EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

 

Present:          Alexander, Beck, Bolin, Flowers, Hoffman, Peterson, Rapkin, Scholz, Stock

 

Absent:           Alloway, Fech, Moeller

           

Date:               Wednesday, November 16, 2005

 

Location:        Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace

 

Note:   These are not verbatim minutes.  They are a summary of the discussions at the Executive Committee meeting as corrected by those participating.

______________________________________________________________________   

1.0       Call to Order

            Beck called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.

 

2.0       Dan Carpenter, Director, University Parking Services

Carpenter was unable to attend the meeting due to a scheduling conflict.  The Committee will reschedule a meeting with him at a later time.

 

3.0       Announcements

            3.1       Yale University’s New Diversity Plan

Beck reported that she recently read an article about Yale University implementing a new diversity plan.  She noted that Yale is putting in place strategies to recruit and retain women and minority faculty members.  She stated that it will be interesting to see what their strategies will be.

 

3.2       Nebraska County Extension Association (NCEA)

Beck reported that the NCEA met in Hastings this week.  She noted that the NCEA donates $1,000 every year to the Senate’s Schwartkopz fund.  She stated that she had planned to attend the meeting but the bad weather interfered.  She pointed out that only faculty members can attend the meeting.  She reported that she sent a letter to the NCEA thanking them for their support and for being involved with the Senate and providing input on a regular basis. 

 

Beck noted that she is concerned with shared governance at UNL and would like to work for a system of tenure for extension educators.  She pointed out that the tenure system for extension educators would be different than what is in place for teaching faculty members.  The tenure system for extension educators could consist of a three year rolling contract.  She noted that the University of South Dakota has a tenure system. 

 

3.3       Senate Goals

Beck stated that she would like to review the Senate goals at an upcoming meeting.  She stated that the Committee needs to see what still needs to be worked on. 

 

3.4       Board of Regents Meeting

Beck reported that she attended the Board of Regents meeting.  She noted that some of the Regents’ committees discussed streamlining some policies. 

 

She stated that each campus gave a presentation on their Programs of Excellence.  She reported that the idea of developing Programs of Excellence was first created by a committee of the Board of Regents which included a number of faculty representatives. 

 

Beck stated that after each Chancellor presented their campus’ Programs of Excellence she noted that there is a definite difference between the approaches used to identify Programs of Excellence.  She stated that she was very impressed with UNO Chancellor Belck’s presentation.  Beck pointed out that it appears that UNO gets a lot of input from the faculty and the process is very well thought out.  She suggested that the Committee should look at UNO’s process. 

 

3.5       Deans and Directors Meeting

Beck reported that she attended the Deans and Directors meeting this morning.  She stated that she gave a report on the efforts being made in regards to academic dishonesty.  She noted that she has charged the Teaching Council to begin campus-wide discussions on the topic.  She also discussed the various compliance issues that faculty members must deal with and how they can impede a professor’s work. 

 

Beck reported that there was discussion on the strategic plans.  She noted that the Deans have to define their college priorities and objectives, how they are going to involve the constituents of the college, including faculty, students, and staff, and objectives for funding.  She stated that departments are to have their plans submitted by January 31st and the college plans must be submitted to the Vice Chancellors in March. 

 

Peterson stated that he has not heard anything about the department plans needing to be submitted by January 31st.  He pointed out that the semester is coming to an end and with the holiday closedown there will not be much time for the faculty members to meet and discuss their plan.  Hoffman stated that he recently met with the Dean of his college and there was no mention about this.  Peterson suggested that the issue should be discussed with the Chancellor when the Committee meets with him on December 7th. 

 

Beck reported that revising the general education program was discussed.  She noted that the statement was made in the meeting that we will have a general education program that is simple and elegant and based on student outcomes. 

 

Peterson reported that the general education planning team is meeting weekly.  He noted that the general education advisory group, which is much larger than the team, meets less frequently but will ultimately make decisions on the revisions that will be put forward.  He stated that four preliminary institutional objectives have been identified for student outcomes:  intellectual and practical skills; knowledge of diversity, peoples, and culture and of the natural and physical world; individual and social responsibilities; and integrative learning.  He pointed out that these objectives are still in the draft phase and are subject to change. 

 

Peterson stated that reports on the progress of the revisions to the general education program will be written.  He noted that the idea for the second year is to develop governance and assessment of the program. 

 

Hoffman asked if the general education program is going to be made into a degree program.  Peterson stated that it will not.  He noted that the revisions are to be a replacement for the current comprehensive education program.  He stated that the thesis behind the general education program is to provide undergraduate students with a breadth of general knowledge and a depth of knowledge in a major. 

 

Hoffman noted that in his college Gallup conducts a survey of graduates every year.  Peterson stated that in some colleges and departments assessment is done very well while other areas conduct very little assessment. 

 

Beck stated that an update on the plans to revise the general education program can be found on the Academic Affairs web site (http://www.unl.edu/svcaa/gened/).

 

Beck reported that the “Power of Red” theme was discussed at the meeting.  She stated that the new banners for R street were shown and a list was distributed of items that can be purchased by departments using a cost/object number.  Items included coffee mugs, lapel pins, wall plaques, scarves, ties, and foil stickers.  All items have the N logo on them.  Hoffman pointed out that the new Faculty/Staff director that just came out has a yellow cover, not red and does not conform with the “Power of Red” theme. 

 

Beck stated that she raised the issue of the website templates and the cost associated with getting assistance with these.  She noted that the cost is supposed to be the same for everyone.  Shea stated that there could be a difference in cost if someone outside the department is actually managing the website. 

 

Beck reported that the December Board of Regents meeting will be on strategic planning. 

 

Beck stated that Vice Chancellor Jackson spoke about the 65 mph speed limit on University vans but noted that VC Jackson pointed out that the only place that this is an issue is on the interstate because it is the only road in Nebraska that allows speeds over 65 mph.  Beck reported that the Office of Business and Finance has received complaints about the speed limit and is looking again at the policy. 

 

Shea asked Beck to comment briefly on the letter to IANR chairs regarding the 8% budget cut scenario.  Beck reported that the unit heads of IANR discussed the issue.  Only two supported not submitting an 8% budget cut scenario but the other heads decided to provide the 8% scenario.  She noted that timing might be part of the issue because the heads didn’t feel they had enough time to counteract against the demand for the budget cutting scenarios. 

 

 

Peterson stated that he has heard many complaints regarding the electronic reporting of activities for faculty members in IANR.  He noted that he just went through it and it was an awful task to do.  Scholz asked if the information is put on a template.  Peterson stated that it is a template but more complicated than just a simple template.  Beck stated that IANR decided to create an electronic means of reporting activities because faculty members were being asked to generate duplicate lists.  She stated that the IANR Liaison Committee has been asked to look into the template to see if it is useful. 

 

4.0       Approval of 11/9/05 Minutes

Peterson moved and Flowers seconded approval of the minutes as amended.  Motion approved.

 

5.0       Unfinished Business

            5.1       RIF Procedures

Beck stated that when the Committee is satisfied with the document she will present it to the Chancellor.  She noted that afterwards it will go to the Senate, the faculty members of the Academic Planning Committee, the Academic Rights and Responsibilities Committee, ASUN Executive Committee, and the campus chapter of AAUP. 

 

Beck noted that she came across a document from March 10, 2003 that was from the Chancellor about dealing with firing tenured faculty members.  She noted that this policy did not follow the existing procedures that were in place when the budget cuts were made.  Rapkin asked how the Chancellor’s document compared with the existing procedures.  Beck stated that they were totally different than what is in the current policy.  Peterson suggested verifying whether the Chancellor’s document is still in effect. 

 

5.2       Quality Indicators Survey – Preliminary Results

Flowers reported that preliminary results were based on 364 responses.  He noted that a couple of colleges had very little or no responses but this could be due to the fact that their work is not typically published in scholarly publications.  Peterson pointed out that the number of responses from CASNR and IANR are probably different because extension educators classify themselves under IANR and faculty members with teaching responsibilities are probably classified in CASNR. 

 

Flowers reported that more senior faculty members responded to the questionnaire but non tenured faculty members responded as well. 

 

The Committee agreed that a reminder should be sent to the faculty about completing the survey. 

 

The Committee stated that the results of the survey should be presented to the Senate and discussed with the Chancellor and SVCAA. 

 

 

6.0       New Business

6.1       University Vans – Speed Limits

Beck noted that some complaints have been made by faculty members regarding the 65 mph speed limit on University vans.  It was pointed out that the speed limit makes lengthy trips even longer.  The Committee agreed not to send a memo to VC Jackson because the argument for the lower speed limit results in safety during windy conditions and fuel economy outweighs the argument for time in traveling.

           

The meeting was adjourned at 5:03 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, November 30th at 3:00 pm.  The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace.  The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Pat Shea, Secretary.