseeable future. Thus, beginning in April, 2020 and until further notice, we will (1) hold senate meetings via remote teleconferencing using Zoom, and (2) reserve 30 minutes at the outset of each meeting for Open Discussions, after which we will proceed to other scheduled senate business. Please contact us to add a topic to the open discussion section and we will add it and invite relevant members of the administration to participate and/or field queries. Topics may include discussion about how instructors and students are dealing with remote instructional approaches, impacts on research and scholarship, supporting members of our university community, and so forth, and provide additional opportunities for information sharing, for example. As always, we welcome your suggestions for discussion topics.

Please feel free to reach out to us directly as well. We will continue holding weekly drop-in office hours on Wednesdays 10:00 to 11:30 AM, however effectively immediately, these will occur via zoom meetings through Winter term finals week, and resume during Spring term week 1:

You may also contact us directly as well at the email addresses below. Thank you for your participation in shared governance here at the University of Oregon.

Elizabeth Skowron, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Psychology President, University Senate eskowron@uoregon.edu

Elliot Berkman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Department of Psychology Vice-President/President-Elect, University Senate berkman@uoregon.edu

US19/20-13: SAT/ACT Optional Undergraduate Admissions Criteria

Date of Notice: March 18, 2020
Current Status: Approved April 8, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Bill Harbaugh, Economics


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS a university task force comprised of faculty and administrators met during February 2020 to consider the use of standardized tests for admissions to the University of Oregon; and

1.2 WHEREAS the task force considered how to accomplish the goals of: increasing diversity, increasing the pool of qualified applicants, growing enrollment, and addressing equity in admissions; and

1.3 WHEREAS test-optional policies are currently in place at 13 institutions in Oregon and are being considered by numerous others around the country with those same goals; and

1.4 WHEREAS while standardized test scores such as the SAT and ACT have been a common metric in undergraduate admissions for many years, a growing body of research raises questions about their efficacy in equitably measuring college readiness; and

1.5 WHEREAS research has shown that SAT and ACT scores vary not just by academic ability, but also by confounding variables such as family income, parental education level, and race/ethnicity (Allensworth & Clark, 2020; Higdem et al., 2016); and

1.6 WHEREAS since the University of Oregon’s current admissions practices do not involve a fixed SAT/ACT cutoff, but instead involve review of a broad mix of academic factors (e.g., grade trends, rigor of courses, local context of school and its average GPA) as well as non-academic factors such as overcoming adversity, community participation, and racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity, and the ability to contribute to university life in other ways, the impact of going test-optional is unlikely to decrease the average academic ability of UO undergraduates; and

1.7 WHEREAS because of the coronavirus shutdowns many students are currently unable to take SAT/ACT tests or complete prep courses for them and UO needs to take rapid action to ensure we remain an option for all students seeking higher education.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approves the Task Force Report: Recommendation regarding use of standardized test scores in admissions to the University of Oregon and its recommendation that UO move to a test-optional admissions policy, for students applying for Fall 2021 admission, in which most applicants can ask to be considered for admission and scholarships without submitting test scores, and that students have the ability to reverse this decision after submitting their application; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the Senate authorizes the Provost to accelerate the timing of this change, if needed to respond to the developing coronavirus situation; and

2.3. BE IT FURTHER MOVED that some students may still be required to submit scores including those applicants whose high school curriculum includes study at an unaccredited school or homeschooled students, NCAA-recruited athletes, and other students who, on a case-by-case basis are determined to need to submit scores as additional evidence of college readiness.

2.4 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the Office of Admissions shall deliver a report to the Senate in Fall of each year with data on the academic preparedness of the incoming undergraduate and their other relevant characteristics.

 

US19/20-11: Approval of Curriculum Report, Winter 2020

Date of Notice: January 8, 2020
Current Status: March 11, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Frances White, Chair of UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Winter Term 2020 Preliminary Curriculum Report for the University Senate Review.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approves the Winter 2020 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UOCC (please see related documents.


Related Documents

UOCC_Winter 2020 Preliminary Curriculum Report

Final Report

Academic Continuity Plan for the Coronavirus Health Emergency

Academic Council 2020

 

The Academic Council was convened on March 4, 2020 after the declaration of emergency on February 27, 2020 following the procedures described in the Academic Continuity Policy. The policy guides planning and decision-making in the event that a significant disruption to campus operations impedes academic activity. The goal of the policy is “to continue academic activities as much as possible and to mitigate the effects of a significant academic disruption, which include particularly grave academic and financial consequences for graduating students, international students, and students receiving financial aid.” The policy balances the principles of academic integrity, transparency for students, instructors, and staff, and fairness for students.

The Academic Council voted to approve the following guidelines for the duration of the coronavirus health emergency. These guidelines should be followed by course instructors in consultation with the Academic Continuity Team in their unit. The Academic Continuity Policy is clear that instructors of record (hereafter referred to as “instructors” which includes faculty and GEs) shall retain primary authority over how to manage their courses, assignments, instruction and grades, subject to the conditions described below.

During this time, Academic Council encourages us to come together to support our students and each other. During an emergency situation, it is important to be flexible, empathetic, and prepared to do a bit extra in the short run.

Academic principles to be followed:

In order to receive credit, the learning outcomes and goals of the course, as detailed in the approved course, must be met. The Instructor of Record (including any active additional Instructor(s) of Record) makes the determination about whether the learning outcomes have been met. The Academic Continuity plan allows for changes in various aspects in the way that course content is delivered, and the learning outcomes are achieved. If the instructor determines that the learning outcomes can be met with adjustments to the organization of the course, including reasonable modifications to the modality, delivery, and assessment practices, the instructor should make these changes under this emergency. Specific guidance on modifications is provided below.

Modality changes might include replacing lectures with video lecture replacements, changing methods of assessment (changing short-answer questions to multiple choice) and similar methods including those used as examples below during the duration of this emergency. The feasibility of such modality changes will be highly dependent on best pedagogical practices within the discipline concerned. Instructors should discuss such possibilities with their unit heads for guidance. If a unit head is unavailable, a unit head from a closely-aligned unit will be assigned. If the instructor determines that the learning outcomes cannot be met even with such adjustments, and the unit head concurs, then the completion of the course may be delayed until the missing instructional or grading work is completed.

Academic credit, and grades awarded to students for that credit, are based on delivery of course content in accordance with the learning objectives of the course and the assessment of the quality of student work in that course. As stated in the Academic Continuity Policy, as in any disruption, Instructors should endeavor to mitigate the effects of a significant academic disruption to ensure that the approved course content is delivered, and the appropriate assessment of student performance is undertaken.

The approved amount of student work for each course is listed in the approved Student Engagement Inventory (SEI). On average, for a 4-credit class, this totals 12 hours a week and includes 4 hours of lecture including discussion section or lab time for a lower level class and at least 3 hours for an upper level class. The remaining time is taken with other coursework such as readings and assignments.

Both delivery of content and assessment of student work can be impacted in an academic disruption. During any disruption, instructors should endeavor to ensure that the approved course content is delivered, and the appropriate assessment of student performance is undertaken by changes to the components of the SEI without significant increase or decrease in workload on the students enrolled in the course. Instructors may, for instance, reduce the number of assessed assignments by increasing work needed per assignment if they can still ensure sufficient assessment of learning outcomes. Instructors may also replace class time with out of class assignments that can meet the same learning outcomes. Finally, it may be possible for some class time and assignments to be missed, and still be able to fully assess learning outcomes by altering other assignments to include the missed class time or work.

During this coronavirus health emergency, the goals for academic continuity are:

  • To protect instructors, staff, students
  • To accommodate individual students and instructors who are ill or worried about contracting illness
  • To continue courses in the event of instructor absence or partial/complete campus closure

Therefore, the Academic Council has approved the following specific expectations for instructors.

During any term, including the current Winter term, the Academic Council:

  • Reminds instructors to work with their department head or supervisor as they normally would if they will need to miss class.
  • Reminds instructors to communicate to students in advance if class meetings are cancelled and let them know what work they should complete. The goal should be to continue instruction even if that has to be done by a replacement instructor and/or remotely.
  • Directs instructors that they cannot cancel courses. At present, campus is continuing courses as scheduled. Any decision to cancel courses will be made centrally.
  • Reminds instructors that they shall not ask students for doctor’s notes or other documentation to verify absences. Instructors shall have clear communication and make-up protocols in place for students to follow if they are going to be or have been absent. If a student is missing enough class that make-ups will be difficult and they are at risk of not passing, they should communicate with those students, and enlist advisors for help.
  • Requires instructors with attendance or participation polices to modify those such that attendance is not counted in grades and participation points could be made up or waived.
  • Informs instructors that they may modify course expectations such that required work is reduced or grading schemes are adjusted provided they can still meet course learning objectives.
  • Requires that instructors shall have make ups or alternatives to exams. If instructors will need support to manage an increased volume of make-ups, they should work with their department head, who will take guidance from the school/college Academic Continuity Team. In some cases, a grade of Incomplete may be used for make-ups that will take place after grades are due.
  • Requires instructors to provide clear, consistent, and specific communication to students about any modifications to the course and changes to assignments and deadlines. Instructors, as a matter of good practice, should provide clear and consistent expectations of course graders for timely grading and assessment of materials and recording of grades to the Canvas gradebook for students to see. Academic Council requires the use of the course Canvas site for all this communication.

In preparation for Spring and potentially Summer terms, the Academic Council:

  • Requires use of Canvas for courses starting in Spring term and for the duration of the academic disruption, as it will make adjusting for absences/campus closures easier. Instructors shall publish their Canvas sites and use them to post materials, collect assignments, provide alternatives to lectures/discussions for students who are absent from class, and post grades.
  • Asks instructors to explore options and tools to deliver their course content for an extended period on Canvas with either synchronous and/or asynchronous options. The Office of the Provost has created a resource page to help instructors (https://provost.uoregon.edu/academic-continuity-preparations). This page will be continually updated.

Absence of Instructor of Record:

If an Instructor of Record is unable to continue as instructor, unit heads may appoint an additional Instructor of Record who will continue to deliver course content and follow the course structure and content as laid out in the syllabus and any other additional resources such as the Canvas site to the best of their ability. The original Instructor of Record remains on the course and when they return, the additional Instructor of Record is removed after the appropriate transition between instructors has been affected. The Instructor of Record will then complete the course and submit grades.

The additional Instructor of Record will follow the established syllabus, including delivery of course content in accordance with the learning objectives of the course and such assessment that falls within the timeline of the course. The additional instructor will not require additional work of the enrolled students beyond the level specified in the SEI or syllabus or change the methods of assessment.

Whenever possible, submission of final grades will be done by the original Instructor of Record. If the original Instructor of Record does not return before the end of the class, course grades should not be submitted by the additional Instructor of Record until Finals Week and all assignments and scheduled exams are due and have been graded.

When the original Instructor of Record returns, they will accept the work done by the students under the additional Instructor of Record and not require additional work of the enrolled students for the time the original Instructor of Record was absent. The returning Instructor of Record will assess, in coordination with the unit head, the degree to which the learning outcomes were achieved, and the student work was correctly assessed given this disruption. If the conclusion of the Instructor of Record and the unit head is that the additional Instructor of Record was unable to deliver course content or conduct assessment as specified, or an additional Instructor of Record was unavailable, the Instructor of Record and unit head may conclude that the course has not been completed. In this case, emergency grades, if available, may be used, or incompletes if appropriate, until such time as the course can be completed.

The instructional work required to complete the course will be conducted and compensated according to appropriate labor agreements and requirements. Upon completion, students will then receive regular (non-emergency) grades.

Absence of GEs that support a faculty instructor:

The impact of loss of GEs from a faculty-taught class will vary with the number of GEs, the amount of GE FTE, and duties of those GEs. Instructors of Record may be able to complete a course with minor losses of GE support, but it is expected that major losses of GE support will require some form of replacement. The amount of loss of GE support will be reflected in the total FTE and associated total of hours of work lost.

The Academic Council recommends that Instructors of Record impacted by the academic disruption through the loss of GEs who run discussion sections, labs, etc., consider modifying the modes of delivery of the course content, activities, and assessments that are required to meet the learning outcomes and goals of the course. It is good pedagogical practice to maintain a set of alternative assignments that can be used as “make-ups” if students have valid reasons for missing class. These make-up assignments may be an acceptable method of delivering course material in accordance with course outcomes that can be deployed if planned course activities cannot be completed for any reason.

The assessment of any assignments used to replace planned course activity should be equivalent to the originally planned assessment for the missing activity. For example, a discussion section normally run by a GE could be replaced with a worksheet if the GE is ill. This worksheet covers the same material and the grading of that worksheet should be equivalent to the grading of the discussion section exercise.

Graded assignments should not generally be replaced by non-graded assignments unless completion of an assignment can be seen as having learning value. For instance, students might be asked to complete a module in Canvas that automatically records a completion grade as a replacement for attending a discussion section. Instructor should consult with their unit heads for guidance. If replacement assignments need to be graded, this must be done by a qualified person, following all applicable labor laws and negotiated contracts. Graders must be appropriately qualified. If GEs are unavailable to hold labs or sections, students should be held harmless so that any student credit for attendance to labs or sections should be waived.

Grading

The Council will continue to meet to provide guidance about grading procedures (e.g., whether to enable emergency grades) should the disruption continue.

Personnel considerations

Additional and Replacement Instructors of Record must be qualified to teach the course. Departments should follow their criteria for level qualification to teach classes, such as in replacement teaching pools, that should be followed. Departments should also follow their normal criteria for graduate students to be instructors of record such as advancement to candidacy or seniority, etc. Work associated with a course that does not involve any instruction or assessment, such as taking attendance, proctoring exams, distributing materials, supervising room occupancy, etc., may be done by individuals not qualified to instruct and following all applicable labor laws and negotiated contracts.

Unit Heads must consider whether the workload required to meet the course learning outcomes is reasonable with respect to the job description of additional instructors of record and their other obligations.

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – March 11, 2020

UPDATE: For those who prefer to attend remotely, rather than in person, we have set up an alternate option via Zoom. Here are the details for accessing the meeting:

Topic: University of Oregon Senate Meeting (March 11, 2020)
Time: Mar 11, 2020 03:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting

https://zoom.us/j/245214867?pwd=Y3VVSlV4QnNHV29WcEtKelgwWkdSZz09

Meeting ID: 245 214 867

Password: 945303

One tap mobile

+16699006833,,245214867# US (San Jose)
+19292056099,,245214867# US (New York)

Dial by your location

+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)

Meeting ID: 245 214 867

Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/anCklkmYH


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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron

3:10 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:11 P.M.   State of the University

  • Provost Patrick Phillips
    • Coronavirus planning, updates; Andre LeDuc (CRO/AssocVP Safety & Risk Services), Cass Mosely (Sr Assoc Vice Pres Research), Ron Bramhall (Assoc Vice Prov Academic Exec)

3:45 P.M.   New Business

4:20 P.M.    Open Discussion

  • Updates: Search Guidelines for Academic Administrator Positions

4:40 P.M.   Reports

  • Scheduling adjustment –> 3:30 P.M., CIET/CAIT: Sierra Dawson (Assoc VP Academic Affairs), Lee Rumbarger (Assist Vice Provost TEP), Janet Woodruff-Borden (Exec Vice Provost for Academic Affairs)
  • Open Access; David Condon, Psychology; Presentation

4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:56 P.M.   Other Business

  • Legislative Updates; Melanie Muenzer

5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Senate Meeting Agenda – February 12, 2020

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron

3:04 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:05 P.M.   State of the University

  • President Schill

3:15 P.M.   New Business

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion

4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:56 P.M.   Other Business

  • Legislative Updates; Libby Batlan and Hans Bernard

5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US19/20-10: Revisions to Expedited Tenure process

Date of Notice: January 22, 2020
Current Status: Approved February 12, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Jack Boss (Music, Chair of FPC 2018-2009)
Carol Silverman (Anthropology, Chair of FPC 2019-2020)
Elizabeth Skowron (Psychology, Senate President 2019-2020)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Senate passed an Expedited Tenure policy for the University of Oregon in January 2018 (Policy 11.02.04); and

1.2 WHEREAS the university’s experience with the policy to date demonstrates that the policy provides the academic units with leverage when seeking to hire tenured faculty members whose credentials have been established through promotion and tenure processes at other research institutions; and

1.3 WHEREAS the policy has demonstrated that it significantly lessens the administrative burden at the unit and college levels for these tenure reviews; and

1.4 WHEREAS all ten cases of expedited tenure considered since January 2018 have had positive outcomes;

1.5 WHEREAS expanding the expedited tenure review process to include experienced associate professor candidates will likely result in additional faculty hiring advantages,

1.6 WHEREAS no unit or department thus far involved in an expedited tenure case has elected to reconsider its decision to use the expedited process after the Expedited Tenure Review Committee (a subset of the Faculty Personnel Committee) has completed its review, as provided for in the original policy; and

1.7 WHEREAS consistently staffing a complement of five Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC) members on the Expedited Tenure Review Committee (ETRC) has resulted in an unmanageable service burden on University FPC members; and

1.8 WHEREAS excellent teaching at the University must be consistently fostered and maintained; and

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the eligibility for expedited tenure review shall continue to include full professors and shall be changed to include associate professors who have been tenured and in rank for a minimum of three years, and

2.2 That new faculty who are hired through the expedited tenure process may be brought in as full professors or as associate professors, depending on their qualifications, and are brought in at no greater than their current rank (i.e., full professors or associate professors). For associate professors to be considered for a promotion to full will require the faculty member be reviewed by the full promotion and tenure process; and

2.3 That the final step of returning the completed review to the originating unit so that faculty members may reconsider their decision to recommend expedited tenure shall be designated as optional in the case of individuals appointed at the rank of full professor, enabling units that wish to retain this step to do so, whereas other units may elect to forego it, and

2.4 That the final step of returning the completed review to the originating unit so that faculty members may reconsider their decision to recommend expedited tenure shall be required in the case of individuals appointed at the rank of associate professor, with the unit faculty also required to vote on the decision to use expedited tenure, and

2.5 That the number of Faculty Personnel Committee members required constitute the Expedited Tenure Review Committee shall be changed from “five members” to “three to five members,” and

2.6 That the Expedited Tenure Review Committee shall always consider teaching evaluations of candidates, as available, in their review process for positions with significant any teaching responsibilities.


Financial Impact: Cost Neutral

Senate Meeting Agenda – January 8, 2020

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron
  • Land Acknowledgment; Sam Norgaard-Stroich

3:05 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:10 P.M.   State of the University

  • President Schill
  • Bob Guldberg, VP and Exec Dir Knight Campus

3:40 P.M.   New Business

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:35 P.M.   Reports

  • Legislative Agenda; Hans Bernard (Asst VP for State Affairs) & Libby Batlan (Assoc VP State & Comm Affairs)

4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:57 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US19/20-09: Accelerated Masters Programs proposal

Date of Notice: November 13, 2019
Current Status: Approved January 8, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Andy Karduna, Human Physiology and Associate Dean of the Graduate School


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS an Accelerated Master’s Programs model presents an opportunity for high achieving students to link advanced undergraduate coursework with graduate coursework and degree completion, thus reducing the time and cost of earning a Master’s degree; and

1.2 WHEREAS Accelerated Master’s Programs can be used as a recruitment tool, helping to increase enrollment both at the undergraduate and graduate levels; and

1.3 WHEREAS Accelerated Master’s Programs are very common among UO’s peer institutions, including most AAU public universities; and

1.4 WHEREAS the Graduate School has been consulting with numerous stakeholders on campus, including the Registrar’s Office, Office of Student Financial Aid and Scholarships, Office of the Provost, Undergraduate Council, Graduate Council, Academic Council and Senate Leadership; and

1.5 WHEREAS the Undergraduate Council and Graduate Council have fully reviewed and endorsed the proposal for an Accelerated Master’s Program model.

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED, on the recommendation of the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils, the proposed Accelerated Master’s Program model is approved (see related documents for full details).


Related Documents

Accelerated Master’s Programs Model Proposal
Accelerated Master’s Programs Model Guidelines

Senate Meeting Agenda – December 11, 2019

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron

3:10 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:15 P.M.   State of the University

  • Janet Woodruff-Borden, Executive Vice Provost

3:30 P.M.   New Business

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:40 P.M.   Reports
4:50 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US 19/20-08: New Program Proposal: Bioengineering

Date of Notice: November 20, 2019
Current Status: Approved January 8, 2020
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Jim Hutchison (Chemistry & Biochemistry), Nathan Jacobs (Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact), Mike Hahn (Human Physiology)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Undergraduate Council is charged by the University Senate with the responsibility of “reviewing, evaluating and enhancing the quality of the University’s academic program;” 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 Bioengineering and recommend that the Provost forward it to the University of Oregon Board of Trustees, the statewide Provosts’ Council, Higher Education Coordinating Commission,and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities for approval;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED, on the recommendation of the Undergraduate Council, the new Bachelor’s degree in Bioengineering is approved (please see related documents for program specifics).


Related Documents

Program Proposal
UGC Feedback
CAS Memo
Due Diligence

US19/20-07: Approval of Curriculum Report, Fall 2019

Date of Notice: November 13, 2019
Current Status: Approved December 11, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Frances White, Chair of UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Fall Term 2019 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate Review.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the Fall 2019 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses (please see Related Documents).


Related Documents

UOCC_Fall 2019 Preliminary Report

US19/20-06: New Program Proposal: Data Science

Date of Notice: November 6, 2019
Current Status: Approved December 11, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Joe Sventek (Computer & Information Science), Bill Cresko (Biology)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Undergraduate Council is charged by the University Senate with the responsibility of “reviewing, evaluating and enhancing the quality of the University’s academic program;” 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 Data Science and recommend that the Provost forward it to the University of Oregon Board of Trustees, the statewide Provosts’ Council, Higher Education Coordinating Commission,and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities for approval;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate approves the recommendation of the Undergraduate Council to approve the new Bachelor’s degree in Data Science (please see related documents for program specifics).


Related Documents

Program Proposal
Academic Plan Template
DSCI Faculty
Other Similar Programs
UGDS Curriculum
Summary for Statewide Provost’s Council


Supplemental Materials

Due Diligence – Domain Emphases
Due Diligence – Program Level
Due Diligence – Multilisting Agreements

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 13, 2019

Note: Please review linked materials and provide any feedback to senatecoordinator@uoregon.edu.


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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron
  • Remarks; Senate Vice President Elliot Berkman

3:10 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:15 P.M.   State of the University

  • President Schill
  • Tim Gardner, Knight Campus

3:30 P.M.   New Business

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion

  • Committee on Recognizing our Diverse History: Updates (’10) and discussion (’20, time permitting); Melanie Muenzer (Assoc VP Vice Prov Acad Init)

4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:51 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US19/20-05: New Program Proposal: Bachelor’s in Neuroscience

Date of Notice: October 23, 2019
Current Status: Approved November 13, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Nicole Dudukovic (Psychology), Adrianne Huxtable (Human Physiology), Philip Washbourne (Biology)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Undergraduate Council is charged by the University Senate  with the responsibility of “reviewing, evaluating and enhancing the quality of the University’s academic program;” 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 Neuroscience jointly administered by the Biology, Human Physiology, and Psychology departments and recommend that the Provost forward it to the University of Oregon Board of Trustees, the statewide Provosts’ Council, Higher Education Coordinating Commission,and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities for approval;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the University Senate approves the recommendation of the Undergraduate Council to approve the new Bachelor’s degree in Neuroscience (please see related documents for program specifics).


Related Documents

Neuroscience proposal
Memo in Support
Sponsor Response to feedback from Undergrad Council

US19/20-04: UOCC rep to Graduate Council – voting status

Date of Notice: October 22, 2019
Current Status: Approved November 13, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Frances White, Chair of UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Graduate Council frequently works on program and course approval with the UO Committee on Courses (UOCC); and

1.2 WHEREAS there is a voting ex officio seat for the UOCC Chair or designee on the Undergraduate Council to coordinate course and program approval processes with that body; and

1.3 WHEREAS the University Senate approved US15/16-18: Revision of the Membership of the Graduate Council, adding the Chair of UOCC (or designee) as a non-voting ex officio member, in part to establish consistency with Undergraduate Council processes;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University approves revising the UOCC Chair or designee seat on the Graduate Council from non-voting to voting.

Senate Meeting Agenda – October 9, 2019

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

    • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Elizabeth Skowron

3:15 P.M.  Approval of the Minutes

3:15 P.M.   State of the University

    • Patrick Phillips, Provost and Sr Vice President; White Paper on 2019-2020 Academic Initiatives
    • Undergraduate Advising at UO; Kimberly Johnson, UGS Asst Vice Prov Advising (Presentation Slides)

4:00 P.M.   New Business

4:30 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:30 P.M.   Reports

4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:56 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US19/20-03: Approval of Curriculum Report, Summer 2019

Date of Notice: September 25, 2019
Current Status: Approved October 9, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Frances White, UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Summer Term 2019 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate Review.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the Summer 2019 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses (please see Related Documents).


Related Documents

Summer Term 2019 Preliminary Curriculum Report

US19/20-02: Revisions to Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee

Date of Notice: September 18, 2019
Current Status: Approved October 9, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Elizabeth Skowron, Senate President
Elliot Berkman, Senate Vice President
Sierra Dawson, Chair of CIET committee


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee (CIET) has broad relevance for and impact upon all UO faculty; and

1.2 WHEREAS the current membership criteria do not provide for consistent representation from all faculty units on campus; and

1.3 WHEREAS the faculty feedback and evaluation needs for different units on campus are varied;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the membership for the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee be revised per the changes outlined in the Redline Draft of the committee’s 17 point chart (please see Related Documents).


Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee 17 point chart – REDLINE_September 2019

US19/20-01: Rename the NTTF Committee

Date of Notice: September 18, 2019
Current Status: Approved October 9, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Elizabeth Skowron, Senate President
Elliot Berkman, Senate Vice President
Beth Harn, Special Education and Clinical Sciences


Motion

Section I

1.1  WHEREAS, the Non-tenure Track Faculty Committee indicated the need to ensure inclusiveness of all long-term faculty (i.e., clinical professor, professors of practice, instructional, library, and research); and

1.2 WHEREAS, the committee will also be inclusive of limited duration faculty employees; and

1.3  WHEREAS, non-tenured faculty on campus have expressed concerns over being disrespected and seen as “less than” compared to their tenured colleagues;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approves the renaming of the Non-tenured Track Faculty Committee to “Career Faculty Committee.”

Implementation Date: Immediate upon approval by University Senate


Related Documents

NTTF 2018-2019 Annual Report

Draft 17 point chart_Redline_Sept 2019

Senate Meeting Agenda – June 5, 2019

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
  • Remarks: President Schill

3:29 PM   Approval of Minutes

3:30 PM     Business / Reports:

  • Vote on Other Curricular Matters included in the Curriculum Report: A change to the last date for students to add courses. Full Text: “The last day to add a course is to be moved from the Sunday preceding the second week at 11:59 p.m. to the Monday of the second week at 11:59 p.m.” Frances White.
  • Vote: US18/19-21: Approval of Curriculum Report, Spring 2019; Frances White
  • Vote on new Senate VP / President Elect. Elizabeth Skowron (Psychology, Senate Vice President)
  • Pass the gavel
  • UO Senate Award for Shared Governance, Transparency and Trust: To Karen Ford (College of Arts & Sciences and English), Jessica Price (General Counsel’s Office), Brent Walth (Journalism)
  • UO Senate Leadership and Service Award for Officers of Administration: To Annie Herz (Human Resources)
  • UO Senate Classified Staff Leadership Award: To Terry McQuilkin (UO Libraries)
  • UO Senate Wayne T. Westling Award: To Karen Ford (College of Arts & Sciences and English), Leslie Opp-Beckman (American English Institute)
  • Another recognition

4:50 PM   Open Discussion
4:52 PM   Other Reports
4:54 PM   Notice(s) of Motion
4:56 PM   Other Business
5:00 PM   Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

US18/19-21: Approval of Curriculum Report, Spring 2019

Date of Notice: April 10, 2019
Current Status: Approved June 5, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: UO Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Spring Term 2019 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate review.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the Spring 2019 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.

Inquiry & Response Regarding UO Academic Freedom Policy

From: Mike Schill <mschill@uoregon.edu>

Subject: RE: Reporting a potential violation of UO’s Academic Freedom Policy

Date: May 29, 2019 at 9:35:40 AM PDT

To: Senate President <senatepres@uoregon.edu>, Jayanth Banavar <banavar@uoregon.edu>, Kevin Reed <ksreed@uoregon.edu>

Dear Bill,

I do not believe that there is sufficient evidence here to warrant an investigation of Kyle Henley.  I have asked Kyle what he meant when he asked Dave to request that all media inquiries go to Molly Blancett.  His response was that he wanted there to be a consistent response about what the provost was proposing so that rumors filled with inaccuracies didn’t spread.   While the cuts we have been required to make are expressed in dollars, they will, by necessity, be felt by human beings.  It is very important that accurate information be given to the media and thereby transmitted to potentially affected individuals.

I believe Kyle when he states that he never meant for this request to silence dissent on campus with respect to the wisdom or necessity of the cuts.   Indeed, we have encouraged folks to give us their views even when those views have been inaccurate, insulting and/or entirely infeasible.  Kyle joins me in his belief in the value of free speech and respectful, robust debate on campus, even when that speech is critical of Johnson Hall.

Kyle’s explanation rings true with me so I am rejecting your request for an investigation.

I appreciate your commitment to free speech.

Best,

Mike

Michael H. Schill
President and Professor of Law
University of Oregon


From: Senate President <senatepres@uoregon.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 8:16 PM
To: Mike Schill <mschill@uoregon.edu>; Jayanth Banavar <banavar@uoregon.edu>; Kevin Reed <ksreed@uoregon.edu>
Subject: Reporting a potential violation of UO’s Academic Freedom Policy

Reporting a potential violation of UO’s Academic Freedom Policy:

Dear President Schill, Provost Banavar, and General Counsel Reed:

We are writing as UO Senate President and Immediate Past President, to report a potential violation of UO’s Academic Freedom Policy by VP for University Communications Kyle Henley.

UO’s Academic Freedom Policy was adopted by the UO Senate on 4/9/2014 and signed by then UO President Michael Gottfredson on 5/28/2014. The full policy is appended below.

This policy states:

“… The University of Oregon encourages and supports open, vigorous, and challenging debate across the full spectrum of human issues as they present themselves to the university community. The University of Oregon protects free speech through Policy No. 01.00.16. This policy on Academic Freedom builds on these existing commitments by recognizing the special contexts of scholarship, teaching, governance, and public service.  …

  1. POLICY AND SHARED GOVERNANCE. Members of the university community have freedom to address, question, or criticize any matter of institutional policy or practice, whether acting as individuals or as members of an agency of institutional governance.”

The email below, sent on 4/11/2019 by the Provost’s Office Communications Director David Austin at VP for Communication Kyle Henley’s request, to Angela Wilhems, Provost Banavar, and Exec Provost Scott Pratt, directs them to email the directors of the Labor Education and Research Center, the Museum of Natural and Cultural History, and the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art, states

“Kyle [Henley] wants to make sure that people from these areas don’t “freelance” and talk to the media about their frustrations.”

The email goes on to tell these Directors to run media inquiries through Central Communications – meaning Mr. Henley’s office. This sort of warning to administrators not to speak freely to the press is exactly the sort restriction on academic freedom that UO’s Academic Freedom Policy is meant to prohibit. The policy says

“Members of the university community have freedom to address, question, or criticize any matter of institutional policy or practice, whether acting as individualsor as members of an agency of institutional governance.” (Emphasis added.)

Restrictions such as that imposed by this email prevent the university community and the public from obtaining accurate information about the governance of the university, and they reduce trust in the university administration. As President Schill in his 5/17/2019 “Open Mike” email put it,

“Transparency is the best policy. Whenever possible administrators should be as forthcoming as possible, subject to the privacy rights of members of our community.”

I ask you to investigate this potential violation of the Academic Freedom Policy, determine if there have been other similar violations by Central Communications, and take appropriate disciplinary actions to discourage further such violations.

Bill Harbaugh
UO Econ Prof & Senate Pres
https://senate.uoregon.edu

Chris Sinclair
UO Math Assoc Prof & Immediate Past President of the Senate


Academic Freedom Policy at https://policies.uoregon.edu/content/academic-freedom-0:Academic Freedom

The University of Oregon encourages and supports open, vigorous, and challenging debate across the full spectrum of human issues as they present themselves to the university community. The University of Oregon protects free speech through Policy No. 01.00.16. This policy on Academic Freedom builds on these existing commitments by recognizing the special contexts of scholarship, teaching, governance, and public service.  

SECTION 1

  1. SCHOLARSHIP.  The University’s research mission requires that members of the UO community have autonomous freedom to conduct research and produce creative work, and to publish and disseminate that work, limited only by the standards and methods of accountability established by their profession and their individual disciplines.
  2. TEACHING. The University’s responsibility to help students to think critically and independently requires that members of the university community have the right to investigate and discuss matters, including those that are controversial, inside and outside of class, without fear of institutional restraint.  Matters brought up in class should be related to the subject of courses or otherwise be educationally relevant, as determined primarily by the faculty member in charge of the class.
  3. POLICY AND SHARED GOVERNANCE. Members of the university community have freedom to address, question, or criticize any matter of institutional policy or practice, whether acting as individuals or as members of an agency of institutional governance.
  4. PUBLIC SERVICE. Public service requires that members of the university community have freedom to participate in public debate, both within and beyond their areas of expertise, and to address both the university community and the larger society with regard to any matter of social, political, economic, cultural, or other interest. In their exercise of this freedom, university community members have the right to identify their association or title, but should not claim to be acting or speaking on behalf of the University unless authorized to do so.

SECTION 2

These freedoms derive immediately from the university’s basic commitment to advancing knowledge and understanding. The academic freedoms enumerated in this policy shall be exercised without fear of institutional reprisal. Only serious abuses of this policy – ones that rise to the level of professional misbehavior or professional incompetence – should lead to adverse consequences.  Any such determinations shall be made in accordance with established, formal procedures involving judgment by relevant peers.


Austin Email

 

US18/19-20: Approval of 2019 Senate Award Nominees

Date of Notice: April 10. 2019
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Senate Exec Committee, Committee on Committees


Motion

Section I

1.1 Whereas the Senate Executive Committee, the Committee on Committees, and the 2018-2019 Classified and OA senators have deliberated and voted on the 2019 Annual Senate Award nominations.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approve the respective nominees found in the Related Documents.


2019 Annual Senate Award Nominees

Senate Meeting Agenda – May 22, 2019

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

3:15 PM   Approval of Minutes

3:16 PM     Business / Reports:

4:42 PM   Open Discussion
4:43 PM   Other Reports
4:44 PM   Notice(s) of Motion
4:45 PM   Other Business

  • Executive Session: Awards

5:00 PM   Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

Thor Mikesell Candidate Statement 2019

I am interested in continuing my work with and on the OA Council representing the mutual interests of University of Oregon OAs. I am encouraged by the work OA’s perform across all units as we collectively strive to achieve excellence. This year the OA council has worked towards improving and strengthening our shared governance, worked towards clarification of roles and responsibilities, and have worked to develop meaningful paths of career development. While we have achieved many great improvements on behalf of all OAs, there is still a great deal of work to be done and I am eager to continue to build on our previous success.

Please consider me to represent your interests as a member of the OA Council.

Anna Duncan Candidate Statement 2019

I am running for Officers of Administration Council to support institutional change that makes OAs feel satisfied in their jobs. I have been an OA for over seven years. I have also been a UO undergraduate student (BA, magazine journalism – 2002), graduate student (Master of Public Administration – 2008), graduate employee, and classified employee. I serve on the HR Recruitment Implementation Advisory Workgroup and the IS Administrative Technology Domain subcommittee.

As a member of the Officer of Administration Council, I will advocate for rational and transparent changes, specifically:

Clear and transparent OA job families, career pathways, and salary bands: I support OA job families and salary bands that are clearly and publicly defined so that we know where we are, and where we can go from there.

Cohesive and intuitive software systems with sufficient documentation and support: Well-defined software development process is crucial. I have created precise software requirements, and written clear software instructions, at UO and in the nonprofit sector. I am excited to use my understanding to advocate for clarity and accountability in all UO software implementations.

Fair and reduced-bias hiring practices: I believe that artificial barriers to UO employment should be reduced, and eliminated. I have served on approximately 20 OA and classified search committees, and by late April will be a trained Search Advocate. I co-wrote with the CAS Dean’s Office Diversity Action Plan Working Group a report on the current state of, and recommendations for, diversity, equity, and inclusion in CAS’s hiring practices.

Policies that are applied consistently and fairly across employee groups and situations: We know this doesn’t always happen, despite our best intentions. I am determined in my efforts to improve this in my own job, and am ready to take this determination to all of campus.

Our university is in a time of many changes. We know that the more engaged we are, the less frustrating and demoralizing these changes will be, but not everyone has the time or the desire to be publicly involved. I am willing and able to be a public advocate for Officers of Administration and for change that is neither frustrating nor demoralizing. Thank you for considering me as a candidate for OA Council.

Daniel McCarville Candidate Statement 2019

Daniel McCarville is the senior analyst within the Office for Research and Innovation. His work focuses on using data to produce effective, efficient recommendations for our research enterprise. As both a career auditor and political scientist, he maintains a professional commitment to accountable, effective governance.

Prior to working for the University, he was legislative staff for the Kansas Legislature.His professional background includes budget process and policy making. He earned an M.A. in Political Science from the University of Kansas and is currently pursuing an M.S. in Educational Leadership from the University of Oregon’s EMPL program.

Joshua Gordon Candidate Statement 2019

I bring a decade of institutional experience and knowledge at the University of Oregon along with deep experience assessing student-athlete experience across the NCAA to ensure alignment with University Mission and Objectives. I have worked in both neutral and advisory capacities throughout university athletics, from an academic perspective.

Lynn Stephen Candidate Statement 2019

I would like to serve on the FAC. I have served one other time. I am an interdisciplinary scholar who has participated not only in my own department, Anthropology, but also in Ethnic Studies, WGSS, Latin American Studies and several research centers. I founded and directed the Center for Latino/a and Latin American Studies for 8 years, was a co-director of the Center for the Center for the Study of Women in Society, and also was at the Oregon Humanities Center. I have 20 years of experience at UO as a department chair, senior scholar, center director, and other roles. I look forward to bringing an interdisciplinary voice to the FAC spanning Social Sciences, Humanities, and Sciences. I have done a lot of thinking about issues across the University and look forward to provide this big picture perspective on the FAC. I am particularly interested in the future relationship between the Knight Campus and the rest of UO.

Katy Larkin Candidate Statement 2019

I have been working in the Office of the Dean of Students since October 2014 and am currently the Director of Student Conduct and Community Standards. I am also an alumna (2010) from the College of Arts and Sciences. I am dedicated to the ongoing success and advancement of the University. I am also acutely aware of the significant impact of budget restrictions and balancing an ever increasing workload. I believe my knowledge and experience in policy development and analysis, as well as my student development and experience expertise, would serve me well in this role. For these reasons, I would like to be considered to represent the OA voice on the Faculty Advisory Committee.

Nina Fox Candidate Statement 2019

If elected to the Faculty Advisory Council, I am interested in hearing faculty opinion and counsel across the wide variety of affairs at the University. This appointment would allow me the opportunity to talk with and support faculty colleagues in shaping the academic initiatives at the University of Oregon. This would allow me to play an active role in supporting student success at the University of Oregon by collaborating with faculty colleagues to keep the student learning and research experience at the forefront of our endeavors.

If elected to the Officers of Administration Council, I am interested in advancing opportunities for growth and the development of a professional development track for this category of employee at the University. This appointment would allow me share ideas on growth and success for OA’s at the University of Oregon.

Stephanie Prentiss Candidate Statement 2019

I am currently the Vice President of SEIU Local 085/503 and I am very interested in participating within committees that provide opportunities for student success. Providing student success encompasses the equitable and fair working environment for classified staff. Without classified staff, our university and students will struggle to be successful. I believe that this is a cooperative between faculty and classified staff and in conjunction with students as well. I would very much appreciate the opportunity to serve on one of the committees offered, and would feel proud to represent the classified staff in doing so.

Don Dixon Candidate Statement 2019

Don started working for the University as a student worker for the Social Sciences Instructional Lab while working on his degree in General Social Sciences (Focus in Crime, Law, & Society). After graduation, Don has been a full time staff member and Desktop Support Technician for the CASIT Help Desk.

After working full time for almost 5 years, Don decided to get more involved in the University by joining the Traffic Advisory Board, which he has served on for the past few years. Don hopes to continue working on that committee and is excited to join other committees as needed.

Stephen Summers Candidate Statement 2019

I’ve had the unique experience of being both a student/researcher and an instructor/administrator at the University of Oregon, and I’m interested in using that perspective to help guide the institution’s future. Working with students representing diverse abilities, identities, and backgrounds compels me to help ensure their perspectives are likewise included in our institution’s future.

While teaching courses on memory, motivation, communication, and university success, I have become interested in both student psychology and the mentality of the university itself. I look forward to the opportunity to invest in the growth mindset of the campus at large.

Zak Gosa-Lewis Candidate Statement 2019

Having been employed by the University of Oregon for just over a year, I feel confident and comfortable in taking the next step in my involvement here on campus. As a young professional who very selectively chose to pursue employ at UO, I believe in our university and the community we belong to. We, as employees, have responsibilities to not just our students, but also to each other.

I believe it is now my time to take that next step in my responsibility and work for my fellow employees on the larger scale. I am hopeful that you will allow me to represent you and our peers to the best of my abilities.

Suzie Stadelman Candidate Statement 2019

Suzie Stadelman is the Education and Prevention Outreach Coordinator for the University Counseling Center. Formerly an undergraduate and graduate student at the UO, she joined the UCC as a staff member in 2013. Suzie is passionate about suicide prevention and mental health promotion and hopes to bring her expertise in these areas to committees, especially to help make the university a safe and inclusive place for students. She looks forward to working collaboratively and creatively to create positive, sustainable change.

Salmon Norgaard-Stroich Candidate Statement 2019

I am interested in serving on the University Senate and committees, focusing on inclusion, diversity, and equity. I believe the U of O does a good job serving students, but focusing on DEI is an important aspect of ALL of our work to better serve students marginalized by race, class, and gender oppression.

My work at the Outdoor Program focuses on connecting students to a ‘sense of place’ as a way to feel grounded, stay healthy, and experience the amazing environment Oregon has to offer. Our most important goal, however, is to build community. We have recognized that outdoor spaces (and many other spaces on campus) are dominated by white, CIS, and often male students and community members. In my work I am committed to building a more diverse staff, and to serving a more diverse student body, and to helping the University build its cultural competence as a whole.
Salmon Norgaard-Stroich
Assistant Director, UO Outdoor Program

Maggie Bosworth Candidate Statement 2019

Bio: Maggie Bosworth started with the University of Oregon and College of Education in 2015 and is currently the Executive Assistant to the Dean. She is also an alumnus of the University with a Masters in Industrial Relations. Maggie brings a numerous perspectives of the University as an alumnus, a parent of two students (’20 and ’22) and also as a staff member (both classified and now as an officer of administration).
I am interested in gaining a better understanding of the university and its mission while contributing to a more active role in its governance and operations.

Vera Sebulsky Candidate Statement 2019

As an OA and at my third Tier-1 research institution, I want to support UO’s elevation in academic prestige and student services success. My bicultural background and broad experience in student services and recruitment, interaction with faculty (engineering, business, and arts and sciences), and industry outreach have equipped me to give back to UO by suggesting practical ways we can improve the student and faculty experience.

I have worked collaboratively with research and teaching faculty, cultivated a positive student experience and increased programming, and surpassed student recruitment goals in the midst of limited resources and funding. I would advance a broader vision that drives recruitment and retention success by viewing each faculty member and prospective and current student as a valuable member of our community.

Higher education is changing quickly. I aim to be useful in supporting the University to stay relevant and sustainable in a rapidly changing technological landscape with evolving student needs. I will also advocate for UO’s capacity to lead in research excellence in a way it hasn’t yet realized.

Lynette Danley Candidate Statement 2019

Dr. Danley holds a Ph.D. in Higher Education Administration from the University of Iowa and an M.S. in Education from Drake University. Dr. Danley most recently worked as the Interdisciplinary Leadership Doctorate Program Coordinator and an Assistant Professor at Governors State University near Chicago. She has worked extensively in higher education, pipeline programs, and community organizing. She has published widely on higher education, particularly women and girls’ retention and persistence experiences throughout P-20 education.
Dr. Danley effectively collaborates with Deans, Chairs, Division Heads and Program Coordinators to plan and review curricular changes that best served the mission of the program and the enrichment of the academic experience for the students. Dr. Danley is capable in assisting in the development of curriculum and policies for programs. She has a proven record securing full-time faculty and adjunct faculty for assignments and addressing student related academic issues. Dr. Danley also understands instructional design and has the ability to develop face-to-face, online, and hybrid courses for undergraduate and graduate students. She taught courses for Colleges of Education, Arts and Sciences, as well as Honors Programs.
Dr. Danley’s tenacity and compassion to promote collaboration across colleges in order to grow and sustain programs has been met with considerable success. Both faculty and administration indicate their appreciation of her commitment to the continual improvement of holistic education for all students. Dr. Danley’s knowledge and experience of instructional technology is impressive. She understands the value of connecting students to course content and utilizes online instructional methods to increase faculty and students’ technological skills pertinent to their respective disciplines/programs.
At previous institutions, Dr. Danley effectively served on the following university-wide committees: Equity-Minded Planning Team, Graduate Council, Faculty Senate, Assessment 2 Committee, College of Education PEU, Division of Education Admissions Committee and Student Concerns Committee. Dr. Danley’s contributions to each of the committees reflected her enthusiasm to accomplish committee goals, solve challenging issues and bring fresh perspectives to the conversations. Dr. Danley’s ability to advocate for students and adhere to university policies demonstrated how she balanced the ethic of care with the ethic of justice.

Nicole Cartelli Candidate Statement 2019

I am excited to submit my intent to run for an elected committee at the University of Oregon. As a Eugene native and alumni, I was very grateful for an opportunity to further my relationship with the university as a human resources professional. I would be honored to share my skills and knowledge with the greater university community, and to learn more about how our campus works together to accomplish our mission of exceptional teaching, discovery, and service.

Participation as an elected member will not only inform my own work as a human resources professional, it will allow me a new and exciting opportunity to better serve an institution that has been a part of my life for such a very long time.

Jason Silveira Candidate Statement 2019

As an Associate Professor at the University of Oregon, I recognize the importance of shared governance and being a good citizen of the University. Further, as a tenured faculty member I feel it is my responsibility to take on more service commitments to better serve the needs of the University, the faculty, staff, and students as a member of these important committees. My approach to service is student centered, and I engage in service that promotes student development, promotes the institution, and promotes the profession. I have been active in my service to the School of Music and Dance serving on several standing committees and search committees. Recently my research and service have focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion in music education – specifically within the LGBTQ community. I currently serve on the Planning Committee for the LGBT Studies and Music Education Symposium, and will be hosting the conference at UO in summer 2020. I have been fortunate to be able to serve the profession, and I hope to have the opportunity to do so at the university level.

Colin Koopman Candidate Statement 2019

I strongly believe in shared governance and administrative transparency at public education institutions. Because of this, I have greatly valued my previous service on the University Senate, which provides an opportunity for both collaborative and open governance. I have served twice previously (taking a break between my two terms of service during a recent sabbatical year). If elected, I look forward to representing the Humanities and our interests once again.

In my service on Senate thus far I have dedicated my energies there to improving policies that come before the Senate by working with stakeholders and fellow senators both on the senate floor and outside of senate meetings. For instance, much of my work has involved clarifying needlessly confusing policy language. Oftentimes policies come to the senate with vague or ambiguous language that does not adequately represent the intentions of those crafting the policy nor the university goals that the policy is designed to achieve. I have also been involved with more substantive policy crafting, particularly around the following areas on which I have been directly involved in crafting legislation: data policies (including information privacy and data security policies), gender-based harassment policies (particularly in light of needs to achieve conformity with Obama-era Title IX guidance), sexual relations policies, and curriculum policies. Some of my work on these matters was informed by my research expertise in information ethics, political philosophy, and philosophy of law.

If elected, I hope to continue to pursue policy improvements in these and other areas. In addition, I hope to join with fellow senators in pressing for greater institutional transparency at UO, an area in which we have much room for (and I believe will for) improvement.

Michael Hames-Garcia Candidate Statement 2019

I have worked at the UO for nearly 15 years, having arrived as an associate professor in 2005. Shortly after arriving on campus, I did a good deal of service as a program and center director, a department head, and a member of the FPC, FAC, and Graduate Council. I have watched the university change significantly in recent years, both for the better and for the worse.

As an active member of our faculty union, as an advocate for faculty, students, and staff of color, and as someone who has been outspoken on issues ranging from campus sexual assault to financial and programmatic transparency at the UO, I hope to continue to do what I can to make this university more equitable, more accessible, more fair, and more just.

Samantha Hopkins Candidate Statement 2019

I’ve been a member of the Clark Honors College for almost 12 years now, serving on every committee in the college at some point in my time here. I have a pretty good sense of who our faculty and students are, and I feel that I could represent the college well in the Faculty Senate. I would like to make sure that as we grow our faculty through the new business model, we can build our relationships across campus with the other units with which we share our students and faculty.

N. Christopher Phillips Candidate Statement 2019

UO Senate: I believe I have been effective in the UO Senate in my past term, for example in ensuring that the Core Education learning goals derived from the University Mission Statement could be reasonably applied to courses in the sciences (and in art). I have also apparently been more regularly communicating with my constituents than most Senators. So far this has been in my department, using the department mailing list, but a broader list has just become available.

Intercollegiate Athletic Committee: I believe it is essential to have oversight of the intercollegiate athletic programs by a group other than the University Administration. I intend to take an attitude of healthy skepticism but not hostility.

Anne Zemper Candidate Statement 2019

As an LGBTQ woman in science, I am particularly passionate about ensuring the equity and inclusion in not only my research program, but to also use my participation on committees and my position as a professor, to promote equity and inclusion wherever I can have influence. In this, I have participated in a number of programs at University of Oregon to introduce a wide swath of students to the excitement that I find inherent in the sciences. This includes lectures to undergraduate courses that introduce students to research, such as freshman interest groups and the honors college freshman research course. I have also given presentations at two UO programs designed to recruit under-represented groups to STEM programs, the SPUR program through Biology, which provides summer research opportunities, and the Preview Oregon program, which brings talented URM undergraduates to campus for several days to introduce them to the research environment. This past year, I was one of three faculty to sit on a Panel for the LGBTQ in STEM student group here, where we discussed LGBTQ-related issues dealing with Professionalism in Science.

I hope to be elected to be more involved in Equity, Inclusion and Outreach efforts across campus.

Senate Meeting Agenda – May 8, 2019

DRAFT

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

All times are estimates.

3:00 P.M.   Call to order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Bill Harbaugh

3:10 PM   Approval of Minutes

3:11 PM     Business / Reports:

  • Update: Knight Campus and Bioengineering program; Patrick Phillips (Biology, Advisor to the President)
  • Report: Data Science Initiative; Bill Cresko (Biology, Office of the Provost)
  • Discuss: US18/19-18: Enhancing Engagement in Academic Governance; Elizabeth Skowron (Psychology, Senate VP)
  • Discuss: US18/19-20: Policy on Hiring and Promotion of Academic Administrators; Bill Harbaugh (Economics, Senate President)
  • Discuss: US18/19-19: Core Ed Distribution Requirements; Chris Sinclair (Mathematics)
  • Senate VP Elections: solicitation of self-nominees, election process, compensation; Bill Harbaugh (Economics, Senate President)
  • Report on Research Metrics and Faculty Tracking Software; Scott Pratt (Executive Vice Provost) and Ellen Herman (History, Office of the Provost)
  • Legislative Update; Melanie Muenzer (Assoc VP Vice Provost of Academic Initiatives)

4:35 PM   Open Discussion
4:36 PM   Other Reports
4:37 PM   Notice(s) of Motion
4:40 PM   Other Business

  • Executive Session: Honorary Degrees

5:00 PM   Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

US18/19-19: Policy on Hiring and Promotion of Academic Administrators

Date of Notice: April 10, 2019
Current Status: Postponed on 05/22/2019
Motion Type: Policy Proposal
Sponsor: Bill Harbaugh, Economics


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS  the University of Oregon does not currently have a policy on the hiring and promotion of Academic Administrators;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approves the Policy on Hiring and Promotion of Academic Administrators as outlined in the Related Documents.


Policy on Hiring and Promotion of Academic Administrators proposal

US18/19-17: Updates to the General Limitations of the Bachelor’s Degree

Date of Notice: April 24, 2019
Current Status: Approved May 22, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Core Education Council


Motion

Section I

1.1  Whereas the University of Oregon has recently reconfigured the core ed requirements; and

1.2 Whereas the Core Ed Council “oversee[s] that part of the University curriculum which is
required of all undergraduate students”; and

1.3 Whereas Core Education Credits are defined to be those satisfying an Area of Inquiry (Social Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Arts & Letters), Writing, Global Perspectives and US-Difference, Inequality, Agency, and/or a Bachelor degree specific requirement.

Section II

2.1 Be it therefore moved that the existing General Limitations for the Bachelor’s Degrees found at http://uocatalog.uoregon.edu/admissiontograduation/bachelorrequirements/ under the heading “General Limitations” be replaced with the following General Limitations for Bachelor’s Degrees:

    1. A total maximum of 124 credits may be transferred from domestic, regionally accredited junior or community colleges and from international junior or technical colleges. Of the total maximum of 124 credits, only 90 credits may be transferred from an international junior or technical college.
    2. A maximum of 48 credits in law, medicine, pharmacy, chiropractic medicine, dentistry, non-academic technology or any combination may be used toward fulfilling total credit hours for bachelor’s degrees.
    3. A maximum of 24 credits may be used toward fulfilling total credits in the following areas (a,b,c, and d) with not more than 12 in any one area:
        1. Lower-division professional-technical courses;
        2. Physical education activity, Military Science activity (e.g. MIL 131 and 331), and dance activity (DANC) courses, except for dance activity courses for majors in dance;
        3. Music lessons Performance in Music (in any the subject code including MUP, MUS and MUJ), except for majors in music;
        4. Applied and/or experiential courses, academic support skills courses, non-academic field experience courses, or career and professional development courses.
    4.  For music majors, a maximum of 24 credits in music lessons performance (in any the subject code including MUP, MUS and MUJ) may count toward requirements for the BA or BS degree.
    5. For dance majors, a maximum of 36 credits of DANC may count toward requirements for the BA or BS degree.
    6. University of Oregon academic records are sealed thirty days after the official conferral date of a degree. After this date, changes to majors and minors, addition of departmental honors, removal of incompletes, grade changes, or other changes to an academic record cannot be made.
    7. When the University awards credits for Advanced Placement Program (AP), International Baccalaureate Program (IB), Cambridge Examination Program, the College-Level Examination Program (CLEP), and credit by examination (course challenge), these credits are counted toward the satisfaction of bachelor’s degree requirements–except residency and the 45 UO credits graded A,B,C,D. When the university grants credit for AP, IB, Cambridge, and CLEP examinations, pass (P*) credit is granted.
    8. For limitations related to repeated courses please refer to UO Policy on Repeatable and Non-repeatable Undergraduate Courses.
    9. Students may not receive credit for any course assessed as having substantially similar content as a course for which they have already received credit.
    10. Students may not receive credit for courses beneath their assessed competency level. Competency level can be assessed by various means such as placement scores, faculty/departmental assessment, etc.
    11. Student may not receive credit for courses that are designated by the department as regressive prerequisites for courses in which they are currently enrolled or have already received credit.
    12. Students must be enrolled with must have degree-seeking status in order to earn an undergraduate major, minor or certificate; undergraduate majors, minors and certificates must be completed at the time the degree is awarded.

2.2 Be it further moved, that the relevant academic unit will be involved in the determination of what credit/courses are restricted in points 9, 10 and 11 of 2.1.

2.3 Be it further moved that the “One Course” restriction under the existing Group Requirements be replaced with

“Students may use a maximum of 3 courses that have the same subject code(s) as their primary major (e.g. MUS, MUJ for music majors) to simultaneously count for both a student’s major requirements and Areas of Inquiry requirements.”

2.4 Be it further moved that, under Group Requirements for Specific Degrees, 1. Bachelor of Arts, Fine Arts, or Science, the language “Each group must include (a) at least two courses with the same subject code and (b) at least one course with a different subject code. No more than three courses with the same subject code may be used to fulfill the 45-credit requirement.” be replaced with:

Students must take courses in at least two subject codes in each Area of Inquiry. Students may use a maximum of 3 courses in any one subject code toward the total credits across all Areas of Inquiry.”

And that under Group Requirements for Specific Degrees, 2. Bachelor of Architecture, Fine Arts, Education, Interior Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Music, or Music in Music Education, the language “Each group must include at least two courses with different subject codes. Two groups must each include at least two courses with the same subject code. No more than three courses with the same subject code may be used to fulfill the total 36-credit requirement.” be replaced with:

Students must take courses in at least two subject codes in each Area of Inquiry. Students may use a maximum of 3 courses in any one subject code toward the total credits across all Areas of Inquiry.”

2.5 Be it further moved that the limitations in 2.1-2.4 be effective Fall 2020, and will go into effect for all students; students who were admitted under the existing rules/limitations may opt to have those limitations apply.

Effective date: Fall 2019 for incoming undergraduate students.
Passed the Core Ed Council unanimously on 4/24/2019.


Updated Draft  of Motion – May 20, 2019

Updated Draft – May 22, 2019

US18/19-18: Enhancing Engagement in Academic Governance

Date of Notice: April 30, 2019
Current Status: Approved May 22, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsors: Elizabeth Skowron, Professor, Department of Psychology, Senate Vice President
Lara Bovilsky, Associate Professor, Department of English, Graduate Council Chair
William Harbaugh, Professor, Department of Economics, Senate President
Frances White, Professor, Department of Anthropology, Academic Council Co-Chair & Chair, Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1  WHEREAS, the UO Senate passed legislation establishing the membership structure for each of the following Senate Committees (Graduate Council, Undergraduate Council, Committee on Courses, and the Core Education Council); and

1.2  WHEREAS, the UO Senate President, Vice President, and Chairs of these academic senate committees would like to support communication and collaboration between these aforementioned committees and the UO Senate, in furtherance of shared governance; and

1.3  WHEREAS, the charge(s) for each of these Senate Committees (e.g., Graduate Council, Undergraduate Council, Committee on Courses, and the Core Education Council) do not designate a voting seat for a current member of the Senate;

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the UO Senate authorizes the incoming Senate President, in consultation with the respective Senate Committee Chair, outgoing Senate President, and Senate Executive Committee to: (a) solicit self-nominations from current UO senators, and (b) appoint or cause to be appointed, one senator to each of these four Senate committees to serve for a two-year term as a full, voting committee member, (c) where no senator is currently serving on said committee.  Senators eligible for appointment consist of members of the statutory faculty (TTF and Career).

2.2 If the selected individual is no longer serving in the Senate, for any reason, senate leadership in consultation with the respective committee chair will follow the procedures above in 2.1 to appoint a replacement from among current Senators.


Financial Impact: Cost Neutral


Appendix:  List of Academic Committees Relevant in this Policy

Graduate Council

Lara Bovilsky, Chair
Sierra Dawson
Erik Girvan
Burke Hendrix
Elim Hernandez-Santos
Andrew Karduna
Alison Kwok
Seth Lewis
Celeste Mena-Morales
Fabienne Moore
Jeremy Piger
Jana Prikryl
Nicholas Proudfoot
Phil Scher
Leslie Straka
Marcia Walker
Hailin Wang
Mark Watson
Angela Whalen
Janet Woodruff-Borden
Hong Yuan

Undergraduate Council

Maeve Anderson
Jagdeep Bala
Diane Bordenkircher
Ron Bramhall
Jessica Cronce
Dennis Galvan
Michele Henney
Kimberly Johnson
Harinder Khalsa
Kathleen Lenn
Kelli Matthews, Co-Chair
Drew Nobile
Daisy O’Lice-Williams
Craig Parsons
Julia Pomerenk
Jana Prikryl, Co-Chair
Lee Rumbarger
Caleb Southworth
Mike Urbancic
Frances White
Michelle Wood

Committee on Courses

Ron Bramhall
Kristy Bryant-Berg
Christian Cherry
Tom Greenbowe
Roberta Mann
Bil Morrill
Julia Pomerenk
Jana Prikryl
Scott Skelton
Mike Urbancic
Kathy Warden
Frances White, Chair

Core Education Council

Ron Bramhall, Co-Chair
Christian Cherry
Edward Davis
Kassia Dellabough
Dennis Galvan
Pedro García-Caro
Austin Hocker
Harinder Khalsa
Lori Manson
Julia Pomerenk
Lee Rumbarger
Alison Schmitke
Doneka Scott
Emily Simnitt
Christopher Sinclair, Co-Chair
Mike Urbancic
Carolyn Vogt
Kathy Warden
Nicole Wilson

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 24, 2019

DRAFT.

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

All times are estimates.

3:00 P.M.   Call to order

  • University update: Provost Banavar
  • Introductory Remarks; Senate Pres Harbaugh
  • Senate committee review report: Senate VP Skowron

3:30 PM   Approval of Minutes

3:31 PM     Business/ Reports:

4:50 PM   Open Discussion
4:51 PM   Other Reports

  • Legislative update; Robert Garral (OtP)

4:58 PM   Notice(s) of Motion

  • Core Ed Distribution Requirements; Senator Chris Sinclair

4:59 PM   Other Business
5:00 PM   Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

US18/19-16: Supporting the Other Academic Units and requesting more equitable expediture reductions

Date of Notice: April 18, 2019
Current Status: Approved April 24, 2019
Motion Type: Resolution
Sponsor: Ed Davis, Senator


Motion

Section I

1.1  WHEREAS the University of Oregon’s mission statement says that it strives for, “… the generation, dissemination, preservation, and application of knowledge”; and

1.2  WHEREAS the Values enumerated in the mission statement include, “We value the unique geography, history and culture of Oregon that shapes our identity and spirit,” and, “We value our shared charge to steward resources sustainably and responsibly”; and

1.3  WHEREAS the Museum of Natural and Cultural History and the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art are both accredited by the American Alliance of Museums, reflecting the uniformly high quality of their curatorial practices, collections-based research, and public-facing outreach programs, placing them in the highest ranks of museums in the United States; and

1.4  WHEREAS the exhibits and collections at the Museum of Natural and Cultural History and the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art are used by faculty in allied units in the College of Arts and Sciences and the College of Design for both undergraduate education and original research; and

1.5  WHEREAS the Museum of Natural and Cultural History is the designated repository for anthropological and fossil collections in the state of Oregon and was recognized with a National Medal for Museum and Library Service in 2018; and

1.6  WHEREAS the Labor Education and Research Center has, for the last 42 years, strived to improve the lives of Oregon’s workers, their families, and their communities through integrated education, research, and public service that supports a strong, inclusive union movement; and

1.7  WHEREAS the Oregon Bach Festival has, for almost half a century, presented masterworks of J.S. Bach and composers inspired by his work to audiences in Eugene and across Oregon, offering educational opportunities, children and family programming, and community events, while supporting the academic mission of the School of Music and Dance; and

1.8  WHEREAS the University of Oregon must balance its budget through $11.6 million in expenditure reductions, but has chosen to reduce the budgets of these units by a combined $1.2 million, or 10% of the total of the University’s expenditure reduction, averaging out to 23% of the overall budgets of each of these units (including both UO funds and state allocations); and

1.9  WHEREAS the budget reductions of the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art will be 15.1%, the Museum of Natural and Cultural History will be 16.6%, the Oregon Bach Festival will be 24.4%, and the Labor Education and Research Center will be 45% of each of their General Fund budgets.

Section II

2.1  THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Senate of the University of Oregon affirms the intrinsic value of the academic work of these units, recognizing that their work in preserving and educating Oregonians in the unique geography, history, and culture of Oregon is central to the University’s mission,

2.2  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the disproportionate cuts to these units that serve to generate, disseminate, preserve, and apply knowledge of Oregon’s labor relations, arts, cultural history, and evolutionary and geological history, do not reflect an appropriate stewardship of those resources sustainably and responsibly. Consequently, we, the Senate, request that the University of Oregon rethink its plan for expenditure reductions to distribute them more equitably across all units.

Note: Technical change to 1.9 made 4/21, replacing “overall” with “General Fund”.

UOPD Report: Near Campus Crime Data

From: Senate President [mailto:senatepres@uoregon.edu
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 10:11 PM
To: Mike H Schill <mschill@uoregon.edu>; Matthew Carmichael <mecarmic@uoregon.edu>
Subject: crime wave data
 
Dear President Schill and Chief Carmichael – 
 
Having now heard several administrators repeat President Schill’s statements about a west campus crime wave, I started to wonder if there was any actual data on this. 
 
As it happens the EPD website allows for rudimentary searches of their dispatch log, at http://coeapps.eugene-or.gov/EPDDispatchLog/Search
 
Because the EPD webpage requires a street name, I focused on incidents with an address that included E 13th Ave, since this seems to be where the “bad actors” like to hang out. I searched for incidents reported from January 1 to March 19th for the years 2016 – 2019. The files are attached. They include everything from the trivial on up, so in addition to total incidents I looked for thefts and assaults. I found:
 
2016: 190 incidents, 11 thefts, 4 assaults
2017: 198 incidents, 11 thefts, 11 assaults
2018: 163 incidents, 11 thefts, 5 assaults
2019: 149 incidents, 15 thefts, 0 assaults
 
Obviously these data are limited, but they don’t seem consistent with a crime wave. If you have any additional data regarding trends in west campus crime I’d appreciate it if you’d share that with me.  
 
Thanks,
 
Bill Harbaugh
UO Senate Pres, Econ Prof

On Apr 3, 2019, at 1:57 PM, Matt Carmichael <Matt.Carmichael@uopd.org> wrote:

Good afternoon,
 
Thank you for your patience.  I hope you find the enclosed information helpful.
 
Sincerely,
 
Matt 

<senate_response_final.pdf>


On Apr 3, 2019, at 2:06 PM, Senate President <senatepres@uoregon.edu> wrote:

Hi Matt, thanks for this report, which however is just a snapshot of the most recent data, and does not provide any time trends. 

The data I used, while from a more limited (but arguably more relevant) geographical area, shows a decrease over time:

2016: 190 incidents, 11 thefts, 4 assaults
2017: 198 incidents, 11 thefts, 11 assaults
2018: 163 incidents, 11 thefts, 5 assaults
2019: 149 incidents, 15 thefts, 0 assaults

If you come across any information on trends, I’d be interested in seeing it.

Bill Harbaugh
UO Econ Prof & Senate Pres
https://senate.uoregon.edu

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download

US18/19-15: New Program Proposal: Ph.D. in PPPM

Date of Notice: April 9, 2019
Current Status: Approved April 24, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Rich Margerum


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 Ph.D. in Planning and Public Affairs in the School of Planning, Public Policy and Management 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 to approve the Ph.D. in Planning and Public Affairs in the School of Planning, Public Policy and Management (please see Related Documents section).


Ph.D. in PPPM Proposal

US18/19-14: Phase out Current Student ‘Course Evaluations’ and Replace with Learning-Focused ‘Student Experience Surveys’

Date of Notice: March 19, 2019
Current Status: April 10, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS peer-reviewed research on the student evaluation of teaching has provided evidence that student course evaluations like those used at UO reflect bias with respect to gender and may reflect bias with respect to race, and that the numerical scores are statistically orthogonal to student learning; see for example the meta-analysis indicating student ratings are not related to student learning by Uttl, White and Wong Gonzalez (2017); the randomized, controlled, blind experiment related to gender bias by Boring, Ottoboni, and Stark (2016); and an online course experiment exposing gender bias by MacNell, Driscoll, and Hunt (2015);

1.2 WHEREAS in Spring 2017 the UO Senate initiated a multi-year effort “evaluating and improving course evaluations and peer reviews with respect to reducing biases and improving validity, with the goal of improving teaching, learning, and equity” – 2017 Motion to Create Teaching Evaluation Task Force;

1.3 WHEREAS guiding principles for this work have been to ensure teaching evaluation is fair and transparent; informed by data collected from peers, students, and instructors themselves; and based on clear definitions of teaching quality rooted in the university’s broad “inclusive, engaged, and research-led” pillars; and to ensure that instructors receive actionable feedback for their own purposes of continuous improvement;

1.4 WHEREAS in Spring 2018 the UO Senate adopted a Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching System, which approved centrally administered midterm student experience surveys (results only available to instructors) and course-level instructor reflection surveys (results included in instructors’ files), and forming and charging a standing committee with developing a new end-of-term student survey and addressing other issues related to the context, policy, and tools used in teaching evaluation;

1.5 WHEREAS in January 2019 the UO Senate voted unanimously to include in instructor files language that requires teaching be evaluated “primarily using peer reviews, instructor self-reflection, and substantive written comments,” and that “numerical student evaluations of teaching should not be used as a standalone measure of teaching quality for any university purpose” – 2019 Policy on Teaching Evaluation Disclaimer Language;

1.6 WHEREAS the evaluation of courses and instructors is the work of the faculty and unit leaders, and although student feedback about their learning experience may assist evaluators in that work, a Student Experience Survey is not a course evaluation in and of itself.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED: beginning in Fall 2019, the University will phase out its current student “Course Evaluations” and replace them with an end-of-term “Student Experience Survey” and this process will be complete by Spring 2020.

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: the Student Experience Survey will offer specific prompts for written student feedback, asking students to report how specific elements of the course—for example, course materials, feedback, organization, interactions with peers, and their own investment of time and effort—affect their learning experience. The Senate CIET Committee will develop procedures and guidelines regarding the addition of customized questions by units and/or instructors to the Student Experience Survey. The surveys will not ask generic evaluative questions such as “What is the quality of this instructor’s teaching?”

2.3 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: the information provided by the Student Experience Survey will not be used as a standalone tool to rate instructors for the purposes of merit, promotion, tenure or renewal, but rather as one source of information to be included, along with peer reviews and instructor reflections, etc., in the evaluation of instructors in light of their academic unit’s criteria for quality teaching.

2.4 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: the Senate’s Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching (CIET) Committee will continue to refine the Student Experience Survey and reporting forms in cooperation with departments, schools, and colleges. The Committee will make annual reports to the Senate about this ongoing work.

2.5 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: the Senate CIET Committee will develop procedures for determining whether to redact comments instructors have flagged as hateful or discriminatory.

2.6 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: In collaboration with the Office of Student Conduct, the Senate CIET Committee will develop procedures to ensure that students who have been found responsible for academic misconduct will be not be able to complete the Student Experience Survey for that course.

2.7 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: the Senate CIET Committee will continue to refine a protocol for instructors who wish to allow their students to complete the web-based Student Experience Survey in class. The Senate CIET Committee will also develop and disseminate materials (videos, handouts) that will help students provide feedback in the Student Experience Survey that is actionable, concrete, and focused on their learning experience.

2.8 BE IT FURTHER MOVED: the Senate CIET Committee, in collaboration with the Office of Institutional Research and the Office of the Registrar, will phase out the current numerical “P&T report” generated by the Office of the Registrar and replace it with a new annual report that combines information from the Student Experience Survey and Instructor Reflection in a format that, when combined with peer review of teaching reports, can be used by unit heads to evaluate instructors against the unit’s criteria for quality teaching. The committee will continue to study the issue of biases in student evaluations.

2.9  BE IT FURTHER MOVED: The Senate CIET Committee will produce recommendations for UO faculty search committees regarding materials they might request as evidence of teaching quality or promise above and beyond student ratings.

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 10, 2019

DRAFT

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to order

  • Remarks: President Schill
  • Introductory Remarks. To include budget crisis, our regional accreditor’s proposed changes to standards, University nominations survey, Dean’s nights at Faculty Club; Senate Pres Bill Harbaugh

3:30 PM   Approval of Minutes

3:30 PM     Business/ Reports:

4:50 PM   Open Discussion
4:51 PM   Reports

  • Legislative update, Melanie Muenzer (OtP)

4:58 PM   Notice(s) of Motion

4:59 PM   Other Business
5:00 PM   Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

Presidential Responses to Senate Actions (JanFeb2019)

Please see the following attachment for President Schill’s responses to recent senate actions:

US18/19-03: Addendum to the Spring 2018 Curriculum Report
US18/19-05: Changes in Department Honors process
US18/19-06: New Program Proposal: Ph.D. in Ethnic Studies
US18/19-07: Conflicts of Interest and Abuses of Power: Sexual, Physically Intimate, or Romantic Relationships with Students
US18/19-08: Approval of new Teaching Evaluation Disclaimer Language
US18/19-09: Process of Undergraduate and Graduate Council Approval when courses are not finalized

Memo

Senate Meeting Agenda – March 13, 2019

DRAFT – Note that a minor update to the COI proposal may be coming.

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

3:00 P.M.    Call to order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate Pres Bill Harbaugh
  • University Report: Provost Jayanth Banavar

3:30 PM    Approval of Minutes

  • February 13, 2019

3:30 PM      Business/ Reports:

4:50 PM    Open Discussion
4:51 PM    Reports

  • Legislative update, Melanie Muenzer (OtP)

4:58 PM    Notice(s) of Motion

  • Replacing the old end of term Student Evaluation of Teaching with a new Student Experience Survey.

4:59 PM    Other Business
5:00 PM    Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

US18/19-13: Approval of Curriculum Report, Winter 2019

Date of Notice: January 16, 2019
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: UO Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Winter Term 2019 Preliminary Curriculum Report (Addendum 03/13/2019) for the University Senate review;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED the University Senate approves the Fall 2018 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.

US18/19-12: Conflict of Interest, Conflict of Commitment, and Outside Activities policy revisions

Date of Notice: November 28, 2018
Current Status: March 13, 2019
Motion Type: Policy Proposal
Sponsor: Elizabeth Skowron (Education and Senate VP)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS a joint administrative and senate task force was charged by the University President and University Senate President with reviewing and revising the former “Conflicts of Interest, Potential” policy; and

1.2 WHEREAS University employees are encouraged to engage in outside activities that advance the mission of the University with the expectation that those activities be proactively disclosed if they would or could present a conflict of interest so they can be managed in a manner that protects integrity, ensures legal compliance, and promotes good stewardship of public resources; and

1.3 WHEREAS the University is prohibited from authorizing outside compensation that “does not comport with the mission of the public university or substantially interferes with an officer’s or employee’s duties to the university.” (ORS 352.232(2)); and

1.4 WHEREAS the current policy was first adopted in 1991, provides unclear guidance about permitted and unpermitted outside activities, currently overlaps unnecessarily with other policies specific to sponsored research, and is not clear which employee groups it covers, though state ethics law applies to all employees; and

1.5 WHEREAS the current policy addresses both conflict of interest and conflict of commitment; and

1.6 WHEREAS the joint Administration-Senate committee charged with this work sought to set forth principles that permit university employees to engage in activities outside the university while preserving their primary professional responsibilities to the university, and not interfere with academic and personal freedoms involved in choosing to engage in those outside activities;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the revisions to the existing policy “Conflict of Interest, Potential,” with this revised policy proposal entitled, “Conflict of Interest, Conflict of Commitment, and Outside Activities” as outlined in the Related Documents.

 


Related Documents

Amended on the floor: Final Draft (approved 03/13/2019)

 

CANCELLED – Senate Meeting for February 27, 2019

2/26: This meeting is cancelled, given the bad and deteriorating weather. The voting items below will be rescheduled for our March 13th meeting. Senate Pres Harbaugh.

DRAFT

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

3:00 P.M.    Call to order

  • Report: UO Finances, Jamie Moffit (VPFA)
  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Bill Harbaugh

3:30 PM    Approval of Minutes

  • February 13, 2019

3:30 PM      Business/ Reports:

4:50 PM    Open Discussion
4:51 PM    Reports

  • Legislative update, Melanie Muenzer (OtP)

4:58 PM    Notice(s) of Motion
4:59 PM    Other Business
5:00 PM    Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

US18/19-11: Requiring Canvas for Core Ed Courses

Date of Notice: January 16, 2019
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion Type: Policy Proposal
Sponsor: Core Education Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS The Core Ed Council voted unanimously in support of this motion on January 28, 2019; and

1.2 WHEREAS the high school to college transition is challenging to many students and performance in the first year is correlated with student success; and

1.3 WHEREAS LMS use is correlated with undergraduate student success; and

1.4 WHEREAS Canvas is FERPA compliant, and other cloud-based grading systems (Google Sheets, etc) may not be; and

1.5 WHEREAS Between Fall 2017 and Winter 2019, 40% of UO Core Ed Courses had not published their Canvas site; and

1.6 WHEREAS The motion is supported by the Deans Council;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that Instructors of Record in classes that count toward “core education” requirements (including Areas of Inquiry; Difference, Inequality and Agency; Global Perspectives; Writing, and BA/BS requirements) shall use, and make available the Learning Management System (LMS) site for the core ed class, prior to the first meeting, to students enrolled in the course.

  • At a minimum, the LMS site for a core ed class shall include information about what requirements the course satisfies, any Methods of Inquiry covered by the course, a course syllabus, any significant assessments, and students’ current performance in the course.
  • The Senate instructs the Core Ed Council to work with the Office of the Provost (and/or other administrative offices) to automate the insertion into the LMS sites of core ed courses the official course description approved by UOCC, any core ed requirements the course satisfies, the Methods of Inquiry and associated learning outcomes approved by UOCC and standard language regarding relevant university policies pertinent to students in core ed courses (AEC, student conduct code, etc). The Senate instructs the Core Ed Council to work with Libraries (and/or other administrative offices) to provide LMS training and support for instructors of courses which count toward core ed courses.

Implementation date: Fall 2020.

Senate Meeting Agenda – February 13, 2019

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
  • University update: President Mike Schill

3:15 PM    Approval of Minutes

3:20 PM      Business/ Reports:

4:55 PM    Open Discussion
4:56 PM    Reports

  • Oregon Legislative updates: Melanie Muenzer, Robert Garral

4:58 PM    Notice(s) of Motion
4:59 PM    Other Business
5:00
PM    Adjourn to Faculty Club, all invited!

US18/19-10: Academic Continuity Plan policy proposal

Date of Notice: November 28, 2018
Current Status: Approved April 24, 2019
Motion Type: Policy Proposal
Sponsor: Academic Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS in 2014 the Academic Integrity Task Force was tasked with evaluating the Fall 2014 Academic Continuity Plan and consulting with faculty, department heads and administrators to develop and implement plans to preserve academic integrity researching and drafting a report on academic continuity in the event of an emergency that causes significant academic disruption on campus; and

1.2 WHEREAS the Academic Integrity Task Force recommended that during Winter term 2015, the Senate President convene the Academic Council and charge that body with developing, in consultation with Academic Affairs and the President’s office, clear protocols for the involvement of the Senate and the relevant Senate committees in campus-wide academic planning and decision-making; and

1.3 WHEREAS the university is required by Federal financial aid requirements to demonstrate student academic progress through the issuance of final course grades, and the university does not currently have the ability to do that in the event of a significant academic disruption where some or all final grades cannot be issued; and

1.4 WHEREAS students may be negatively impacted in a variety of ways if they do not receive emergency grades during a significant academic disruption; and

1.5 WHEREAS the University Senate is the sole faculty governance authority over all academic matters as commonly understood in higher education, and as such has sole authority over the methods of instruction and awarding of grades; and

1.6 WHEREAS the Office of the General Counsel has raised no legal objections to the proposed policy (Memo fr: General Counsel, April 16, 2019) while stating that the President ultimately retains emergency authority over such matters; and

1.7 WHEREAS the Academic Council has now developed this Academic Continuity Plan and recommends its approval by the University Senate.

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED that the University Senate approves the Academic Continuity Plan policy (Please see Related Documents below).


Related Documents

Academic Continuity Plan – FINAL (04/03/2018)
GTFF Written Response to Academic Continuity Plan 03/13/19
General Counsel Analysis Memo
Presidential Response

US18/19-09: Process for Undergraduate and Graduate Council approval when courses are not finalized

Date of Notice: January 16, 2019
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Academic Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS Courses required for majors, minors, certificates or other transcripted credentials must have permanent rather than generic or experimental numbers, and

1.2 WHEREAS proposals to change transcripted credentials may need to temporarily include courses that are in the process of being regularized or changed;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the following clarification of the approval process to be added to the Procedures for curricular changes.

Clarification of process when changing or creating courses required for majors, minors, certificates, and specializations

A course may be offered under an experimental number for a maximum of three times, at which time it must be either submitted for permanent approval or dropped from the department course offerings. Experimental courses are afforded none of the rights that approved courses have (i.e., they cannot be listed as required courses in degree programs, cannot have pre-requisites, cannot have expanded course descriptions, cannot be designated as group-satisfying or multicultural-satisfying, etc.).

Regularizing or changing courses for proposed new majors, minors, etc.

Courses required for majors, minors, certificates or other transcripted credentials must have permanent rather than generic or experimental numbers. Proposals to the Graduate or Undergraduate Council to add new or change existing transcripted credentials should, therefore, endeavor to have new courses or revised courses approved before submission. In rare cases, expedited approval may be requested from the Council for proposals that temporarily include courses that are in the process of being regularized or changed. Such requests might happen, for example, in response to rapidly emerging opportunities. In order for expedited approval to occur, course proposals must be initiated in the Course Inventory Management system (CourseLeaf) in outline form but with sufficient detail that the UOCC can determine that these classes will likely be approvable when the final version is submitted by the proposer. The UOCC representative on the Council will then report either that 1) these courses are on track to be approved and can be included as temporary required classes so that the proposal can move forward for a Council vote, or 2) these classes are not ready and that the proposal needs to wait for these classes to reach this “likely approvable” stage before a vote can be taken.

US18/19-08: Teaching Evaluation Disclaimer Language

Date of Notice: January 30, 2019
Current Status: Approved January 30 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee has proposed disclaimer language to be utilized in conjunction with teaching evaluations from the old system to inform persons evaluating faculty promotion and tenure files until we fully transition to a new course evaluation system;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the Teaching Evaluation Disclaimer language as outlined in Related Documents.


Related Documents

Teaching Evaluation Disclaimer Language

US18/19-07: Conflicts of Interest and Abuses of Power: Sexual, Physically Intimate, or Romantic Relationships with Students

Date of Notice: November 1, 2018
Current Status: Approved January 30, 2019
Motion Type: Policy Proposal
Sponsor: Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (CSGBV)


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence was tasked with revising the UO policy on intimate relationships on campus, in cooperation with the Office of General Counsel;

Section II

2.1 THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate approves the Conflicts of Interest and Abuses of Power: Sexual, Physically Intimate, or Romantic Relationships with Students policy proposal (please see related documents below).


Related Documents

Policy Draft: REDLINE
Policy Draft: CLEAN
Policy Draft: REDLINE version 2… submitted as amendment

Drafts amended at January 30, 2019 Senate meeting: REDLINE, CLEAN

Senate Meeting Agenda – January 30, 2019

DRAFT (updated 1/30 and 1/29 regarding the sexual relationships policy and Teaching Evals disclaimer language)

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

3:15 PM    Approval of Minutes

3:20 PM      Business/ Reports:

  • Discussion: US18/19-06: New Program Proposal: Ph.D. in Ethnic Studies; Lynn Fujiwara (ES), Ernesto Martinez (ES), Laura Pulido (ES) and Lara Bovilsky (Grad Council)
  • Vote: US18/19-07: Conflicts of Interest and Abuses of Power: Sexual, Physically Intimate, or Romantic Relationships with Students; Sonja Boos (German & Scandinavian), Jessica Price (General Counsel’s Office). NOTE from Senate Pres: This policy was given to the Senate by the CSGBV at our Jan 16th meeting. The text of that version of the policy is here.  CSGBV co-chairs Sonja Boos and Ib Gassama have been working with senators and CSGBV members on new language to incorporate issues raised in the Senate discussion. That revised version is here. At the Senate meeting I will ask for a motion to substitute it by amendment, so that we can proceed to debate this revised version, and consider any additional amendments from the floor.
  • [SUSPENSION OF RULES] Teaching Evals Disclaimer Language; Bill Harbaugh
  • Discussion: Carol Gering, New VP for Online & Distance Education
  • Vote:  US18/19-05: Changes to Department Honors Process; Ron Bramhall
  • Discussion: Process for new program approval when course approvals are pending; Frances White
  • Oregon Legislative updates; Melanie Muenzer

4:55 PM    Open Discussion
4:56 PM    Reports
4:57 PM    Notice(s) of Motion

  • Academic Continuity Plan; Frances White

4:54 PM    Other Business
5:00
PM    Adjourn

US18/19-06: New Program Proposal: Ph.D. in Ethnic Studies

Date of Notice: December 11, 2018
Current Status: Approved January 30, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Graduate Council
Lynn Fujiwara, Ethnic Studies
Ernesto Martinez, Ethnic Studies
Laura Pulido, Ethnic Studies


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 Ph.D. program in Ethnic 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.


Related Documents

M.A. proposal for HECC
Ph.D. proposal for HECC
Slide Presentation

 

 

US18/19-05: Changes to Department Honors Process

Date of Notice: November 28, 2018
Current Status: Approved January 30, 2019
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: Undergraduate Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Senate tasked the Academic Council in motion US17/18-15 with responding to several recommendations from the Honors Task Force Report;

1.2 WHEREAS the Academic Council asked the undergraduate council to address the recommendations as they fall under the undergraduate council charge

1.3 WHEREAS the undergraduate council consulted reviewed the Honors Task Force report and developed the attached guidelines over 3 undergraduate council meeting

Section II

BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the Senate approve and adopt the attached Departmental or Program Honors Guidelines effective Fall 2019.


Related Documents

Department Honors Guidelines 2019

US18/19-03: Addendum to Spring 2018 Curriculum Report

Date of Notice: Dec 12, 2018
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion type: Legislation
Sponsor: UO Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS there was a technical glitch in the Course Leaf system that prevented course changes approved by the UO Committee on Courses from appearing in the Spring 2018 Curriculum Report;

2.2 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate retroactively approves the additional course changes outlined in the Addendum to the Spring 2018 Curriculum Report (please see related documents).


Related Documents

Addendum to Spring 2018 Curriculum Report

Senate Meeting Agenda – January 16, 2019

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
  • Remarks: President Schill
  • Nominations for Honorary Degrees; Elizabeth Skowron
  • Conflict of Interest/Commitment policy draft updates; Elizabeth Skowron

3:20 PM    Approval of Minutes

  • October 3, 2018
  • November 14, 2018
  • November 28, 2018

3:25 PM      Business/ Reports:

4:55 PM    Open Discussion
4:56 PM    Reports
4:57 PM    Notice(s) of Motion

  • Changes to temp course policies for new majors; Frances White

    4:59 PM    Other Business
    5:00 PM    Adjourn to Faculty Club through front door of Schnitzer Museum

US18/19-02: Approval of Curriculum Report, Fall 2018

Date of Notice: October 3, 2018
Current Status: Notice Given
Motion Type: Legislation
Sponsor: UO Committee on Courses


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Fall Term 2018 Preliminary Curriculum Report for the University Senate review;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED the University Senate approves the Fall 2018 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.

Senate Meeting Agenda – November 14, 2018

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
  • Remarks:  Provost Banavar

3:30 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, October 17, 2018 and October 31, 2018

3:30 P.M.   Business/Reports

  • Retreat Debrief (Presentation slides)
  • A policy for selecting faculty members for committees that are established by the administration
  • Undergraduate Council review of admissions policies
  • Consent Calendar
  • Discussion: Intimate Relationships Policy (with Town Halls input)
  • Brief presentation on UO Leadership Academy; Chris Ruiz de Esparza and Jennifer Espinola
  • Academic Council: Emergency and/or Contingency Planning
  • Discussion: Conflict of Interest/Conflict of Commitment Policy draft; Cass Moseley and Elizabeth Skowron

4:50 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Senate Nominees to Task Force on Potential Reorganization of CAS

From: Senate President <senatepres@uoregon.edu>
Subject: SENATE: Pedro Garcia-Caro and Frances White elected as CAS TF nominees by acclamation
Date: October 31, 2018 at 2:40:52 PM PDT

Dear Senators –

We had two self-nominations for the two Senate nominees for the task force on the potential CAS reorganization:

1) Pedro Garcia-Caro (Romance Languages):

I have served as a senator representing the Humanities Division of the College of Arts and Sciences for six years (2011-2014 and 2016-2018) and have often voiced my concerns for the increasing marginalization of languages, general education, the liberal arts and the humanities on our campus. As Secretary of AAUP-Oregon I have written in our local newsletter on the challenges faced by the Liberal  Arts in our current political and economic setting as well as on the role of private interests and donors in a Public University (2018). I am not completely attached to the current college configuration, for instance, I don’t think it has fomented well interdisciplinary programs, and research experiences to their full potential. This will continue to be a key challenging issue that might not be best resolved with a new division of colleges and which may be tied to the larger budgetary issues that have plagued our campus for years. Being part of this task force I will actively interrogate these different models and take part in the discussion of key details related to the way in which a reorganized college or set of new collegial organizations might best contribute to enhance disciplinary and interdisciplinary experiences in particular across the Social Sciences and the Humanities, the areas where I locate my own research as a cultural historian working on Latin America.

2) Frances White (Anthropology):

As a member of a highly interdisciplinary department and intellectual area, I am deeply concerned about the impact these discussions and decisions has on interdisciplinarity both the faculty research perspective and, from my positions on the various academic committees and councils, on the undergraduate student and graduate student experiences in interdisciplinary courses and programs.

Frances and Pedro are therefore elected by acclamation, and the Senator leadership hereby passes their names on to the Provost as the Senate’s nominees. Thanks to them both for their work supporting shared governance on this important task force.

I encourage all Senators to work with their constituents and Provost Banavar to help find nominees for the remaining task force openings.

Bill Harbaugh
UO Senate Pres, Econ Prof
https://senate.uoregon.edu


From: Senate President <senatepres@uoregon.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 10:08 AM
Subject: RESPONSE NEEDED, SENATE CAS Caucus : Call for nominations for appointments to task force on the potential CAS reorganization

Dear CAS Senators –

As you know, President Schill and Provost Banavar are convening a task force, chaired by Assoc CAS Dean Karen Ford, to advise them on the potential reorganization of CAS into several colleges. The details of this are at https://provost.uoregon.edu/task-force-structure-college-arts-and-sciences.

The charge says that

“At least two of the CAS faculty members shall be selected from names nominated by the president and vice president of the University Senate. ”

Senate VP Elizabeth Skowron has decided to recuse herself this from because she is not CAS faculty, so Chris Sinclair as Immediate past Senate president and I have decided on the following process to select nominees. (Neither Chris nor myself are interested in being on the task force, given our other obligations.)

1) Alll interested CAS faculty senators (I.e. the members of the CAS Caucus) can self-nominate by emailing me at senatepres@uoregon.edu, along with an optional <250 word statement about why you would like to serve on the task force. This is due by midnight this Tuesday, Oct 30. 

2) On Wednesday Oct 31st I will email all CAS Caucus members the names and statements of the nominees. The Senate staff will then collect votes by email, due by 5PM Friday Nov 2nd. Each CAS faculty senator can vote for up to two nominees.

We will forward the names of the top two vote-getters to Karen Ford as the Senate nominees for task force membership. This process will ensure that there are at least 2 CAS Senators among the 20 task force members.

I will also forward the names, statements, and number of votes for all those submitting self-nominations, in the hope that the administration will find that information useful in picking the remaining 7 CAS faculty members.

The task force’s charge also includes a timeline saying that the task force is to make a report by April 15, and that the President and Provost will make the decision in Mid-May, for discussion at the June 3-4 Trustees meeting and a likely announcement date. This process does not include a Senate for. Our feeling is that any decision to reorganize CAS departments into new colleges is a significant academic matter that will require Senate approval, and we will take up the question as to how to best do this in the Senate soon, so I’m sending this message to all Senators for information, but at the moment it only requires action from Senators representing CAS divisions, i.e. those on the CAS Caucus.

Thanks,

Bill Harbaugh
Economics Prof & Senate Pres
University of Oregon
https://senate.uoregon.edu

Nominations for task force to analyze the structure of CAS

From: CAS Dean <casdean@uoregon.edu>
Subject: [Cas-allemps] Nominations for task force to analyze the structure of CAS
Date: November 1, 2018 at 10:39:59 AM PDT
To: “‘cas-allemps@lists.uoregon.edu‘” <cas-allemps@lists.uoregon.edu>
Sent on behalf of Provost Jayanth Banavar

November 1, 2018

Dear College of Arts and Sciences Colleagues,

I hope this note finds you well. Our administration continues to work with Karen Ford, CAS senior divisional dean, to determine the membership of the task force that will soon begin analyzing the structure of the college.

Yesterday, the Senate submitted the names of two tenure-track faculty members chosen by acclamation, and I’m grateful for their suggestions. The deadline for all of campus to nominate faculty or staff from CAS is Friday, November 2, and I write to encourage you to get me the names of those who you feel might be good to serve on the task force.

By Friday, November 9, we hope to finalize the membership of the task force and move forward on the important work of the future of CAS.

This is a critically important endeavor we are embarking on. The charge of the task force is straightforward. Members will be asked to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of: (i) the current structure (combining the three divisions of Humanities, Social Sciences, and Natural Sciences), (ii) a split of CAS into two colleges (Humanities/Social Sciences and Natural Sciences), and (iii) a split of CAS into three separate colleges (one for each division).

There will be much to debate, and I am eager to hear what the task force discusses. Once the task force starts its work, I will be providing regular updates to the campus community. The meetings will be open to the public.

Please send me an email with your thoughts on potential members for the task force to feedback@uoregon.edu. You can also link to more information about the task force’s charge on the website for the Office of the Provost.

Sincerely,
Jayanth Banavar
Provost and Senior Vice President

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – October 31, 2018

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

3:15 P.M.  New Business

4:50 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US18/19-01: Approval of Online Sports Product Management program

Date of Notice: Oct 9, 2018

Current Status: Approved October 31, 2018

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Graduate Council


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Graduate Council met on October 24, 2018, to discuss the proposal for a new online delivery mode for the existing Master’s of Science degree in Sports Product Management as attached to this motion; and

1.2 WHEREAS the Graduate Council deemed the proposal to meet the University’s standards for a graduate degree, and therefore voted to recommend that the Senate approve the proposed degree;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate approves online delivery of the Master’s of Science degree in Sports Product Management, and authorizes the Provost to take the necessary steps to move forward with it.


ONLINE Sports Product Management proposal

University to consolidate email services

From: “Jessie Minton” <minton@uoregon.edu>
Subject: University to consolidate email services
Date: October 24, 2018 at 1:00:21 PM PDT
To: harbaugh@uoregon.edu
Reply-To: cio@uoregon.edu

Dear Colleagues,

During my first 18 months as chief information officer at the University of Oregon, I have been delighted to find a wide variety of partnerships across campus. Technology supports our mission and helps us reach our potential through collaboration across campus, and around the Pacific Northwest, the country, and the world.

To enhance our ability to work together collaboratively, I am very excited to announce a project to improve email service at the UO. We have begun a process that will consolidate email and calendaring services for all students and employees to one service by 2023. In an additional email improvement, all new university alumni may now keep their university email addresses for their lifetimes via an email forward, which we started offering this past June.

The email consolidation project will move students and employees to UOmail, a cloud-hosted version of the Exchange email service that is currently used by two-thirds of UO employees. Moving everyone to UOmail will provide a number of benefits, including:

  • Consistent user experience
  • Significant feature enhancements
  • Improved collaboration throughout the university
  • Improved information security and operating efficiency

Currently, university IT staff operate multiple, duplicative email services. This results in inconsistent user experiences, operational inefficiencies, and increased costs for support and maintenance. Students currently use a different email service than most UO employees, which creates a barrier for collaboration and previously hindered our ability to offer students the use of their UO email addresses after graduation.

In planning this change, we have worked with President Schill; Provost Banavar; the Academic Leadership Team, including the deans; the IT Steering Committee; University Senate leadership; and campus IT directors. Microsoft’s cloud-based email service was selected for UOmail because of its features and price, and Microsoft’s ability to meet the university’s data security requirements. That service also integrates with Office 365 and OneDrive, which are widely used on campus already, and the university will benefit from Microsoft’s highly available cloud services.

Because email is essential to our work, some people may be concerned about how these changes will impact them. Most employees will not need to make many changes when moving to UOmail because much of the work will occur behind the scenes. For employees who need to switch, university IT staff will coordinate the work with you and help you learn how to use the software and features offered by UOmail.

This project will provide UOmail to all new students and employees starting in summer 2019. The next major milestone of this project will move the remaining one-third of employees from their current mail service to UOmail by September 2019. By 2023, all remaining students will be using UOmail, and the transition will be complete. During all phases, Information Services will work closely with departmental IT staff to coordinate the transition.

We will share details of this project and its progress on the Information Services website at is.uoregon.edu/projects/email. The university and Information Services are committed to working with IT staff to minimize any impacts and ensure a smooth transition to the new system. We look forward to improving email and calendaring services for our campus community.

Sincerely,

Jessie Minton
Vice Provost for Information Services and Chief Information Officer

Senate Meeting Agenda – October 17, 2018

DRAFT

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks and retreat plans: Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • Remarks: President Mike Schill
  • Remarks: ASUO President Maria Gallegos-Chacon

3:30 P.M.  New Business

4:45 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Senate Meeting Agenda – October 3, 2018

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
  • Remarks; Senate Vice President Elizabeth Skowron
  • Remarks; Provost Banavar
  • Remarks; Bob Guldberg (Knight Campus)

3:40 P.M.  Votes

3:45 P.M.   New Business

Discussion of upcoming policies, discussions and issues for fall quarter

4:45 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports

  • Status of committee reports and where to find them

4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion

4:56 P.M.   Other Business

  • Senate Retreat: October 31, 2018

5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

UO Presidential Contract renewal input

On TuesdaySep 4, 2018, at 5:05 PM, Angela Wilhelms <wilhelms@uoregon.edu> wrote:

Hi Bill,

The contract is a personnel matter between the president and the board, in this case led by the board chair. General input as you suggest was not solicited. As you are aware, matters before the board – including this contract – are posted online for review and anyone is able to make public comment if they so desire.

If you are asking more generally about the valuation, not the contract per se, the adopted presidential evaluation process was followed, which includes feedback from direct reports, deans, and trustees. The faculty, staff, and student trustee often provide information gleaned from the prior year’s office hours, interactions with various groups, etc. And much of the trustees information is also informed by routine updates. The more comprehensive 360-style review is in year five.

Angela

Board of Trustees of the University of Oregon
Resolution: Amendments to Presidential Review Management and Process

From: Bill Harbaugh <harbaugh@uoregon.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 10:32 AM
To: Angela Wilhelms <wilhelms@uoregon.edu>
Cc: Elizabeth Skowron <eskowron@uoregon.edu>; Melanie Muenzer <muenzer@uoregon.edu>
Subject: Presidential contract renewal input

Dear Board Secretary Wilhelms:

I’m writing as Senate President to ask you to provide the Senate with information showing which UO faculty members, students, administrators, or employees were asked to provide to provide input to the board regarding President Schill’s proposed contract renewal, and what process was used to solicit this input (e.g. letters, anonymous surveys, etc.)

Thanks,

Bill Harbaugh
Economics Prof & Senate Pres
University of Oregon
https://senate.uoregon.edu

 

Defacement/Improvement of University Mission Statement

From: Bill Harbaugh <harbaugh@uoregon.edu>

Subject: Defacement/improvement of University Mission Statement

Date: August 23, 2018 at 9:13:55 PM PDT
To: Adriene Lim <alim@uoregon.edu>
Cc: Mike Schill <mschill@uoregon.edu>, Jayanth Banavar <banavar@uoregon.edu>, Ed Teague <ehteague@uoregon.edu>, Elizabeth Skowron <eskowron@uoregon.edu>, ASUO President <asuopres@uoregon.edu>, Chris Sinclair <sinclair@uauoregon.org>

Dear Dean of Libraries Lim –

I’m writing to you regarding the defacement (or perhaps it should be called an unofficial improvement) of “The Mission of a University” mural in the Knight Library, specifically the red-marker redaction of the words “racial heritage”. This is shown in the image below, which a UO faculty member sent me today.

Classes are not yet in session, so I have not been able to consult with the Senate on this. However my official view as Senate President is that this change is an act of historical significance and free-speech which should be preserved, or at least be prominently documented, so long as this mural remains on display.

Yours,

Bill Harbaugh
Economics Prof & Senate President
University of Oregon
https://senate.uoregon.edu

Dean Lim’s Response

mission statement defacement

 

President Schill’s Response to US17/18-20: Differential Tuition

From: President Michael Schill <pres@uoregon.edu>
Subject: President Schill’s response to Senate resolution US17/18-20
Date: July 20, 2018 at 2:19:21 PM PDT
To: Senate President <senatepres@uoregon.edu>, Senate Vice President <senatevp@uoregon.edu>

Cc: Betina Lynn <betina@uoregon.edu>, Melanie Muenzer <muenzer@uoregon.edu>, Greg Stripp <stripp@uoregon.edu>, Angela Wilhelms <wilhelms@uoregon.edu>

Dear Senate President Bill Harbaugh and Vice President Elizabeth Skowron,

Attached is a letter from President Schill regarding Senate resolution US17/18-20. The Framework document referenced in the letter is also attached.

Please distribute this letter to members of the University of Oregon Senate.

Sincerely,

Office of the President


President Schill’s Response
Differential Tuition Framework

Temporary Discrimination Policy Extension

From: Bill Harbaugh <harbaugh@uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: Policy 580.015 – Discrimination
Date: June 29, 2018 at 12:36:30 AM PDT
To: Angela Wilhelms <wilhelms@uoregon.edu>
Cc: Melanie Muenzer <muenzer@uoregon.edu>, Elizabeth Skowron <eskowron@uoregon.edu>, Missy Matella <mmatella@uoregon.edu>

Dear Angela –

Writing as Senate President, I agree that given this situation the best course of action is to extend the current policy, problematic as it is, for another 6 months.

My understanding is that AGC Missy Matella had been the point person for the Discrimination Policy revision process, and that she will continue to be in her new HR job. I’m ccing her on this, and I would appreciate it if she could send the Senate a list of the set of policies that the administration believes will interact with the Discrimination Policy, with her explanation of the interactions, so that we can formulate a plan with her and you to get this and the other policies revised in a timely fashion.

Thanks,

Bill Harbaugh
Economics Prof & Senate Pres
University of Oregon
https://senate.uoregon.edu

On SundayJun 24, 2018, at 1:42 PM, Angela Wilhelms <wilhelms@uoregon.edu> wrote:

Dear Bill and Elizabeth:

This email is in my university secretary role.

As you know, the UO inherited a number of Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) from the state and has systematically been working through these to ensure they are updated, necessary, clear, etc.

One such OAR is 580.015, et seq., titled “Discrimination.” This OAR was out of date with certain federal requirements and other UO policies, so the president enacted some temporary changes in 2016 to account for this. As you know, temporary changes are limited to a 6-mo lifespan.  These have been renewed a couple of times and we are at a point where they need to be renewed again.

I recognize that the spirit of temporary policies is not simply continued extension and hope that you believe me when I say these multiple extensions are not a way to circumvent the policy process.

In actually, it’s just a complicated set of policies that Title IX, AAEO, General Counsel, HR and others have not wanted to finish until other related policies are done.

The current temporary approval expires July 12 and there is a request by the offices above for one more extension. They need more time during a school year (when faculty and students are around) to work on permanent edits and then have the senate consider those that relate to the various academic sections of the policy.

The policy can be found here, and attached is the redline that shows the changes currently in effect from the base policy.

Please let me know if you wish to discuss this further or have any questions.

Thank you for your understanding.

Angela

Angela Wilhelms
University Secretary & Advisor to the President
University of Oregon
O: 541.346.5561
C: 541.931.5426
wilhelms@uoregon.edu


UO Policy 580.015 Discrimination – TEMP CHANGES REDLINE 08-18-16-2gx8xtp

 

Oregonian Op-Ed and UO Senate Resolution

From: Bill Harbaugh <harbaugh@uoregon.edu>
Subject: Oregonian Op-Ed and UO Senate Resolution.
Date: July 8, 2018 at 8:52:09 PM PDT
To: gilleyb@pdx.edu

Cc: Chris Sinclair <csinclai@uoregon.edu>, ASUO President <asuopres@uoregon.edu>, Mike Schill <pres@uoregon.edu>, John Nicols <nic@uoregon.edu>, Chris Phillips <ncp@uoregon.edu>

Dear Professor Gilley –

I read your Oregonian Op-Ed today at https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2018/07/oregon_campuses_need_intellect.html

There’s much I agree with. However I want to set the record straight regarding the UO Senate resolution that you mention. I was UO Senate Vice President last year (and am president this year), and I helped write the resolution. You seem to have mis-read it as supporting the “hecklers’ veto”. It does not. It clearly states:

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the UO Senate supports the rights of students to peacefully protest during university events, even disruptively, so long as those protests do not prevent speakers from being heard and the audience from hearing what they have to say; 

This is the latest in a series of Senate actions that have all taken the same stand – supporting the rights of speakers, and protesters, to be heard. Here is the explanation I gave to the UO Board of Trustees last month:

… Second, I want to explain the Senate’s resolution “In Support of the UO Student Collective”. This is the group of students that disrupted President Schill’s “State of the University”speech in October.

… [UO President Schill] has said that with this resolution the Senate endorsed the sorts of disruption of classes by students who might object to something about the course content, as has occurred at other universities, such as Reed and Evergreen, where students have essentially shut down courses on particular subjects.

This is not at all what our Senate has endorsed. The resolution states clearly:

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the UO Senate supports the rights of students to peacefully protest during university events, even disruptively, so long as those protests do not prevent speakers from being heard and the audience from hearing what they have to say; 

https://senate.uoregon.edu/entry/?Motions=US17/18-02

I’m not a lawyer, but this language is consistent with everything I understand about the First Amendment, everything I believe about academic freedom, and everything that UO’s other policies on these matters state. People have a right to speak, and those who object to that speech have the right to have their objections heard even if that disrupts and causes inconvenience for the speaker and the audience.

What those who object cannot do, and again I quote from our resolution, is prevent speakers from being heard and the audience from hearing what they have to say. 

Our resolution does not endorse the sorts of disruptions that prevent faculty, or our President, from teaching what they want to teach or saying what they want to say. It specifically speaks against that, only allowing “disruption” so long as that disruption doesn’t prevent the professor’s lecture, or for that matter the President’s talk, from continuing.

Our resolution does not endorse allowing the actions of the Students Collective taking the podium and shutting down President Schill’s address – although it does call for some leniency in their subsequent discipline, and some reforms to make sure free speech discipline cases are handled with special care. These were students, after all.

If this is not clear, please see the UO policy on Academic Freedom, which the Senate passed in 2014 and which the UO President signed, which states:

The University’s responsibility to help students to think critically and independently requires that members of the university community have the right to investigate and discuss matters, including those that are controversial, inside and outside of class, without fear of institutional restraint. It is the responsibility of speakers, listeners and all members of our community to respect others and to promote a culture of mutual inquiry throughout the University community.

Or see the UO Policy on Freedom of Inquiry and Free Speech, which we passed in 2010, which states:

The University supports free speech with vigor, including the right of presenters to offer opinion, the right of the audience to hear what is presented, and the right of protesters to engage with speakers in order to challenge ideas, so long as the protest does not disrupt or stifle the free exchange of ideas. 

(https://policies.uoregon.edu/policy/by/1/01-administration-and-governance/freedom-inquiry-and-free-speech)

I don’t see how the Senate and the faculty could be any more clear about our position, and I’m tired of hearing people misrepresent it. Though of course I’m open to any arguments, even disruptive ones.

Thank you. Questions?

I hope that this makes clear that this UO Senate resolution is not a good example of faculty opposition to free-speech, and that you will search for a better one to use instead.

I’m posting this on the UO Senate website, and I’m ccing professor Chris Sinclair (Math), who was Senate President when this motion passed, the current ASUO student president, UO President Mike Schill, as well as UO professors John Nicols (History) and Chris Philips (Math) since they are the UO NAS members that I know.

Thanks,

Bill Harbaugh
Economics Prof & Senate Pres
University of Oregon
https://senate.uoregon.edu

 

 

Senate Meeting Agenda – June 6, 2018

DRAFT

Location: EMU 214 (Redwood Auditorium)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate Vice President Bill Harbaugh
  • Update from Johnson Hall

3:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes, May 23, 2018

3:35 P.M.   Business

  • Spring 2018 Preliminary Curriculum Report; Frances White (Anthropology), Chair of UO Committee on Courses
  • Vote: Vice President and President Elect for 2018-2019
  • Spring 2018 Elections & Appointments Results
  • UO Senate Award for Shared Governance, Transparency, and Trust – Britt Johnson, AEI; Monique Balbuena, Clark Honors College; Kenny Jacoby, Palm Beach Post
  • UO Senate Leadership and Service Award for Officers of Administration – Teri Rowe, Economics and Sociology
  • UO Senate Classified Staff Leadership Award – Jimmy Murray, Price Science Commons Library
  • UO Senate Wayne T. Westling Award – Frances White, Anthropology

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

Senate Awards Reception:

  • Part 1 – Refreshments and Snacks in the Redwood Auditorium, 4:30 – 5:30 P.M.
  • Part 2 – Drinks and hor-d’oeuvres at the Faculty Club*, Senate Awardees and guests welcome. 5:50 on, with a toast at 5:45 P.M.
    • * Enter through the front door of the Jordan Schnitzer Musuem of Art

 

US17/18-21: Approval of Curriculum Report, Spring 2018

Date of Notice: May 1, 2018

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: UO Committee on Courses


Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Spring 2018 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate Review;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED the University Senate approves the Spring 2018 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.

Senate Meeting Agenda – May 23, 2018

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
  • Institutional Hiring Plan; Jayanth Banavar

3:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes, May 9, 2018

3:35 P.M.   Business

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
4:40 P.M. Executive Session

Awards

5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Senate Meeting Agenda – May 9, 2018

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
  • Update from Johnson Hall

3:20 P.M. Approval of Minutes, April 25, 2018

3:35 P.M.   Business

4:50 P.M.   Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
4:55 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

US17/18-19: Implementing a System for the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching

Date of Notice: May 2, 2018

Current Status: Approved May 23, 2018

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Bill Harbaugh & Sierra Dawson, Teaching Evaluation Task Force


Section I

1.1 Whereas: On May 24th 2017 the Senate approved motion 17/17-28 to create a task force on student evaluations with the charge of “evaluating and improving course evaluations and peer reviews with respect to reducing biases and improving validity, with the goal of improving teaching, learning, and equity.” (https://senate.uoregon.edu/entry/?Motions=US16/17-28)

1.2 Whereas: While student evaluations of teaching can be an important tool for evaluating and improving teaching and learning, there is substantial peer-reviewed evidence that student course evaluations of the sort used at UO are biased with respect to gender and race, and that the numerical scores are orthogonal to measures of teaching effectiveness and learning outcomes. (See for example Uttl, White and Gonzalez (2016) at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X16300323?via%3Dihub)

1.3 Whereas: There is also scholarly evidence that, unless conducted by trained evaluators using consistent methodology, peer (faculty) reviews of teaching of the sort often done by UO departments are ineffective at evaluating teaching and do not provide useful feedback for improvement.

1.4 Whereas: While in the past UO has required that only signed written student evaluations be provided to department heads and review committees to be used in instructor review, the UO Office of General Counsel’s interpretation of the relevant law is that student classroom survey evaluations of a faculty member’s classroom or lab performance must be anonymous. (See letter from the UO General Counsel’s Office)

Section II

2.1 Therefore: The Senate directs the Committee on Committees to create and staff a Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee to include faculty, graduate student, undergraduate student, and ex-officio administrative representatives, and charged with collecting feedback from stakeholders and updating the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching System (CIETS) as needed. The 17-point chart is appended to this motion. Senate approval will be required for any changes in the CIETS except those involving the wording of questions or design of the instruments. described above.

2.2 Therefore: In Fall 2018 the committee will present to the Senate (for vote) a disclaimer for faculty personnel committees, heads, and administrators will stop using to include in reports, if those reports continue to use numerical ratings from student course evaluations in tenure and promotion reviews, merit reviews, and other personnel matters. If units or committees persist in using these numerical ratings, a statement regarding The disclaimer will address the problematic nature of those ratings, provide and an explanation for why they are being used despite those problems and include other available information regarding faculty teaching (e.g. peer reviews, student comments, faculty self-evaluations).will be included with the evaluative materials.

2.3 Therefore: As of Fall 2018 student evaluation surveys will be anonymous. Past faculty personnel committees, heads, and administrators will stop using signed written comments from previously collected student course evaluations can continue to be used in tenure and promotion reviews, merit reviews, and other personnel matters.

2.4 Therefore: Beginning with the Fall 2018 quarter, the University will stop collecting data using the current student course evaluations and will adopt the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching System (CIETS), starting with the following elements:

  • A Midterm Student Experience Survey. This web-based anonymous survey will collect non-numerical course feedback that will be provided only to the instructor, for use in course improvement. (See spring 2018 pilot at https://oregon.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_6nCcC7UHM64Etil).
  • An End-of-Term Instructor Reflection Survey. To be completed Available for optional use by the instructor and to be used for course improvement and evaluation. (See winter 2018 pilot at https://oregon.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_aa47C9OFZCiFt1r; and spring pilot as .pdf).
  • An End-of-Term Student Experience Survey. This web-based anonymous survey will collect non-numerical course feedback that will be used for course improvement and evaluation.

2.5 Therefore: The committee will be charged with bringing the Senate a motion regarding the end of term student evaluation survey in Fall 2018. The current Course Evaluations will stay in place until a new version is approved by the Senate.

2.6 Therefore: The committee will be charged with bringing proposals to the Senate for vote, no later than Fall 2019, motions on the following:

Notes:

Oregon Law on classroom evaluations by students

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/352.226

(9) Classroom survey evaluation by students of a faculty member’s classroom or laboratory performance shall be anonymous. The record of tabulated reports shall be placed in at least one of the files designated in subsection (4) of this section. All survey instruments used to obtain evaluation data shall be returned to the faculty member.

(10) A public university listed in ORS 352.002 (Public universities) and, after July 1, 1975, but before the date on which the public university obtained a governing board, the State Board of Higher Education and its public universities, offices, departments or activities, when evaluating its employed faculty members, may not solicit or accept letters, documents or other materials, given orally or in written form, from individuals or groups who wish their identity kept anonymous or the information they provide kept confidential.

GCO letter regarding ORS 352.226 (9) and (10)

17-part chart

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND EVALUATION OF TEACHING COMMITTEE [Tier 1]

1) Name of Committee followed by [Committee Tier Number in brackets]:

Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee [Tier 1]

2) Brief Description:
The committee collects feedback on the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching System (CIETS), makes minor changes to the instruments based on stakeholder feedback, and advises the Senate on significant changes as needed.

3) Background:
Created by Senate legislation US17/18-19: “Implementing a System for the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching” on May 23, 2018.

4) Charge and Responsibilities:
The committee collects feedback on the Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching System (CIETS), makes minor changes to the instruments, and advises the Senate on significant changes as needed. Any proposals for Senate action during an academic year should be proposed in writing no later than the beginning of Spring Term.

5) Membership Requirements:
Three to five faculty broadly representative by college, including at least one career instructional faculty, one tenured professor, and one Senator, appointed by the Committee on Committees. One graduate student, appointed in consultation with the GSA and the GTFF. One undergraduate student appointed in consultation with the ASUO. Ex-officio members to include designees from the Office of the Provost, the Registrar, and the Teaching Engagement Program.

6) Leadership Structure (Chair, Convener &/or Staff):
a) Chair: Elected
b) Convener: Office of the Provost ex-officio member
c) Staff: Office of the Provost

7) Election of Chair (quarter, week or “at the first meeting”):
Annually at the first meeting.

8) Length of Term:
a) Non-Students (faculty, OA’s OR’s, Classified): 2 years, staggered
b) Students: 1 year
c) Ex officio: indeterminate

9) Term Limits:
a) For the Chair: none
b) For Committee Members: none
c) Ex officio: none

10) Frequency of Meetings:
At least quarterly.

11) Workload Designation:
a) For the Chair: Tier 1
b) For Committee Members: Tier 1

12) Reporting Deadline(s):
The Continuous Improvement and Evaluation of Teaching Committee shall report to the University Senate. At a minimum this report shall be in the form of an annual written report submitted by the Committee Chair to the Senate President and Senate Executive Coordinator no later than June 1. The committee shall also make additional written or oral reports to the Senate as necessary.

13) Current Members [Leave blank at present]:

14) Type:
Standing Committee

15) Category:
Academic

16) Selection Process:
Appointed

17) Additional Information:



Sample: Instructor Reflection

Sample: End-of-Term Student Experience

Jessica Roberts Candidate Statement 2018

While I am new to the UO, communications holds a special position in that we interact widely across campus. I feel this would be a particularly beneficial attribute if chosen for the OA council as it would allow me to take into account a number of points of view from OAs in a wide-variety of roles, which would then in turn help to inform me  to make the best and most representative decisions. I also feel that being new can bring an asset of objectivity and new eyes to old challenges and that could be a unique perspective to the group. Finally, I very much want to be a part of this community and become a true asset to our university. I have served on councils and advisory boards in all my previous jobs and cities, and am hopeful I can find a way to be of service to the UO as well.

Sara Stubbs Candidate Statement 2018

I have been at the University of Oregon for almost 10 years, and am currently serving as the Director of Customer Service and Support in Information Services. I am running for the OA Council because I am interested in continuing the work of improving relationships and communications across campus, and the council has proven to be a foundational aspect to accomplishing that. The challenges facing the University at this time including growth and the always present resource issues, will require collaboration and communication levels above and beyond what has been required previously. I believe I can both assist in and learn from what the OA Council has to offer in these areas and would be honored to serve the University in this capacity.

Jessica Marquez Candidate Statement 2018

Jessica’s bright and beaming smile and friendly demeanor warms and welcomes students, staff, and faculty to Allen Hall. As the SOJC’s Human Resource Manager, with over ten years in the industry, Jessica has experience building policy from the ground up and knows how to bring creative cohesion into a complex office setting. With two young girls at home, she’s no stranger to managing a very busy work-life balance. With the interest in what’s best for students and employees, Jessica seeks to create a learning and working environment at the UO that leaves a positive, lasting impression.

Micah Sardell Candidate Statement 2018

Micah Sardell is the Director of Enterprise Systems at Information Services within the University of Oregon.  He has been an engaged, trusted, and customer-focused IT leader at the University of Oregon for the past 15 years and has served as a member of the OA Council for the past two years.  During his service on the OA Council he has held the OA Council leadership roles of OA Council Secretary and OA Council Co-Vice Chair.

Micah is seeking re-election to continue to serve the OA Community in a leadership role for the next two years.  During the upcoming two years he hopes to lead the completion of a final report and action plan as an outcome of the OA Council Workplace Climate Survey and Listening Tour exercises.  He will also continue to serve OA’s in a leadership capacity, highlighting OA employment issues through the connections he has developed with senior campus leadership.

Jessica Cronce Candidate Statement 2018

Jessica Cronce is an Associate Professor in the Department of Counseling Psychology and Human Services in the College of Education and the Director of the Family and Human Services (FHS) undergraduate major. She joined the UO faculty in 2015. Her research focuses on the prevention of harms related to alcohol use, drug use, gambling, and other health-risk behaviors among college students and other young adults.

Jana Prikryl Candidate Statement 2018

My diverse job responsibilities, which include instruction, advising, and the administration of an undergraduate major provide me with the background and perspective to contribute in a meaningful way to the undergraduate council. My service on the UOCC, and my role as Director of the General Science program, have familiarized me with the UO policy implementation process. My interest in serving on the undergraduate council stems from a desire to advocate for our undergraduate students and contribute to the development of sensible policies that further our education mission.

Jagdeep Bala Candidate Statement 2018

I would like continue contributing to our University’s efforts to enhance undergraduate students’ achievements and successful transition to careers after graduation. This year, I am serving on the scholastic review committee, the academic council, and the student success advisor council. These engagements, together with work on the Student Success Advisory Council, Transfer Students Committee and Tyekeson work group over the last couple of years, have given me perspective, ideas and impetus that I would like to carry forward.

Arkady Vaintrob Candidate Statement 2018

I was a Director of Undergraduate Studies and a Chair of Scholarships and Awards committee in the Math department and served on the Undergraduate Council and the University Senate in the past. I am interested in strengthening undergraduate research and teaching at the UO.
Here are my preferences for the selected seats (in decreasing order): Undergraduate Council, Academic Requirements Committee, Committee on Scholarships, Study Abroad Programs Committee, Scholastic Review Committee.

Larissa Ennis Candidate Statement 2018

I’m hoping to get your vote for the Officers of Administration Council again in 2018. I am completing my first 2-year term as an OA Councilor, and in that time I have come to a greater understanding of the challenges facing OAs as the only unrepresented professional employee group on campus, and of the ways the OA Council can improve our standing. In the last year it has been my pleasure to play a key role in authoring the OA Council’s Workplace Climate survey, with the goal of creating a better workplace for all OAs at the University of Oregon. I hope to continue the work we started with the survey and continued with the listening tour, by creating an action plan and collaborating with campus partners to make real change happen for OAs. No campaign promises here, but I would be grateful for the opportunity to finish what we started—or at least make some incremental improvements in the lives of our colleagues. Thank you for your vote.

Joshua Gordon Candidate Statement 2018

Joshua Gordon is an Instructor of Sports Business at the Lundquist College of Business and the undergraduate program manager for the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center. He recently published a book on high performance organizational culture, The Sports Playbook (Routledge 2018) and advises intercollegiate athletic programs on issues around Title IX, hazing, and culture.

A leading business and legal strategist for more than twenty five years, Gordon is an experienced educator, consultant, negotiator, facilitator, and organizational capability builder. Gordon specializes in sports industry strategy and crisis management that builds upon a deep history of contexts that have included business-to-business, organizational change, energy, environmental, real estate and housing, family, and gang-related challenges. He is the founder and lead practitioner at the Sports Conflict Institute (SCI), which supports competitive goals in athletics through understanding, preventing, and resolving destructive conflict inside and outside the lines and specializes in building high performing team culture. He has presented to audiences that have included individuals and teams from the NCAA, NBA, NFL, MLS, NRL, MLB, USATF, USTA, PGA, LPGA, and ATP.

In addition to his career in conflict management and dispute resolution, Gordon is a competitive runner with recent Masters All-American performances in the mile, 3K, 5K, and 10K distances. He competes as part of the University of Oregon Running Club and the Bowerman Track Club.

Anne Laskaya Candidate Statement 2018

Assoc Professor whose main area is Late medieval Lit, but who has regularly taught women’s lit, world literature, and gen ed. I have served on the FAC during a time of incredible upheaval and transition from LaRiviere to Berdahl to Gottfredson and was co-chair of FAC in 2013. I have served on many committees, including Student Conduct, Appeals boards, Undergrad Council, Academic Requirements, various Senate committees, Committee on Committees, teaching awards, department review committees, various ad hoc committees, and more.

Jason Silveira Candidate Statement 2018

Jason Silveira teaches a variety of music education classes at the University of Oregon, and is also the conductor of the University of Oregon Symphonic Band. His research interests include music perception and cognition, psychology of music, teacher effectiveness, psychophysiological responses to music, and social justice. Dr. Silveira has been published in Journal of Research in Music Education, International Journal of Music Education, Psychology of Music, Journal of Music Teacher Education, Contributions to Music Education, Music Educators Journal, Research Perspectives in Music Education, and the Oregon Music Educator. He also served as Chair of the Affective Response Special Research Interest Group, and currently is Chair-elect of the Perception and Cognition Special Research Interest Group for the National Association for Music Education. Additionally, Dr. Silveira serves as editor of the Oregon Music Educator, and has served as an invited reviewer for Journal of Research in Music Education, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Psychology of Music, International Journal of Music Education, Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, and the National Association for Music Education.

Charles Martinez Candidate Statement 2018

I am Philip H. Knight Professor in the Department of Educational Methodology, Policy, and Leadership in the College of Education, where I also serve as director of the Center for Equity Promotion. I previously served from 2005-2011 as UO Vice President for Institutional Equity and Diversity and previously served on the UO Senate from 2012-2014. I have served on the UO FAC this past year, and hope to serve a regular term beginning in AY18-19.

Teri Rowe Candidate Statement 2018

I served 2012-2016 on the OA Council; 2 as Chair and have served the last two years on the Faculty Advisory Council as Chair and Co-Chair. I enjoy participating in service to the UO and would appreciate you vote for another 2 years. Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have about my candidacy or your own interest in running for an elected office. Best, Teri

Jen Mirabile Candidate Statement 2018

Jen has worked at the University of Oregon since 2005. She currently works in central HR’s Programs and Services department managing the HR Partners network, TRP program, and Work-Life Resources. She currently serves as a member of the university’s Campus Family Alliance, Accident Review Board and the Student Academic Accommodation Committee. She is an active member of the College and University Professional Associate for HR and serves on the Western Region Board.

Nancy Nelson Candidate Statement 2018

Nancy J. Nelson, Ph.D., NCSP is a Research Assistant Professor at the Center on Teaching and Learning and core faculty in the Special Education and Clinical Sciences Department (C-NTTF). Dr. Nelson’s expertise lies in the development and efficacy testing of reading and math interventions, the use of multi-tiered systems of support to intensify academic supports for students on the basis of data, and the implementation of education technology in school systems.

Heather McBride Candidate Statement 2018

I’m a pro-tem writing instructor teaching freshman level writing classes. My interest in non-dominant American narratives has increased my awareness of the unreasonable expectations placed on women, non-binary people, and people of color both in the US and when traveling. As a result I have an interest in both addressing sexual and gender based violence and working with the Study Abroad Program.

Valerie Mickelson Candidate Statement 2018

Hi I am Valerie Mickelson and I have been employed at the UO for 4 years in Printing & Mailing Services. I am finishing my 1st term as a classified Senator and have learned a lot in the last 2 years and would love to continue to serve on the senate. I currently manage the UO Fleet Copier Program and the newly implemented Managed Print Programs in addition to working in the front office of Printing & Mailing. I am a two time UO Grad and feel blessed to now work for an institution that gave me so much during my tenure as a student.

Zach Fairchild Candidate Statement 2018

I have served the university in various roles, all as a classified staff member. I understand and value the diversity amongst our classifications, but also know the complications it brings to the work we do, how we go about accomplishing our work and the lines we sometimes have to draw with our CBA and management.

I have read and reread our CBA and always bring the classified voice to the table, in whatever roles I serve in, whether it be my daily work or committee/appointed commitments. Working for the division of student life, in my current role, I have a unique platform and have opportunities to work closely with decision makers and game changers across campus.

Holding relationships closely and building trust within the university has been my constant goal. Throughout my time at UO, I have been able to garner trust from management and HR, build strong bonds between my colleagues and constituents, and serve our students with the upmost pride and dedication in all I do.

I hope to serve the university community further in the coming weeks, months and years.

Jay Butler Candidate Statement 2018

Hi Everyone,
My name is Jay Butler and I currently work in the Payroll Department, in the Business Affairs Office. I am running for Classified Representative for UO Senate, as well as several Senate committees. I have been at UO for 8 years and have been involved in many facets of the university that make our campus so great. I have been a reliable substitute senator for the last two years for classified staff on the Senate. I have been involved with the Governor’s Food Drive each year. As a past volunteer for Food for Lane County, this is a cause close to my heart. I have worked tirelessly with the Zero Waste Program to help bring Deady Hall, Fenton Hall, and the Thompson University Center to become Zero Waste buildings, as well as promoting sustainability across campus. And last, the reason why I’m running. Over the past 8 years, 5 presidents, 5 contract negotiations, and the scare of striking, I feel it is now more important than ever to voice the ideas and concerns of Classified Staff. President Schill and the top administration continuously talk about Faculty and Students. But rarely do I hear the words “Staff” in there. I believe that we are an integral part of the university that is often overlooked and I look forward to engaging with the UO Senate on behalf of all of us. ~ Thank You.
Jay Butler

Lisa Wimberly Candidate Statement 2018

It is with great passion and enthusiasm that I respectfully submit my application to serve on the University Senate. The Senate has a long history of involvement with the University Community and I would like to be part of that involvement.
I have over 30 years of experience overall and 10 years at the University working in the nonprofit and volunteer committee sector promoting and advancing services, programs and policies that build and support the creation of a stable healthy community and University. Those that have worked with me over the years can attest to both my passion and involvement in public issues, advocacy and collaboration at the local and state levels.
Through my experience serving on multiple boards, committees and councils over the last 30 years, I have gained insight and a deep understanding of the many challenges and opportunities that our community grapples with on an ongoing basis. If elected to the Senate I promise to bring a deep commitment to contributing to the work as it moves forward to build a vibrant and effective voice for all.

Marie Swarringim Candidate Statement 2018

I’ve worked at the University of Oregon for nearly 10-years in a variety of positions from a administrative assistant to my current position as a Management Analyst. I enjoy working at the UO & serving on committees because of our diverse population & commitment to providing exceptional education opportunities for our students. My daughter is student at the UO which gives me a unique perspective as an employee. It’s always interesting to hear what our students experiences & concerns are.

Dan Shepard Candidate Statement 2018

I have been with the University now for nearly 4 years in my current position, which focuses heavily on the financial side of managing a department, as well a graduate coordinating. So, I am aware of the many challenges and opportunities facing departments from a classified perspective. Additionally, my relationship with the University, and academia in general, stretches back to my time here as an undergraduate beginning in 2003, and I am very cognizant of the issues faced by students here, and the issues they continue to face following graduation. My service goal would be to use my experiences to provide critical and thoughtful insight towards any issue that might come before the Senate.

Bill Madden Candidate Statement 2018

BS degrees in Art and Computer Science from Western Oregon University, 2011; held Electrical General Administrator’s License, WA; Electrical Contractor, Commercial & Industrial, 2.5 Yrs; Electrician Bonneville Pwr Admin, 32 Yrs; Web Application Developer 6 Yrs.; serve on CASIT Equity, Diversity, Inclusion Committee 1Yr. Extremely interested in participating in decision making concerning: growth, development, student & staff diversity/acceptance, and promotion of the UO.

Don Dixon Candidate Statement 2018

Known for wearing bow ties and unique hats, Don has spent a decade in the IT field. He has earned the nicknames “Dapper Don” and “Cool Hat Guy” for his gregarious demener and welcoming personality. He began his IT career at Best Buy, where he began as a seasonal Computer Sales Specialist. After the holiday rush, Don was soon promoted to the Best Buy for Business Department, where he became one of the top salesman in the company. As a Business professional, he began taking training in both PC and Mac repair and set-up, as well as computer security and networking. He moved into the Geek Squad, where he spent almost 4 years, working both in the store and as an on-site technician. Don has also worked for the Social Sciences Instructional Lab, where he helped oversee the everyday workings of three computer labs ranging from 10 to 33 computers. Don was a student worker for CASIT before graduating with his degree in General Social Sciences (Focus in Crime, Law, & Society) and has been a full time staff member and ITC for the CASIT Help Desk since October of 2014.

Sharece Bunn Candidate Statement 2018

Sharece is passionate for social justice and equity and says that her passion for cultural and ethnic diversity stemmed from growing up in Dayton, Oregon where she learned from her peers who migrated to and from Mexico with the seasons. Sharece holds a B.A. in English from Northwest Nazarene University, an M.S. in Journalism from the University of Oregon, and an Ed.M. in College Student Services Administration from Oregon State University. Sharece has twice served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Ukraine and loves to travel the globe and meet new people. In her spare time, she enjoys reading, writing, wandering around with her camera, and going on mini adventures around Oregon.

Monica Bray Candidate Statement 2018

Degree History
PhD, Political Economy and Public Policy, University of Southern California
MA, Economics, University of Southern California
BA, Sociology, University of California San Diego
Bio
Monica Bray oversees the Graduate Programs Office at the Lundquist College of Business. Prior to coming to the University of Oregon, she worked in the private and public sectors for more than twenty years and has a broad background in higher education, financial management, policy analysis, strategy and international affairs. Previously, she was an Assistant Professor of Economics and Research Methods at California State University, Monterey Bay, where she taught finance and accounting for the Executive MBA Program and served as the Director of the Master of Public Policy Program. She was also the Director of Career Services at USC Price and an Adjunct Professor of Finance at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. In addition, Bray had an extensive career in financial services and wealth management, working with some of the most respected financial institutions in the United States. She has also served as a strategic consultant for more than a decade.

Angela Long Candidate Statement 2018

Angela Long is Director, Health Initiatives, at the University Health Center. She is responsible for advancing the health of UO students by managing a team of professionals who maintain the electronic health record and information technology support; health promotion and prevention initiatives; HIPAA compliance, health center accreditation, medical records; marketing, communications, assessment; immunization compliance; and communicable disease outbreak preparedness. Serves as a member of the UHC executive and management teams. Collaborates with other campus leaders on alignment of prevention programs.

Cressa Perloff Candidate Statement 2018

Cressa Perloff holds an OA position as the Project Coordinator for Exploring Computer Science, a research project focused on equity in high school computer science education. She is also a graduate student in the Prevention Science M.S. program. Her former career was in the field of alternative math education, and she holds a BFA in Modern Dance. Cressa also consults regarding how to make programs, organizing structures, institutional culture, and events more inclusive and equitable, and she is engaged in various civil rights and community wellness projects at UO and around Eugene. She held the position of Event Coordinator for the ASUO LGBTQA3 in 2016-17 and is a founding member of Decolonizing Judaism.

She is excited about the opportunity to bring these perspectives and experiences to the UO Senate. She has an interest in helping UO policies, practices, and statements align with an ethic of maintaining a welcoming, safe, equitable university environment for all our community members.

Jill Martineau Candidate Statement 2018

Hello, my name is Jill Martineau and I am the Conduct and Care Coordinator for the Office of the Dean of Students at the UO. As a new employee of 5 months, I hope to get involved in committees and groups that represent the larger institutional mission. I look forward to finding ways to create on-going success and development for our students. As an added bonus, I would have the opportunity to meet new colleagues and work collaboratively in addressing certain challenges and turning them into opportunities for growth and improvement. I look forward to engaging with others across the institution.

Melina Pastos Candidate Statement 2018

With a more than 15-year career in higher education, the breadth of my work has included international program management at UC Berkeley, Native student retention at the University of Alaska, instruction at a tribal college, and most recently at UO, over 5 years in student advising. I also bring experience from the non-profit and business sectors and an interdisciplinary social science background. Attending Faculty Senate meetings this past year was a reminder to me that academic affairs and student affairs need to be in constant collaboration to complement each other’s efforts and build supportive relationships across campus units. Motivated by the goal of creating access and equity in education, UO’s Student Success Initiatives and Core Education Reform are some of the issues that interest me in serving on the Senate.

Brady Nittman Candidate Statement 2018

I arrived at the University of Oregon 2 years ago and currently serve as a Financial Analyst in the Budget and Resource Planning office. I have a diverse background in University finances and bring a strong analytical lens to my current role.

While working in the central budget office I have been exposed to many of the challenges Officers of Administration face on an institutional level. As the only unrepresented group on campus, it is imperative that we are unified and ensure our collective voice is heard.

I want to play an active role in driving improvement and positive change at the UO. The Officers of Administration Council provides the opportunity to make constructive contributions that will benefit all OA’s and the University as a whole.

Volya Kapatsinski Candidate Statement 2018

I grew up in Russia and was interested in linguistics from a young age. However, linguistics is a broad field that encompasses cultural, social, structural, and cognitive perspectives on language. My academic trajectory has taken me from the cultural side of this spectrum to the cognitive side. I started out interested in linguistic anthropology and the relation between language change and cultural change, then drifted into quantitative studies of language change in progress, then cognitive explanations for recurrent changes, and finally into the study of the cognitive processes assumed by such explanations. My current research brings together computational learning theory, language acquisition and historical linguistics to explain why language change around the world follows certain recurrent trajectories. The interdisciplinary nature of my academic experience has made me familiar with a broad range of research traditions, methods and publication venues, from sociolinguistics to cognitive science. I have reviewed articles for 19 journals, ranging from “Cortex” to “Language Variation & Change”. This breadth may serve me well on the FPC and the Library Committee. It may also help me contribute to the work of the Senate, especially as the university continues to develop and re-evaluate criteria for research productivity and research excellence.

Caroline Lundquist Candidate Statement 2018

I have been studying and teaching ethics for about fifteen years, having received my PhD in philosophy (specializing in ethics) from the University of Oregon in 2013. I worked at Lane Community College for several years, where I taught an array of philosophy courses, served on numerous committees, and developed LCC’s first Center for Teaching and Learning. I currently serve as the Associate Director of Carnegie Global Oregon, an ethics-based FIG and ARC here at the U of O. I also teach ethics class for the Department of Philosophy and the Clark Honors College. I volunteer extensively in the Eugene community, and co-lead a regular public philosophy discussion series at the Eugene Public Library.

I am especially interested in serving on any committees that address ethical questions and challenges. I am interested in finding ways to ensure that the University of Oregon’s policies and practices reflect the values of its community members, and would love to help faculty (and administrators whose work supports teaching and learning) to find ways to integrate ethics into the curriculum.

Pedro Garcia-Caro Candidate Statement 2018

Deeply committed to shared governance, a public university ethos, and administrative transparency, I have served in the Senate for several years and in other university-wide committees. I currently serve as Secretary for AAUP Oregon, and Direct the Latin American Studies Program. I am completing a book on cultural debates about mining in Latin America in the nineteenth and early twentieth century.

Vera Keller Candidate Statement 2018

I’m a historian of science specializing in the origins of experimental science in the early modern period. Before tenure, I did not engage in much University Service, only serving on the Student Health Advisory Comittee in 2012-2013. I’m now seeking to get involved. The following relate to the committees I suggested joining:Through my career at UO, I’ve engaged a lot with the library, especially SCUA. In graduate school, I’ve previously served as the LGBTQ+ representative to student government. And, while I haven’t run a Study Abroad program at UO, I’ve studied abroad myself, as well as been a fellow at numerous international academic centers.

Margaret Sereno Candidate Statement 2018

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.

Spring 2018 Candidates and Statements

University Senate
*Statutory Faculty openings for 2017-2018 election cycle must come from tenured, tenure-track, officers of instruction and officers of administration with tenure in an academic department classifications.

College of Arts and Sciences – No more than two from any department

Natural Sciences – 5 faculty openings

1. Margaret Sereno, Psychology
2. Alan Rempel, Earth Sciences
3. Chris Sinclair, Mathematics
4. Michelle Wood, Biology
5. Lou Moses

Social Sciences – 2 faculty openings

1. Glen Waddell, Economics
2. Eileen Otis, Sociology
3.

Humanities – 5 faculty openings

1. Zhuo Jing-Schmidt, East Asian Languages
2. Volya Kapatinski, Linguistics
3. Caroline Lundquist, Geography
4. Pedro Garcia-Caro, Romance Languages
5. Michael Stern, German & Scandinavian Studies
6. Alejandro Vallega, Philosophy
7. Mark Whalan, English

Professional Schools

College of Design – 2 faculty openings

1.
2.

Lundquist College of Business – 2 faculty openings

1. Ali Emami, Finance
2. Robin Clement, Business

College of Education – 1 faculty openings

1. Elizabeth Skowron, Counseling Psychology

School of Journalism & Communication – 1 faculty openings

1. Christopher Chavez, Advertising

School of Law – No current openings

School of Music & Dance – No current openings

Clark Honors College – 1 opening

1. Vera Keller

UO Libraries -1 faculty openings

1.

Officers of Administration – 1 opening

1. Monica Bray, College of Business
2. Sharece Bunn, International Affairs
3. Jesse Conway, Research & Innovation
4. Angela Long, Health Center
5.Jessica Marquez, SOJC
6. Jill Martineau, Dean of Students
7. Thor Mikesell, SOMD
8. Brady Nittmann, Budget & Resource Planning
9. Melina Pastos, Undergraduate Studies
10. Cressa Perloff, Education Science Lab
11. Jessica Roberts, College of Education
12. David Salmon, Undergraduate Studies

ASUO Student Senators – 5 openings (selected by the ASUO)

Classified Staff – 2 openings

1. Jay Butler, Business Affairs
2. Don Dixon, CASIT
3. Zach Fairchild, Student Life
4. Angie Hopkins, CSWS
5. Bill Madden, CASIT
6. Valerie Mickelson, Printing & Mailing
7. Sarah Proctor, Libraries
8. Peggy Schneider, Parking & Transportation
9. Dan Shepard, Human Physiology
10. Marie Swarringim, Campus Planning
11. Louie Vidmar, SOJC
12. Lisa Wimberly, EC Cares


Elected Committees

Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence – 3 openings

1. Hayden Harker, Mathematics
2. Heather McBride, English
3. Mikhail Myagkov, Political Science
4. Nancy Nelson, Education
5. Mary Oberlies, UO Libraries
6. Ofer Raban, Law

Core Education Council (NEW)

College of Arts & Sciences

Natural Sciences – 1 opening

1. Edward Davis, Earth Sciences
2. Chris Sinclair, Mathematics

Social Sciences – 1 opening

1. Pedro Garcia-Caro, Romance Languages
2. Emily Simnitt, English

Professional Schools – 3 openings

1. Alison Schmitke, Education
2. TBD
3. TBD

Faculty Advisory Council

Career NTTF – 1 opening

Randy Sullivan, Chemistry

Humanities – 1 opening

1. Martha Bayless, English
2. Spike Gildea, Linguistics
3. Zhuo Jing-Schmidt, East Asian Languages
4. Volya Kapatinski, Linguistics
5. Tyler Kendall, Linguistics
6. Pedro Garcia-Caro, Romance Languages
7. Michael Stern, German & Scan Studies

Professional Schools (NTTF) – 1 opening

1. TBD

Officers of Administration – 1 opening

1. Jill Martineau, Office of Dean of Students
2. Thor Mikesell, Music
3. Jen Mirabile, Human Resources
4. Jessica Roberts, College of Education
5. Teri Rowe, Economics & Sociology
6. David Salmon, Undergraduate Studies
7. Sara Stubbs, Information Services

Professional Schools (TTF) – 1 opening

1. John Chalmers, Business
2. Alex Dossin, Music
3. Ihab Elzeyadi, Architecture
4. Fritz Gearhart, Music
5. Charles Martinez, Education
6. Kevin Nute, Architecture
7. Jason Silveira, Music

Faculty Grievance Appeals Committee – 2 openings

1. Burke Hendrix, Political Science
2. Dave Fowler, UO Libraries
3. Mary Grenci, UO Libraries
4. Peng Lu, Mathematics
5. Kevin Nute, Architecture
6. Ofer Raban, Law

Faculty Personnel Committee

College of Arts & Sciences – 4 openings

1. Marcin Bownik, Mathematics
2. Sangita Gopal, Cinema Studies
3. Volya Kapatsinski, Linguistics
4. Peng Lu, Mathematics
5. Carol Silverman, Anthropology
6. Caleb Southworth, Sociology
7. Michael Stern, German & Scan Studies
8. Stephen Frost, Anthropology

School of Law – 1 opening

1. TBD

School of Journalism & Communication – 1 opening

1. Donnalyn Pompper, SOJC

Graduate Council

College of Business – 1 opening

1. Hong Yuan

CAS  Humanities – 1 opening

1. Anne Laskaya, English
2. Fabienne Moore, Romance Languages

CAS Social Sciences – 2 openings

1. Burke Hendrix, Political Science
2. Jeremy Piger, Economics

School of Music & Dance – 1 opening

1. Leslie Straka, Music

Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee

Classified Staff – 1 opening

1. Don Dixon, CASIT
2. Zach Fairchild, Student Life
3. Lauren Goss, Libraries
4. Christina Green, Business Affairs
5. Angie Hopkins, CSWS
6. Marty Hurst, Educational and Community Supports
7. Bill Madden, CASIT
8. Valerie Mickelson, Printing & Mailing
9. Sarah Proctor, Libraries
10. Peggy Schneider, Parking & Transportation
11. Lisa Wimberly, EC Cares

Faculty – 1 opening

1. Curtis Austin, History
2. Charlie Butler, Journalism
3. Katherine Donaldson, Libraries
4. Dave Fowler, Libraries
5. Spike Gildea, Linguistics
6. Joshua Gordon, Business
7. Rebekah Hanley, Law
8. Hayden Harker, Mathematics
9. Burke Hendrix, Political Science
10. Kathleen Lenn, Libraries
11. Peng Lu, Mathematics
12. N. Christopher Phillips, Mathematics
13. Glen Waddell, Economics

Officers of Administration Council – 4 openings

1. Jesse Conway, Research & Innovation
2. Larissa Ennis, University Advancement
3. Angela Long, Health Center
4. Jessica Marquez, SOJC
5. Jill Martineau, Office of Dean of Students
6. Thor Mikesell, Music
7. Brett Moody, Office of Dean of Students
8. Brady Nittmann, Budget & Resource Planning
9. Cressa Perloff, Education Science Lab
10. Jessica Roberts, College of Education
11. David Salmon, Undergraduate Studies
12. Micah Sardell, Information Services
13. Sara Stubbs, Information Services

Promotion-Tenure-Retention Appeals Committee – 1 opening

1. Martha Bayless, English
2. Peng Lu, Mathematics
3. Carol Silverman, Anthropology

Undergraduate Council

CAS At Large – 2 openings

1. Jagdeep Bala, Psychology
2. Kathleen Freeman Hennessy, Computer and Information Science
3. Tyler Kendall, Linguistics
4. Hardiner Khalsa, Romance Languages
5. Craig Parsons, Political Science
6. Jana Prikryl, Biology
7. Caleb Southworth, Sociology
8. Michael Stern, German & Scan Studies
9. Randy Sullivan, Chemistry
10. Thomas Tasker, AEI
11. Arkady Vaintrob, Mathematics

CAS Humanities – 2 openings

1. Tyler Kendall, Linguistics
2. Harinder Khalsa, Romance Languages
3. Michael Stern, German & Scan Studies

CAS Natural Sciences – 1 opening

1. Jagdeep Bala, Psychology
2. Jana Prikryl, Biology
3. Randy Sullivan, Chemistry
4. Arkady Vaintrob, Mathematics
5. Craig Parsons, Political Science
6. Caleb Southworth, Sociology

College of Design – 1 opening

1. TBD

College of Education – 1 opening

1. Jessica Cronce, Family & Human Services

College of Business – 1 opening

1. Erin Cil, Business Analytics
2. Michele Henney, Business

School of Music & Dance – 1 opening

1. Drew Nobile, Music Theory
2. Jason Silveira, Music


Appointed Committees

Campus Planning Committee

College of Design – 1 opening

1. TBD

Faculty – 2 openings

1. Lowell Bowditch, Classics
2. Dean Livelybrooks, Physics
3. Krista McGuire, Biology
4. Edward Teague, UO Libraries
5. Rebekah Hanley, Law
6. Katherine Donaldson, UO Libraries
7. Marcin Bownik, Mathematics

 

Spring 2018 Senate and Committee Vacancies

Name Years Attributes
Campus Planning Committee 18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Design
Campus Planning Committee 18-19,19-20,20-21 Appointed,Faculty
Campus Planning Committee 18-19,19-20,20-21 Appointed,Faculty
Committee on Scholarships 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Law,Teaching
Committee on Scholarships 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching
Committee on Scholarships 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching
Committee on Scholarships 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching,At large
Committee on Scholarships 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Social Sciences,Teaching
Committee on Scholarships 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching,At large
Committee on Scholarships 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Education,Teaching
Committee on Scholarships 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,SOJC,Teaching
Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty
Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty
Committee on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Humanities
Core Education Council 18-19 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Social Sciences
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Professional Schools
Core Education Council 18-19 Elected,Faculty,Professional Schools
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Professional Schools
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Appointed,CAS,At large
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20 Appointed,CAS,At large
Core Education Council 18-19 Appointed,CAS,At large
Core Education Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Appointed,CAS,At large
Distinguished Teaching Awards Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching
Distinguished Teaching Awards Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching
Environmental Issues Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Environmental Issues Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Environmental Issues Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Environmental Issues Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Environmental Issues Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,OA
Environmental Issues Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Classified
Erb Memorial Union Board of Directors 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Erb Memorial Union Board of Directors 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Erb Memorial Union Board of Directors 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Erb Memorial Union Board of Directors 18-19 Appointed,Classified
Faculty Advisory Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,Humanities,TTF
Faculty Advisory Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,Professional Schools,Career,NTTF
Faculty Advisory Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,OA
Faculty Advisory Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,Professional Schools,TTF
Faculty Advisory Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,CAS,Career,NTTF
Faculty Advisory Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,TTF,Humanities
Faculty Grievance Appeals Committee 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty
Faculty Grievance Appeals Committee 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty
Faculty Personnel Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,CAS
Faculty Personnel Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,CAS
Faculty Personnel Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Law
Faculty Personnel Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,CAS
Faculty Personnel Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,CAS
Faculty Personnel Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,SOJC
Faculty Research Awards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Research
Faculty Research Awards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Research
Faculty Research Awards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Research
Faculty Research Awards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Research
Faculty Research Awards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Research
Faculty Research Awards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Research
Graduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,TTF,Social Sciences,Teaching
Graduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,TTF,Social Sciences,Teaching
Graduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,TTF,Humanities,Teaching
Graduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Business,Teaching
Graduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,SOMD,Teaching
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Classified
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee 18-19 Appointed,Faculty
Library Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Library Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Library Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Library Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Library Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Nontenured-Track Faculty Committee 18-19 Appointed,NTTF
Nontenured-Track Faculty Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,NTTF
Nontenured-Track Faculty Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,TTF
Nontenured-Track Faculty Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,TTF
Nontenured-Track Faculty Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,TTF
Officers of Administration Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,OA
Officers of Administration Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,OA
Officers of Administration Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,OA
Officers of Administration Council 18-19,19-20 Elected,OA
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed,NTTF
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed,OA
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed,Classified
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed,TTF
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed,TTF
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed,Faculty
Ombuds Administrative Advisory Group 18-19 Appointed
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 Faculty
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 Faculty
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 Faculty
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 Faculty
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 Faculty
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 OA
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 Libraries
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19 OA
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19
Presidential Task Force on Recognizing our Diverse History 18-19
Promotion-Tenure-Retention Appeals Committee 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,TTF,CAS
Respect & Community Values Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Respect & Community Values Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,OA
Respect & Community Values Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Classified
Respect & Community Values Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Research
Respect & Community Values Committee 18-19 Appointed,At large
ROTC Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
ROTC Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
ROTC Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Scholastic Review Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty,Teaching
Senate Budget Committee 17-18,18-19 Elected,Tenured,Senator
Senate Budget Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Tenured,Senator
Senate Budget Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,NTTF,Senator
Senate Budget Committee 18-19,19-20 Elected,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,Classified,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,NTTF,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,OA,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,NTTF,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,TTF,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,TTF,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,Research,Senator
Senate Executive Committee 18-19 Appointed,TTF,Senator
Student Conduct and Community Standards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student Conduct and Community Standards Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student Health Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student Health Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student Health Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student Health Advisory Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student-Faculty Committee on Grievances 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Student-Faculty Committee on Grievances 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 17-18,18-19 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Study Abroad Programs Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty
Transparency Committee 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,Tenured
Undergraduate Council 17-18,18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Social Sciences
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Design
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,CAS,At large
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Business
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,SOMD
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Humanities
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,Education
Undergraduate Council 18-19,19-20,20-21 Elected,Faculty,CAS,At large
University Appeals Board 18-19 Appointed,Faculty
University Appeals Board 18-19 Appointed,Faculty
University Appeals Board 18-19 Appointed,Faculty
University Committee on Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Classified
University Committee on Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Classified
University Committee on Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,TTF
University Committee on Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,NTTF
University Committee on Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression 18-19,19-20 Appointed,Faculty,TTF
University Committee on Sexual Orientation Attraction Gender Identity and Expression 18-19,19-20 Appointed,OA
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,CHC
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Humanities
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Humanities
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,SOJC
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Business
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Business
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Humanities
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Humanities
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Education
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,OA
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Classified
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Design
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Classified
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Natural Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Social Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Libraries
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Social Sciences
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Design
University Senate 18-19,19-20 Elected,Faculty,Humanities

US17/18-18: Repeal of Multicultural Requirement and Introduction of US: Difference, Inequality, Agency and Global Perspectives Requirements

Date of Notice: January 10, 2018

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Lee Rumbarger; Multicultural Requirement Task Force


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the University of Oregon has, since 1994, required two “multicultural” courses for a baccalaureate degree selected in two of three categories, American Cultures, International Cultures, and Identity, Pluralism and Tolerance.

1.2 WHEREAS the Black Student Task Force identified a shortcoming in the degree to which our curriculum raises as a central thematic focus the study of unequal power distribution and allows for attention to US histories and communities.

1.3 WHEREAS the University’s response to the Black Student Task Force included the formation of a faculty-student Ethnic Studies 101 Working Group in January 2016, which ultimately recommended a shared, across-the-disciplines approach to teaching about “inequality and injustice” and developing students’ “skills to navigate a diversifying world” (BSTF memo).

1.4 WHEREAS a 2016 joint committee of the Undergraduate Council and the University Committee on Courses expressed “dissatisfaction with the current categories and structure” of the multicultural requirement and identified a “diluting of the purpose and coherence of the requirement.”

1.5 WHEREAS the joint committee recommended updating the multicultural requirement category titles and descriptions to reflect “current scholarship in the field of critical multicultural education” and addressing an “imbalance in the categories” that means most UO students do not take American Cultures (AC) courses and, thus, “are not exposed to the critical conversations occurring in AC courses addressing a critical analysis of students’ cultural context and assumptions.”

1.6 WHEREAS a faculty group reporting to Undergraduate Council, the Working Group on Intercultural and Inclusive Teaching, met across the 2016-17 academic year and ultimately recommended learning outcomes, teaching strategies, and curricular and support structures it determined best suited for building faculty and student capacities related to critical multicultural education.

1.7 WHEREAS on November 11, 2016 the UO Senate resolved to “strengthen our curricula to reflect the diversity of peoples and cultures that have contributed to human knowledge and society, in the United States and throughout the world.”

1.8 WHEREAS the multicultural requirement can serve as an important model in a broader process to update UO’s general education requirements.

1.9 WHEREAS many of our comparator universities have replaced requirements that teach cultural pluralism and tolerance with programs that foster rich, often experiential engagement with both global cultures highly divergent from familiar US worldviews, and historical patterns of identity-based injustice and exclusion in the US.

1.10 WHEREAS Oregon State University, University of Massachusetts Amherst, University of California, San Diego, University of Vermont, Florida International University, and Pitzer College (among others) have enacted thoughtful requirements for understanding the United States and its cultural/racial histories, and for engaging the world. These examples inspire our efforts to rethink our own requirements.

1.11 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.

1.12 WHEREAS the Undergraduate Council passed this proposal to withdraw the UO multicultural requirement and replace it with Difference, Inequality, Agency: US and Global Perspectives on 18 April 2018.

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the current multicultural requirement be replaced with two new requirements, one course in each category: 1) US: Difference, Inequality, Agency and 2) Global Perspectives. that undergraduate students will take one course in each of two new categories: US: Difference, Inequality, Agency and Global Perspectives. These two courses will replace UO’s current multicultural requirement.

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that courses in the US: Difference, Inequality, Agency category formed in 2.1 will develop students’ analytical and reflective capacities to help them understand and ethically engage with the ongoing (cultural, economic, political, social, etc.) power imbalances that have shaped and continue to shape the United States. This engagement may also include the relation of the United States to other regions of the world. Each course will include scholarship, cultural production, perspectives, and voices from members of communities historically marginalized by these legacies of inequality.

Each course will undertake one or more of the following:

  1. Teach respectful listening and tools for ethical dialogue in order to expand students’ abilities to practice civil conversation and engage with deeply felt or controversial issues.
  2. Facilitate student reflection on their own multiple social identifications and on how those identifications are formed and located in relation to power.

Each course will address:

  1. Intersecting aspects of identity such as race, gender, sexuality, socioeconomic status, indigeneity, national origin, religion, or ability.
  2. The uses of power to classify, rank, and marginalize on the basis of these aspects of identity, as well as considerations of agency on the part of marginalized groups.
  3. Historical structures, contemporary structures, forms of knowledge, cultural practices, or ideologies that perpetuate or change the distribution of power in society.

2.3 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that courses in the Global Perspectives category will foster student encounter with and critical reflection upon cultures, identities, and ways of being in global contexts. Each course will include substantial scholarship, cultural production, perspectives, and voices from members of communities under study, as sources permit.

Each course will undertake one or more of the following:

  1. Teach respectful listening and civil conversation as critical tools for collective student engagement with topics that are controversial today;
  2. Provide critical vocabulary and concepts allowing students to engage and discuss topics with which students may be unfamiliar.

Each course will engage with one of more of the following:

  1. Texts, literature, art, testimonies, practices, or other cultural products that reflect systems of meaning or beliefs beyond the US context;
  2. Power relations involving different nations, peoples and identity groups, or world regions;
  3. Consideration of hierarchy, marginality or discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, or ability (or some combination).

Note: Approved study abroad programs also fulfill the Global Perspectives requirement.

2.4 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that we recommend significant, faculty-endorsed professional teaching development opportunities to support the teaching of this key part of the curriculum and research on this pedagogy.

2.5 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that courses that fulfill the multicultural requirement in either the US or GP category will include on their syllabus a short rationale and shared set of student learning objectives, which may be augmented by individual faculty. The Senate Core Education Council will be charged with providing this language and refreshing it periodically as part of a continual process of improvement and evolution of the curriculum.

2.6 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that until current courses are resubmitted for approval for the new categories, all current AC courses will be placed in the new US category, all current IC courses will be placed in the new GP category, and all IP courses will be placed, by the UOCC, in either the new US or GP category depending on their primary body of illustrative material.

2.7 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the UOCC is charged with developing a process and timeline for the resubmission and approval of current courses. To ensure broad consultation and minimization of disruption to current departments and courses, the UOCC will propose a process and timeline to the Senate for review and approval in the spring 2018 curriculum report.

2.8 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the Core Education Council is charged with exploring and potentially recommending optional further study options for each category, consisting of a menu of possible activities (experiential learning and service, research, advanced coursework) from which students select. The Core Education Council will also explore and recommend ways in which this further study should count toward degree requirements.

Should the Senate approve these requirements, the Senate Core Education Council will work with the Teaching Engagement Program and Undergraduate Studies to develop, for later consideration and approval by the Senate, the further study optional pathways, menu of approved optional activities, and how those activities would count toward degree requirements.

2.9 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the new requirements will be in effect in Fall 2019.


Presentation from 4/25 Senate meeting

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 25, 2018

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

3:10 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, April 11, 2018

3:10 P.M.   Business/Reports

3:50 P.M.    Open Discussion
3
:50 P.M.   Reports
3
:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion
3:55 P.M.   Other Business

4:00 P.M. Executive Session

Vote: Honorary Degrees

5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Feedback wanted: Conflicts of Interest

Dear Campus Community:

We are seeking input on draft revisions to the “Conflict of Interest, Potential” policy and associated draft procedures. At this stage, these are very much discussion drafts and we would greatly appreciate input from the community so that we can further revise them.

The goals of this effort are to make the policy easier to understand, make it easier for employees to obtain approval for outside work, and ensure that the policy aligns with state law.

Please provide comments via this link by Friday, April 27:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bsJEMUqBoPN3zsV

During the month of April, we have been attending a variety of standing meetings to obtain initial feedback on the drafts. After revising the documents based on this first round of feedback, we anticipate convening a diverse group of employees to provide further feedback and then submitting the revised policy through the standard policy process.

For your reference, you can find the current policy here: https://policies.uoregon.edu/policy/by/1/09-research/conflicts-interest-potential

Thank you for any time you are able to put into this during the busy spring quarter. I look forward to your feedback.

Sincerely,

Cassandra Moseley
Sr. Associate Vice President for Research and Innovation


Draft COI Policy

Draft COI Procedures

Annual Committee Service Survey Closing Soon

UPDATE (Mon, Apr 16, 2018):

We still need several folks to sign up for committee service. The survey is still open. If you have trouble with the “submit” button, please email the following to senatecoordinator@uoregon.edu:

Name
Rank
Department

At this time, no one has indicated interest in the following vacancies:

Campus Planning Committee
1 faculty from College of Design
1 Classified Staff

Committee on Scholarships
1 teaching Faculty from Law
1 teaching faculty from  Soc Sci
1 teaching faculty from Education
1 teaching faculty from SOJC
1-3 at-large teaching faculty

CORE Ed Council
1 Soc Sci faculty

Faculty Advisory Council
1 career NTTF from the Professional Schools (no more than 1 from same school, college or administrative unit)

Faculty Personnel Committee
1 faculty from Law
1 faculty from SOJC

Grad Council
1 TTF faculty from Business

Nontenured-Track Faculty Committee
3 Tenure-Track faculty

Ombuds
All seats

Respect & Community Values
1 Research faculty

ROTC
2 faculty

Undergrad Council
1 faculty from College of Design

University Senate
1 faculty from SOJC
2 faculty from Soc Sci
1 faculty from Libraries

 


Dear Campus Community,

Thank you to everyone who has already completed the survey regarding university service opportunities. Between the University Senate and several university committees, there are myriad ways for you to be involved in shared governance at the UO.

We know there are countless demands on your time, but encourage you to take a look at the opportunities to serve the UO through a committee or senate position. This type of service is extraordinarily beneficial to the institution.

Please respond by Thursday, April 12. Filling out the survey does not automatically put you on a committee or the ballot – we’ll follow up with you before doing anything official.

If you have any questions, please contact Betina Lynn, the Senate’s executive coordinator, at senatecoordinator@uoregon.edu.

CLICK HERE FOR THE SURVEY.

Sincerely,

Chris Sinclair
University Senate President
Professor of Mathematics

Bill Harbaugh
University Senate Vice President and President-elect
Professor of Economics

US17/18-17: Learning Goals for Methods of Inquiry

Date of Notice: March 14, 2018

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Core Education Task Force


Motion

Section I

1.1  WHEREAS The Mission of the University of Oregon is:

The University of Oregon is a comprehensive public research university committed to exceptional teaching, discovery, and service. We work at a human scale to generate big ideas. As a community of scholars, we help individuals question critically, think logically, reason effectively, communicate clearly, act creatively, and live ethically; and

1.2  WHEREAS The combined curriculum common to all undergraduate degrees, the Core Education, should serve the mission of the university; and

1.3  WHEREAS Clearly articulated learning goals are useful for student success; and

1.4  WHEREAS Clearly articulated criteria for how a course meets learning goals is useful for UOCC course approval; and

1.5  WHEREAS Clearly articulated criteria for how a course meets learning goals are useful for assessment of student learning in that course; and

1.6  WHEREAS The American Association of Colleges and Universities has developed nationally vetted learning goals and criteria for many categories of learning outcomes common between institutions; and

1.7  WHEREAS Accreditation standards require that institutions demonstrate how their common curriculum supports their institutional mission; and

1.8  WHEREAS Accreditation standards require that the institution establish and assess student learning goals for its general education program.

Section II

2.1  BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the University Senate establish the following categories of Learning Goals derived from the University Mission: Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, Written Communication and Ethical Inquiry. These categories of Learning Goals will be called Methods of Inquiry.

2.2  BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that when approving new courses which satisfy one of the Areas of Inquiry of Arts & Letters, Social Sciences and/or Natural Sciences, the UOCC will ensure that, in addition to the learning goals relevant to the Area of Inquiry(ies), courses will only be approved if they address learning goals from at least two Methods of Inquiry.

2.3  BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that when approving courses which satisfy one of the Areas of Inquiry of Arts & Letters, Social Sciences and/or Natural Sciences, the UOCC will require approved courses to address at least half of the criteria for the relevant Methods of Inquiry.

2.4  BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the Core Education Council will develop and bring to the Senate for approval guidelines for assessing the learning goals in Methods of Inquiry.

2.5  BE IT THEREFORE MOVED that the Core Education Council will regularly review Methods of Inquiry and recommend changes to the Senate when appropriate.


Presentation with Methods of Inquiry

Learning goals (paragraph) and criteria (bullets) for Methods of Inquiry

Critical Thinking

Students will develop the skills and habits of mind necessary for the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events in the evaluation and formulation of opinions and conclusions. Critical thinking requires students to question critically, think logically and reason effectively in the context of discipline-specific methodologies.

  • Explanation of issues, assumptions, or hyptheses
  • Evidence: Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion Using relevant and credible evidence, information, or hypotheses to describe, investigate or analyze a situation, or draw a conclusion.
  • Facility with methods of reasoning appropriate to the discipline (such as inductive, deductive, scientific, or esthetic reasoning, or statistical inference)
  • Modeling: Capturing the essentials of a situation in language or symbolism suitable for deriving conclusions about it.
  • Influence of context and assumptions
  • Student’s position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis)
  • Logical conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences)
Creative Thinking

Students will develop the capacity to combine or synthesize existing ideas, images, or expertise in original ways, and work in an imaginative way characterized by a high degree of innovation, divergent thinking, and risk taking.

  • Acquiring Competencies: acquiring strategies and skills within a particular domain.
  • Taking Risks: going beyond original parameters of assignment, introducing new materials and forms, tackling controversial topics, advocating unpopular ideas or solutions.
  • Solving Problems
  • Embracing Contradictions
  • Innovative Thinking: connecting, synthesizing or transforming ideas in discipline-specific ways.
  • Connecting, Synthesizing, Transforming
Written Communication

Through iterative experiences across the curriculum, students will develop the capacity to develop and express ideas in writing, to work in different genres and styles, work with different writing technologies, and mix texts, data, and images to effectively communicate to different audiences.

  • Context of and Purpose for Writing: considerations of audience, purpose, and the circumstances surrounding the writing task(s).
  • Content Development
  • Genre and Disciplinary Conventions: Formal and informal rules inherent in the expectations for writing in particular forms and/or academic fields
  • Sources and Evidence
  • Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Ethical Reflection

Students will develop the capacity to identify, examine, and critically revise ethical positions, map them onto larger ethical ideas (theoretical traditions, moral frameworks, prevailing social frameworks), and reflect on how decisions and actions (including, sometimes, inaction) shape our relations to others and self. Students will develop the capacity to articulate the ends sought in a range of endeavors in personal, social and professional contexts. Students will also develop concepts, practices, and other tools appropriate to valuing those ends in relation to their means of attainment and their impacts on self and others.

  • Awareness of one’s own values and capacities for self-questioning
  • Language and tools to examine ethical issues, including discipline-specific frameworks
  • Recognition of the presence of ethical issues, especially where typically neglected
  • Awareness of impacts of our decisions and actions (both personally and as members of groups)
  • Application of ethical inquiry to subject-specific issues

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 11, 2018

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:  Melanie Muenzer, Associate Vice President and Vice Provost for Academic Initiatives

3:30 P.M.   Approval of Minutes, March 14, 2018

3:30 P.M.   Business/Reports

4:45 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:45 P.M.   Reports
4:50 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion

  • Motion Intro: Multicultural Requirement; Lee Rumbarger
  • Motion Intro: Revisions to Faculty Research Awards Committee; Bill Harbaugh

4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Nominations for a new Senate VP/President Elect

Dear Statutory Faculty:

It’s time to start the annual process of electing a new Senate VP & President Elect. This is one position, elected by the Senate at its last Spring meeting. Any statutory (i.e. teaching) faculty are eligible to run (not just Senators) excepting those serving in administrative positions “above” that of department head.

Neither Chris nor I plan to run for the VP/Pres Elect position. We both agree it’s time for new Senate leadership to step forward.

Three year commitment: Continue reading Nominations for a new Senate VP/President Elect

US17/18-16: Approval of Curriculum Report, Winter 2018

Date of Notice: January 3, 2018

Current Status: Approved March 14, 2018

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: UO Committee on Courses


Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the UO Committee on Courses has submitted the Winter 2018 Preliminary Curriculum Report for University Senate Review;

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE MOVED the University Senate approves the Winter 2018 Curriculum Report as submitted by the UO Committee on Courses.

Senate Meeting Agenda – March 14, 2018

DRAFT

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

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

3:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes, February 28, 2018

3:35 P.M.   Business

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

Senate Meeting Agenda – February 28, 2018

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
  • Update from Johnson Hall

3:20 P.M. Approval of Minutes, February 14, 2018 & Consent Calendar

3:25 P.M.   Business

  • Clark Honors College; Karen Ford, Divisional Dean for CAS Humanities
  • Discussion: Romantic Relationships; Sonja Boos
  • Motion Intro: Learning Outcomes; Chris Sinclair
  • Multicultural Requirement; Lee Rumbarger, Alison Gash, Avinnash Tiwari and Michael Hames-Garcia

4:50 P.M.   Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:50 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion

  • Department Honors

4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Talk to your Dean at the Faculty Club

It’s that time of year when we hope faculty will begin thinking about serving in the Senate or on one of the many Senate committees next year. And it’s always time to sit down and talk with your dean about how things are going in your school or college. So, the Senate has decided to combine the two by offering a series of school- and college-centered nights at the Faculty Club. You’ll be able to talk with your dean and we’ll tell you about ways you can provide service to the university through the Senate.

In addition, we’ve arranged for Provost Jayanth Banavar and UO President Mike Schill to have their own nights at the Faculty Club. All faculty are invited to attend on those nights.

These events will be on Wednesdays and Thursdays through the rest of Winter Term from 5 – 6:30 pm in the Faculty Club at the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art. Here’s the schedule so far:

Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Sarah Nutter, Lundquist College of Business

Thursday, February 22, 2018
Andrew Marcus, CAS
Hal Sadofsky, CAS Divisional Dean – Natural Sciences

Wednesday, February 28, 2018
Provost Banavar

Thursday, March 1, 2018
Bruce Blonigen, CAS Dean for Faculty & Operations
Phil Scher, CAS Divisional Dean – Social Sciences

Wednesday, March 7, 2018
Randy Kamphaus, College of Education

Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Juan-Carlos Molleda, School of Journalism & Communication
Christoph Lindner, College of Design

Thursday, March 15, 2018
President Schill

Senate Meeting Agenda – February 14, 2018

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
  • Update from Johnson Hall

3:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes, January 31, 2018

3:35 P.M.   Business

4:50 P.M.   Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:50 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion

  • ARC Colloquia; Chris Sinclair
  • Core Ed Learning Outcomes; Chris Sinclair

4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Senate Meeting Agenda – January 31, 2018

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
  • Update from Johnson Hall

3:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes, January 17, 2018

3:35 P.M.   Business

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

US17/18-08: Creation of Core Education Council

Date of Notice: January 22, 2018

Current Status: Approved March 14, 2018

Motion Type: Legislation

Sponsor: Chris Sinclair (Math), Senate President


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS Core Education (also referred to as general education) requires extensive faculty oversight that currently cannot be provided by existing Senate committees; and

1.2 WHEREAS Core Education needs revision and revitalization to better serve students and comply with accreditation standards; and

1.3 WHEREAS the University’s general accreditor, the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU) suggested the university form a faculty committee to perform the tasks described above;

Section II

2.1. THEREFORE BE IT MOVED the University Senate hereby creates the Core Education Council per the parameters laid out in the 17 pt chart in the Related Documents section below; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the Senate directs the Committee on Committees to set the length of initial terms for elected members of the Core Education Council in a manner which ensures minimal variation in the number of open seats on the Council in subsequent years.


Related Documents

17 Point Chart – FINAL-03/09/2018


Date of Effectiveness:

US17/18-07: Proposed Changes in Transfer Articulation from Community Colleges

Date of Notice: January 10, 2017

Current Status: Notice Given

Motion Type: Legislation

Motion Sponsor: Frances White (Anthropology), Chair of Academic Council and UOCC


Motion

Section I

1.1 Whereas HB 2998 states “Community colleges and public universities listed in ORS 352.002 shall:

(a) Evaluate existing one-year curricula for students  at a public post-secondary institution of education who plan to  transfer to a different public post-secondary institution of education; and

(b) Establish a foundational curriculum, or foundational curricula, for the first year of coursework at public post-secondary institutions of education in this state.

(2) A foundational curriculum established under subsection (1) of this section must contain a minimum of 30 college-level academic credits.

(3) Students at a community college who complete a foundational curriculum established under subsection (1) of this section shall:

(a) Be able to transfer each academic credit  contained within the foundational curriculum from a community college to any public university listed in ORS 352.002; and

(b) Have each academic credit from the foundational curriculum be counted towards the student’s degree requirements at any public university listed in ORS 352.002., and

1.2 Whereas the existing AA/OT and OTM defines a 90 credit and 45 credit curriculum respectively with course attributes defined by Senate approved criteria and outcomes, and

1.3 Whereas these existing criteria and outcomes need updating, therefore,

Section II

2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED that the Senate approves the Foundational Curricula approved by the Undergraduate Council on Jan 10th, 2018 and by the UOCC on Jan 12th, 2018, and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED that the senate approves the updating of the course criteria and outcomes as approved by the Undergraduate Council on Jan 10th, 2018 and by the UOCC on Jan 12th, 2018.


Related Documents

HB 2998 Report – Final Commission

Outcomes and criteria for transfer of Gen Ed

Power Point Presentation – Jan. 17 2018

Senate Meeting Agenda – January 17, 2018

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
  • Update from Johnson Hall

3:30 P.M. Approval of Minutes, November 29, 2017

3:35 P.M.   Business

4:50 P.M.   Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports
4:50 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion

  • Committee Clean-up (re-stagger)
  • CORE Ed Council

4:50 P.M.   Other Business
5:00 P.M.   Adjourn

 

US17/18-06: Resolution denouncing White Supremacy & Hate Speech on UO Campus

Date of Notice: November 15, 2017

Current Status: Approved January 31, 2018

Motion Type: Resolution

Sponsor: Arian Mobasser, Senator


UPDATE: Jan. 31, 2018 – From Senate Executive Committee

The Senate Executive Committee to whom was referred the Resolution of Senator Mobasser on the subject of the campus response to White Supremacist activity on campus, beg leave to submit the following report.

Report of the Senate Executive Committee

In consideration of the intent of Senator Mobasser’s original resolution, the accepted and proposed amendments of Senator Gary, Freyd and Garcia-Caro, and in consultation with these Senators and others from the constituencies represented by the University Senate, the Senate Executive Committee moves that the University Senate substitute the entire text of Senator Mobasser’s resolution with the following text:

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Mission Statement of the University of Oregon states:

“We value our diversity and seek to foster equity and inclusion in a welcoming, safe, and respectful community”; and

1.2 WHEREAS UO students have approached the UO administration with their concerns about UO policies and US policies that affect their well-being, safety, and academic success; and

1.3 WHEREAS White Supremacist speakers and White Supremacist groups have been increasingly present on the University of Oregon campus; and

1.4 WHEREAS White Supremacist groups have increased efforts to recruit on college campuses; and

1.5 WHEREAS far right and White Supremacist groups historically and currently leverage free speech rights to incite violence at public universities; and

1.6 WHEREAS a commitment to free speech carries a concomitant duty to speak out in defense of values of democracy and inclusivity against the forces of racism and White Supremacy; and

1.7 WHEREAS the history of White Supremacist organizations’ connection to violence against minority groups is unambiguous; and

1.8 WHEREAS the State of Oregon has a history of White Supremacist group activity; and

1.9 WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Security has stated that White Supremacist groups “continue to pose a persistent threat of lethal violence” to racial/ethnic/religious minorities; and

1.10 WHEREAS hate and bias incidents 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 2015 and 2016 Hate and Bias Reports; and

1.11 WHEREAS the UO campus still prominently displays signs and monuments that glorify white colonization and domination, while failing to do enough to honor the work and sacrifices made for justice and equity; and

1.12 WHEREAS, although campus has began to recognize people of color, women, and others of diverse backgrounds marginalized voices through actions such as the renaming of Dunn Hall to Unthank Hall and the naming of Kalapuya Ilihi residence hall, there is still more to be done.

Section II

2.1 BE IT RESOLVED that the UO Senate denounces the views and actions of White Supremacist, White Nationalist, and Neo-Nazi groups as incompatible with the values of our university community; and

2.2 BE IT RESOLVED that the UO Senate urges the university administration and community to speak out in unity against White Supremacist, White Nationalist, and Neo-Nazi groups to protect our values and our position as an institution of higher learning, and to protect the safety of members of our community who are most affected by their actions and message of hate; and

2.3 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that we request that the University President in consultation with the Senate President and student leaders, convene an ad hoc task force comprised of members from all campus constituencies to discuss, identify and propose campus education about the UO’s history as it relates to diversity and inclusivity, as well as recommend changes, modifications and additions to spaces and monuments which still narrate the campus along the lines of white supremacist mythologies.


UPDATE: Jan. 17, 2018 – referred back to Senate Exec Committee for further revisions – REDLINE VERSION

Section I

1.1  WHEREAS the Mission Statement of the University of Oregon states:

“We value our diversity and seek to foster equity and inclusion in a welcoming, safe, and respectful community”; and

1.2 WHEREAS UO students have approached the UO administration with their concerns about UO policies and US policies that affect their well-being, safety, and academic success; and

1.3 WHEREAS White Supremacist speakers and White Supremacist groups have been increasingly present on the University of Oregon campus; and

1.4 WHEREAS White Supremacist groups have increased efforts to recruit on college campuses; and

1.5 WHEREAS far right and White Supremacist organizations groups historically and currently leverage used disingenuous appeals to free speech in order to gain access to rights to incite violence at public universities; and

1.6 WHEREAS other public universities have denied platforms to specific White Supremacist speakers/groups; and

1.6 WHEREAS a commitment to free speech carries a concomitant duty to speak out in defense of values of democracy and inclusivity against the forces of racism and White Supremacy; and

1.7 WHEREAS the history of White Supremacist organizations’ connection to violence against minority groups is unambiguous; and

1.8 WHEREAS the State of Oregon has a history of White Supremacist group activity; and

1.9 WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Security has stated that White Supremacist groups “continue to pose a persistent threat of lethal violence” to racial/ethnic/religious minorities; and

1.10 WHEREAS hate and bias incidents  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 2015 and 2016 Hate and Bias Reports; and

1.11 WHEREAS the UO campus still prominently displays signs and monuments that glorify white colonization and domination, while failing to do enough to honor the work and sacrifices made for justice and equity; and

1.12 WHEREAS, although campus has began to recognize people of color, women, and others of diverse backgrounds through actions such as the renaming of Dunn Hall to Unthank Hall and the naming of Kalapuya Ilihi residence hall, there is still more to be done.

1.12 WHEREAS White Supremacist speech and organizing is a significant threat to our stated values, and members of our university community, especially marginalized demographics;

Section II

2.1 BE IT RESOLVED that the UO Senate denounces the views and actions of White Supremacist, White Nationalist, and Neo-Nazi groups as incompatible with the values of our university community; and recognizes their organizing on campus as a significant threat to the university community and our stated values; and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the UO Senate urges the university administration and community to unite in solidarity speak out in unity against White Supremacist, White Nationalist, and Neo-Nazi groups to protect our values and our position as an institution of higher learning, and to prioritize protect the safety of members of our community who are most affected by their actions and message of hate.

2.3 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that we request the University President, in consultation with the Senate President and student leaders, appoint convene an ad hoc committee task force charged with recommending the creation, placement, and wording of at least four plaques to be placed in relevant locations on campus (such as next to the Pioneer statues) designed to inform the community (consistent with our educational mission) about the history of white supremacy and/or its resistance on the University Campus, with the intention that the plaques will be in place by September 15, 2018. comprised of faculty, students, staff and administrators comprised of members from all campus constituencies to discuss, identify and propose campus education about the UO’s history as it relates to diversity and inclusivity, as well as recommend changes, modifications, and additions to spaces and monuments which still narrate the campus along the lines of white supremacist mythologies.

 


Resolution language to be replaced by the above amended text:


Motion

Section I

1.1 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

1.2 WHEREAS White Supremacist groups have been allowed on the University of Oregon campus by the administration; and

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

Section II

2.1 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

2.2 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the UO Senate urges University of Oregon administration to pledge that they will dissuade and minimize the impact of White Nationalists and other hate groups on this campus to the best of their ability.


Related Documents:

Flyer 1
Flyer 2
Flyer 3
Flyer 4
Flyer 5
White Nationalist Sticker
Student Collective Handout
White Supremacist Intelligence Memo
White Supremacist Infiltration doc
White Supremacist website

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 Senate 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 business 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.

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 The expedited tenure process is not appropriate for faculty members or academic administrators who are currently employed and/or under contract at the University of Oregon.

2.3 If a unit faculty votes to hire a new faculty member at the rank of full professor, and votes to recommend indefinite tenure to the candidate based on the candidates’ application materials, and the Provost and the Dean of the relevant School or College agrees with the hiring and tenure recommendation of the unit, 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

2.4 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 FPC members from the College of Arts and Sciences (one from each division) and two FPC members from  the other schools and colleges. The members of this committee, to be called the Expedited Tenure Review Committee (ETRC), will be elected annually by the FPC. The ERTC will be composed with attention to equity, diversity and inclusion.  ETRC members shall recuse themselves from the consideration of tenure cases in their unit. Vacancies, including those that arise from recusals, will be filled by the FPC chair after consulting the FPC membership; and

2.5 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

2.6 The ETRC, upon completion of its review, will report their recommendation to the hiring unit, and will provide the compiled tenure dossier, which shall include all information upon which they have made their recommendation, to the hiring unit. Relevant members of the unit, as specified by the unit governance documents, shall have three five business days after receipt of the dossier to change their vote for indefinite tenure and to notify the ETRC about any such changes.  The ETRC shall consider any changes to the unit tenure vote and 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

2.7 The ETRC will determine what materials should be considered in their review, but such materials must include at a minimum the following: 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 will carefully document any non-written evaluations for inclusion in the tenure dossier. The ETRC may request other information as it sees fit through the dean of the relevant school or college. Failure of a dean to provide requested information may result in the ETRC requiring the candidate be reviewed by the full promotion and tenure process.

2.8 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.

2.9 The FPC shall be responsible for tracking when an individual is awarded tenure via the expedited process and will include in their annual report to the Senate the number of cases considered by the ETRC and the number of cases in which tenure was awarded via the expedited process.


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 – November 29, 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 from Johnson Hall
  • College of Ed update: Dean Kamphaus

3:40 P.M. Approval of Minutes, November 1, 2017 and November 15, 2017

3:45 P.M.   Business

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

 

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.

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 November 15, 2017

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: Approved November 29, 2017

Motion Type: Resolution

Sponsor: Arian Mobasser, Student Senator


Motion

Section I

1.1 WHEREAS the Mission Statement of the University of Oregon states: “We value our diversity and seek to foster equity and inclusion in a welcoming, safe, and respectful community”; and

1.2 WHEREAS the UO Policy on Free Inquiry and Speech states “Free speechis central to the academic mission and is the central tenet of a free and democratic society.” [Emphasis added]; and

“The University supports free speech with vigor, including the right of presenters to offer opinion, the right of the audience to hear what is presented, and the right of protesters to engage with speakers in order to challenge ideas, so long as the protest does not disrupt or stifle the free exchange of ideas. It is the responsibility of speakers, listeners and all members of our community to respect others and to promote a culture of mutual inquiry throughout the University community.”; and

1.3 WHEREAS UO students have approached the UO administration with their concerns about UO policies and US policies that affect their well-being, safety, and academic success; and

1.4 WHEREAS the preamble of 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

1.5 WHEREAS overzealous disciplinary action against students may result in the repression of dissent and free speech and continues to harm these students’ academic success; and

1.6 WHEREAS UO officials have made public statements that may prejudice the adjudication of the alleged conduct code violations; and

1.7 WHEREAS the UO Policy on Academic Freedom says

“Members of the university community have freedom to address, question, or criticize any matter of institutional policy or practice, whether acting as individuals or as members of an agency of institutional governance.”

and

“These freedoms derive immediately from the university’s basic commitment to advancing knowledge and understanding. The academic freedoms enumerated in this policy shall be exercised without fear of institutional reprisal. Only serious abuses of this policy – ones that rise to the level of professional misbehavior or professional incompetence – should lead to adverse consequences.  Any such determinations shall be made in accordance with established, formal procedures involving judgment by relevant peers.”

and yet despite this requirement, relevant peers have not been involved in this conduct code judgement process.

Section II

2.1 BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the UO Senate supports the rights of students to peacefully protest during university events, even disruptively, so long as those protests do not prevent speakers from being heard and the audience from hearing what they have to say; and

2.2  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate recognizes that the students involved in the protest at the State of the University Address succeeded in bringing significant matters of academic concern and student well-being to the attention of the university community, and that we urge that this be taken into consideration when judging their discipline cases; and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate calls on the the Student Conduct Code and Community Standards Committee to ensure that the Student Conduct Code is revised to include student peers in judgements on disciplinary cases involving free speech, as required by the Policy on Academic Freedom. Given the importance of free speech and academic freedom, the Senate urges the Committee to develop Student Conduct Code procedures distinct from standard discipline charges; and

2.4 BE IT FURTHER 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

2.5 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate supports the conversations the administration has now initiated with the UO Student Collective and that the Senate will continue to provide a forum for all students.


Related Documents:

Oregonian Op-Ed  – July 2018

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

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.