EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Alloway,
Beck, Fech, Flowers, Hoffman, Moeller, Peterson, Rapkin, Scholz, Shea, Stock
Absent: Alexander, Bolin
Date: Wednesday, November 9, 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 3:01 p.m.
2.0 Professor Sidnie Crawford, Chair,
Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC)
2.1 Student
Absence Policy
Beck reported that the meeting with Crawford was precipitated by a faculty member’s concern about a letter he received from the IAC regarding a student athlete’s absence from his classes.
Crawford stated that the instructor probably received a letter from the IAC. The letter includes the competition/travel schedule for the student athlete. She stated that the IAC’s policy which follows the Academic Senate’s policy on class absences, is that the student can miss six Tuesday, Thursday classes and/or nine Monday, Wednesday, Friday classes.
Crawford stated that the Associate Athletic Director sends out a letter to the coaches each year requiring the coach to fill out the schedule of competition. The schedule must be approved by the Athletic Director as well as the IAC. She noted that the Athletics department counts the number of absences for each of the competition to ensure that the University’s policy is being adhered to. If the schedule goes over the number of allowed days, the coach must apply for a waiver. She noted that most schedules are approved but two waivers were received. She pointed out that women’s volleyball has applied for a waiver which will be approved if they should get into the Final Four competition. She noted that volleyball is a particular problem because the Final Four competition is always held during finals week and the student athletes sometimes have to take their final exams on the road.
Crawford stated that the IAC approves the schedule for the sport itself, not an individual student athlete’s schedule. She pointed out that the IAC sends out the letter to the student to give to the instructor to inform him/her what the sport schedule is and to verify that this is the correct schedule.
Crawford stated that the letter also indicates that it is up to the instructor to approve or disapprove the absences. She noted that if the instructor disapproves of the absences the IAC will ask the instructor if he/she can work with the student and the athletic department to try and accommodate the schedule.
Crawford reported that student athlete absences are usually not a problem but occasionally there is a problem. She noted that some professors have raised concerns because a student misses too many classes. She stated that it is entirely up to the professor if he/she does not want to accept the number of absences as indicated in the Academic Senate’s policy (http://www.unl.edu/asenate/sapresolution.htm) on student absences.
Crawford stated that an issue that needs to be looked at again by the IAC is the additional absences that teams may face if they get into post season tournaments. She stated that Professor Potuto, the NCAA faculty representative from UNL, has suggested that the IAC should address this issue because there is more pressure from outside sources like the media to have more tournaments.
Crawford stated that a point that needs to be clarified is whether a student will lose their financial aid if the student misses a game because they cannot be excused from a class. She pointed out that this is incorrect. A student will not lose their financial aid if they cannot compete in a game. She stated that any coach who tried to do this would get in serious trouble.
Beck wondered whether the instructor who made the complaint received the letter before the student spoke with him. Crawford stated that the instructor probably received the letter first. She noted that the Athletics advising department needs to make sure that students also speak to their instructors and clear their absences with that instructor.
Crawford pointed out that another thing that needs to be done is that faculty members need to be made more aware of the policy and how it works. She stated that in new faculty orientation no information is provided regarding how the Athletic department works with student athletes. She stated that the IAC is going to suggest to Athletic Director Steve Pederson that he contact Academic Affairs to see if someone from Athletics can make a presentation to new faculty members regarding the policies of the department. Peterson suggested that a brief summary about how the policy and the Athletics department work would be helpful. He stated that it could be put on the Senate web site. Crawford stated that the overview of the IAC policy lays out clearly the policy and suggested that this could be put on the web. Beck noted that people seem to think that there are several different policies.
Stock stated that he has had a lot of student athletes and he does not recall getting a letter from the Athletics department. Moeller stated that the same is true for her. Flowers reported that he sporadically receives a letter but not for all of the student athletes. Crawford asked if the letters should all be mailed to the faculty. Stock stated that this would be helpful.
Alloway asked for clarification of the basketball waiver. Crawford stated that there is an early tournament that is held this semester so the sport overlaps both semesters.
Crawford stated that another part of the IAC policy that is not part of the Senate policy is that student athletes cannot miss more than five classes in a row. She pointed out that the outside pressure being made by television and tournaments is increasing and the IAC wants to keep checks in place to protect the students.
Beck noted that it does not seem like there are any real problems with the policy but rather there are some implementation procedures that need to be addressed. Crawford agreed and stated that some general publicity about the policy would be helpful. She stated that it is her feeling that the policy usually works fairly well.
Peterson stated that it seems like 20% of classes being missed is a fair amount of classes to miss. He wondered how people felt about students missing this amount of classes and the work that is associated with them. Stock stated that he knows of some colleagues who feel the 9/6 number is too much but he has found that most student athletes are good students who make the effort to make up any course work that they miss. Flowers stated that overall his experience has been that most student athletes are good students but sometimes students have not been as successful in a course as they could be because of the missed classes.
Alloway stated that the new grade reporting form for athletes is much better than the individual cards he used to receive.
Alloway stated that some student athletes have brought in forms from the Athletic Department requesting recommendations for specific classes for the coming semester before the printed course catalogs are available, making it harder for the instructor to provide specifics. He wondered if student athletes have an early advising timetable. Crawford stated that she will check on this.
Hoffman pointed out that he often does not give exams in his courses until late in the semester. He stated that when he does not return the form to the Athletics department about how the student athletes stand in his class the Athletics department gets angry. He stated that an option should be put on the form that states that a grade is not available at that time.
Beck suggested that a coherent document explaining the Senate’s and IAC’s policies should be on the Student Affairs web site as well.
Alloway stated that he has found that most student athletes have very good time management skills and usually turn their work in ahead of time. He noted that his experience with student athletes has been positive and that most of these students are engaged in their classes. Peterson stated that he thinks most faculty members are willing to work with student athletes and support their athletic endeavors.
Crawford stated that it is becoming more of a balancing act for student athletes. She stated that there are a lot of demands coming down from the sports channels and the NCAA to have more games. She stated that universities need to resist these demands for the sake of the student athletes.
Peterson asked about the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics. Crawford stated that it appears that things have died down with the Coalition. She noted that in part this could be the result of many of the universities having implemented changes that coincide with what the Coalition was trying to do.
Crawford stated that the NCAA accreditation is going on for UNL. She noted that data are being gathered and information about the accreditation will be posted on the web sometime in December.
Fech asked if there are problems
with students missing classes who are involved in other university sponsored
activities. Moeller stated that she
finds these students to be self-starters and highly motivated and she has not
had problems with them. Peterson pointed
out that many of the non-athletic activities do not involve repeated absences
but sometimes they can come at inconvenient times. Rapkin stated that the debate team is
probably the closest to athletics in regards to missing a number of
classes. Alloway pointed out that
students hired by Huskervision miss a lot of classes because they cover every
sport. Stock noted that members of the
band also miss a number of classes due to activities. He wondered whether letters are sent out to
instructors about students involved in the band. Crawford stated that she did not think a
letter is sent because it would have to come from the
3.0 Announcements
3.1 Departments
without Senate Representation
Beck reported that she has been contacting departments that do not have a representative on the Senate. She stated that the response has been neutral but people have said that they will discuss the issue at their department meetings.
3.2 Next Faculty at 5
Beck reported that the next Faculty
at 5 will be held at 5:00 on Tuesday, November 15th at the Van Brunt Visitor’s
Center. She reported that C.A. Waller
will be performing for free at the
4.0 Approval of 11/2/05 Minutes
Flowers moved, and Moeller seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
5.0 Unfinished Business
5.1
The Committee worked on making further revisions to the procedures. They hoped to present the procedures to the Senate at the December meeting.
5.2 Budget
Cuts
Moeller reported that she checked with her department chair regarding the budget cuts and what kind of scenarios the chairs are expected to do for her college. She reported that the chairs have been asked to come up with 1, 2, 3, and 4% budget cut scenarios.
Beck stated that a letter has been sent to the chair/heads of IANR calling for them to not present the requested 8% budget cut scenario, at least at first. She reported that one chair has stated that he did not want to propose an 8% budget cut scenario.
Moeller reported that the Chancellor’s Commission on the Status of Women met with Chancellor Perlman earlier. She stated that they discussed the budget cuts and Chancellor Perlman made it clear that he was letting the Deans determine how best to do the cuts in their colleges. She reported that the Chancellor stated that he feels the faculty will know best how to make the cuts.
Hoffman wondered whether departments were having discussions on the budget cuts. Flowers stated that he has heard the figure of 2% and that it was being done administratively. He reported that there have been no directives about the faculty needing to participate in discussions. Moeller questioned whether information on the budget cuts was not filtering down to the chairs.
Peterson stated that the whole budget cutting situation is lumpy (okay, folks I just couldn’t resist putting this in) because funds from an open position in one department could be used to fund a position in another department so it is difficult to determine where budget cuts are actually made and where reallocations have occurred. He stated that a former Executive Committee member once stated that there is a 5% attrition rate every year of faculty leaving and these open lines can be used for budget cuts.
Fech asked if the letter to the heads/chairs of IANR has gone out. Beck stated that it has gone out. Fech asked if the Directors of the Research & Extension Centers were sent the letter. Beck stated that she assumed so. Moeller asked if the heads of the departments in IANR were going to take a leadership role in dealing with the budget cuts. Shea stated that the budget cuts is a major issue and the process being used can provide a potential mechanism to restructure the Institute without going through the process of getting approval, particularly from APC. He stated that faculty members should insist on knowing what criteria are going to be used for making budget cuts. He noted that budget scenarios that are approved by the department can then be used by the Vice Chancellor to cut programs. The Vice Chancellor can then claim that it was faculty driven. He stated that there may not be many faculty members who share these concerns. Rapkin noted that at some point people shut down and don’t want to deal with issues like the budget cuts because they have had to address them year after year.
Fech asked when the letter was sent out. Beck stated that it was sent out on Tuesday, November 8th. She stated that the department heads will be discussing the letter at their next meeting and will decide as a group whether they will refuse to submit an 8% budget cut scenario.
6.0 New Business
6.1 Faculty
Compensation Advisory Committee Syllabus Revisions
Peterson stated that the FCAC has voted to recommend changes to the committee structure because the current listed membership requirements do not work. He pointed out that the President Elect of the Academic Senate was made chair of the committee without ever serving on it. He noted that this is difficult because the President Elect does not know how the committee functions. He reported that the proposed changes to the syllabus would include the President Elect, President, and Past President of the Academic Senate in the membership of the committee. The President would act as chair.
6.2 Research Council’s
Mentoring Report
Due to lack of time the Committee agreed to review the report at a later meeting.
6.3 Special Fees Committee
Beck reported that the Special Fees Committee meets once in early December. She stated that this committee reviews request for fees attached to courses. Hoffman, Alloway, and Beck volunteered to serve on the committee.
Peterson stated that last year a colleague of his was on the committee and raised a concern that special fees were being put on courses for things like copying expenses. The colleague felt that there might be some abuse of the fees. Flowers noted that there was some controversy awhile ago about the fees and how they were being used. Beck stated that they will check to see if there looks to be any abuse.
6.4 Verification of Grades
for Greek Houses
Alloway reported that there has been a marked increase in the number of students needing verification of grades for their Greek houses with some requests coming every two weeks. He stated that he has spoken with Linda Schwartzkopf, Director of Greek Affairs, about this issue and she will be speaking with the house leaders.
Alloway pointed out that while he is supportive of efforts to maintain Greek house academic standards, the form asking for grade verification has no disclosure statement or signature stating that the student agrees to release this information to a third party. The Committee agreed that there needs to be some verification for release of the information, otherwise the release of academic information could be a violation of a student’s righst under the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Alloway stated that he would keep in touch with Linda Schwartzkopf on this issue.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, November 16th 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.