EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Present: Alexander, Bradford, Flowers, Hachtmann, Ledder, Moeller, Stock, Zimmers

Absent: Alloway, Beck, Bolin, Rapkin, Scholz

Date: Wednesday, February 21, 2007

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

Moeller called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.

2.0 Charles Bethea, Executive Director, Lied Center for Performing Arts

Moeller stated that Bethea was invited to talk to the Committee to discuss having more faculty involvement with the Lied Center. She noted that the Committee is interested in seeing if there can be a reduced price for tickets for faculty and staff members to get them move involved in attending events at the Lied Center.

Bethea stated that he welcomed the opportunity to speak with the Committee. He noted that until 2005 there were no programs in place for faculty/staff discounts at the Lied. He reported that a relatively new discount program is in place for faculty and staff.

Bethea stated that there has been a student discounting program where students get a 50% reduction in ticket prices. However, the discount program for students is funded through student fees. He noted that each year the Lied Center applies for funding from the ASUN’s Committee for Fee Allocations and the students have been quite supportive of the request. He stated that each year student usage of the Center is evaluated and the requested amount is based on this usage. He noted that last year and this year the Lied Center received $105,000 from student fees which resulted in a discounting ratio of 80/20 for student tickets. He pointed out that the reason that there have not been other discounts is because the students are basically paying for their discounts and the Lied Center wanted to be sensitive to the students.

Bethea reported that the other campuses in the NU system do not receive a discount but other schools such as Doane and Wesleyan do because they escrow money each year to the Lied Center and in turn a discount on tickets is available for their students.

Bethea stated that he has been thinking about offering a discount for the faculty and staff for a long time. He noted that his desire is to make it more possible for faculty and staff members to take advantage of attending events at the Lied. He stated that there is now a discount program in place for the faculty and staff. He noted that they can now purchase tickets for single events at 10% off. He pointed out that if the faculty or staff member is a season ticket holder and purchase tickets for a number of events can receive a 20% discount.

Ledder noted that he would like to attend a number of events at the Lied Center but the cost prevents him from doing so.

Bethea stated that he recognizes that attending events at the Lied Center can be costly. He stated that this unfortunately is due to the price of the arts these days. He noted that artists’ fees and other associated costs continue to rise rapidly and keeping ticket prices from escalating is challenging.

Bethea reported that last year about 300 faculty and staff members purchased tickets for the Lied Center. He stated that currently about 58% of the season is completed and already 280 faculty and staff members have purchased tickets. He thinks the increase in attendance could be a result of more faculty and staff members being aware of the discounts.

Stock asked if the single ticket purchase applies to spouses of faculty and staff members. Bethea stated that this is not available yet although it has been discussed. He admitted that it would probably be an incentive to get more people to attend events at the Lied Center if faculty and staff members could purchase more than one ticket at 10% off. He stated that he wants to roll out the discount plan thoughtfully and to wait and see what faculty and staff do with it. He noted that the Lied Center was hoping to be able to provide faculty and staff with the option of paying for season tickets through payroll deduction but he was told this is not possible.

Ledder stated that if the Lied Center intends to allow the purchase of tickets for a spouse it should be made so faculty and staff members can buy two tickets at the discounted rate. Bethea stated that if a student purchases tickets they need to produce a student ID and as long as the person buying the ticket is a student, the Center really doesn’t care who the other ticket goes to. The same thing would work for faculty and staff members. Ledder suggested that faculty and staff members should be allowed to purchase tickets for other people up to a limit of two. Bethea stated that this has been discussed. He pointed out that the Lied Center wants to roll out the discount program in measured steps because it wants to be respectful to the students but so far there has not been any resistance. He noted that he believes the discount program will be fine for the faculty and staff. He stated that he definitely wants to encourage participation in the Lied Center.

Moeller noted that the Free at 6 concerts are well attended. Bethea stated that the Lied Center is doing a number of different things to change its audience. He stated that the Lied Center is part of a consortium of presenters in the research one tier group of universities. He reported that the members of the consortium are investing in a major impact study that looks into what engages audiences. He stated that the data is just coming in now on the study and there will be a complete analysis some time this year.

Ledder asked how many performances sell out. Bethea stated that only 5% are true sell outs. He pointed out that a true sell out is hard to achieve and not always the most desirable thing. He stated that in terms of budget projection, the Center budgets conservatively.

Ledder asked if there are times when the audience is less than half full. Bethea stated yes, depending on the event. He noted that an audience of 1100 people is considered less than half full. He pointed out that about 60% of the venues are less than half.

Ledder asked if attendance would be improved if the price were lowered for these events. Bethea stated that he is not sure whether this would bring more people in. He stated that the programs are negotiated at a certain price. Ledder pointed out that if you could fill the seats at a lesser price you might collect more money than if the seats were empty.

Bethea stated that the other side of the argument is how much the venue is valued. He noted that there are certain psychological values involved in the decision whether to offer tickets at a reduced price for shows that are less than half full. He stated that some people feel that the tickets should be given away in these cases but he pointed out that you don’t give away a car because it is no longer that year’s model. Ledder pointed out that the analogy is flawed since you cannot sell tickets for an event that has passed.

Moeller asked for further information on the study that is being conducted. Bethea stated that the study is about value impact, the value of what is done and the kind of interaction with the audience that occurs during a performance. He stated that he believes the findings of the study have the potential to affect the way the Lied Center approaches and engages audiences. He noted that comprehensive steps were done to conduct the study including surveys taken by the audiences and intensive focus group discussions.

Bethea stated that the world of entertainment is changing rapidly and the whole approach is changing radically. He stated that audiences today are drawn to different things than they used to be. He noted that some people believe the Lied Center should be recreating audiences for classical music, dance or chamber music but the Center needs to be respectful of new audiences as well.

Bradford asked if the discount for faculty and staff members is publicized. Bethea stated that it was publicized in the first advertisement and in the Scarlet and through email messages.

Bradford asked if people buy the $10 or family events to get the total number of their events up to eight so they can get the 20% discount. Bethea stated that there is no question that people buy tickets for the less costly events but he is glad to see people coming to any of the events.

Bethea stated that one thing that is not put on the season for ticket holders is Club Carson. He noted that this is geared towards a target audience, young professionals and students and there are usually two performances. He stated that these performances are in a small theater with drink and food available and tickets are $15.

Bethea stated that there are also east campus events which are priced more in the middle range. He noted that there are a fair number of season ticket holders who will grab these events as well.

Bethea stated that the Lied Center wants to be as accessible to the community as it can be. He noted that recently there was a mini hip hop event at the Center. He stated that there were clearly people there who have probably never been in the Lied Center before. He stated that this was an opportunity to draw in a new audience and to work with organizations in the community.

Bethea stated that there are about 50 events a year that are outside rentals which is the primary source of income for the Center. He pointed out that the Lied Center does not get any university or state funding. He noted that the standard rental income is $30,000. He stated that dance recitals are a big production and take a lot of time and a lot of resources are needed for them.

Bradford asked if the proposed new civic arena would have an impact on the Lied Center. Bethea stated that he did not think it would because the acts would be so different. He pointed out that the gross capacity of attendees makes a difference in what venues would go to the arena. He stated that the Lied Center will be watching to see if there are any impacts if the arena is built. He noted that the Qwest Center has not impacted the Center and less than 1% of the business is from Omaha.

Bethea stated that the Broadway productions used to be the cash cow but they are not any longer. He noted that Lincoln gets the second generation touring shows of Broadway productions while Omaha gets the first generation.

Bethea stated that he would welcome and values any input that can be provided and he urged people to contact him by email.

3.0 Professor Moore, Sociology and Jan Deeds, Assistant Director of Student Involvment

3.1 Violence Against Women on Campus Grant (VAWOC)

Moore reported that the campus previously had a VAWOC educational grant and the campus is in the process of renewing it. She stated that we have run into some challenges from the federal government because they did not see enough administrative support of the grant to warrant further funding. As a result, the campus is looking for some new ways of approaching the educational processes here on campus to inform students of the key elements of the UNL student code of conduct. She noted that there is a coordinating committee that meets monthly which has representation from the faculty, housing, student involvement, athletics and the police working on developing the educational processes.

Moore reported that Deeds is spearheading an effort to develop an entry way for new students. This entry way is for students who have not had access to educational programs and it would inform them of what is expected of them as members of the UNL community. Moore stated that these students would include first time resident hall students, transfer students, those living in Lincoln, and international students.

Moore stated that what the coordinating committee is proposing is developing several compliments. The module would be accessible on-line and it is hoped that those faculty members who work with first year students will embed it. She pointed out that the effort is to orient students to campus communities that deal with key citizenship issues. She noted that they began thinking about the possibility of modules being broader with student codes of conducts.

Moore stated that the hope is to develop a collaborative planning group composed of faculty, staff, and students drawing on faculty with expertise on content area. She stated that the idea is to have people think about how to develop an integrated network of modules dealing with violence but including alcohol, hazing, academic dishonesty and plagiarism, and cultural competency. She noted that independent funding might be available for the alcohol and drug issues. She stated that she believes there is a good opportunity to develop the modules.

Deeds stated that she has had to write letters for students who have been victims of violence or sexual abuse because of the impact it has had on the students’ academic work. She pointed out that there is no one orientation course that all students take when they come to campus. She stated that the idea is to develop something that colleges can use as a tool to help students.

Ledder asked how a transfer student or international student would know about this module. Deeds stated that this is one of the things the collaborative group will be working on.

Moore stated that there are clearly processes in place now that can provide this information. She stated that there is peer networking with organizations such as the non-traditional student organization. What is being proposed is a resource that would be consistently made available to students but with faculty and staff input.

Moore stated that the proposed module would be part of building a civil society on campus. She noted that things such as cultural competency or knowledge about what is considered sexual harassment are not addressed in freshmen seminar classes. She stated that the plan is to develop a consistent resource for instructors who might want to address these kinds of issues further. Moeller noted that it would be helpful in her class when she is teaching future students. Moore agreed and said that it could also be linked to academic dishonesty. She stated that the list of student codes of conduct could be added over time. She stated that the coordinating group will initially work on relationship issues and probably one other model.

Flowers asked if other groups on campus have discussed the idea of developing the modules. Deeds stated that there have been discussions and there has been a good response from everyone. Flowers noted that the module could help the campus get support for other things as well and it might be unique for us to have this kind of system in place. He pointed out that the difficulty with a lot of these topics is that information on them is not easily accessible. Moore agreed and stated that information on these topics is not coordinated.

Moeller asked how the Senate could help. Deeds stated that an internal agreement to assist in the collaborative planning group is needed. She noted that if each college could agree to help that would strengthen the chance of getting the grant. Moore noted that the group will work with the advising offices of each college.

Deeds pointed out that the deadline for the grant is March 1^st. The grant is already written but the internal memos agreeing to assist in the process are needed. She stated that the memo just needs to be an agreement to participate. Moore stated that she is aware that the Senate will not have a meeting in time to vote on this but she wondered if the Executive Committee could write a letter for the Senate. Ledder moved that the Executive Committee write a letter of agreement. Motion seconded by Flowers. Motion approved.

Moore noted that the initial grant was developed by a liaison person working between the Rape/Spouse Abuse Crisis Center and the campus. She noted that the funding ran out but ASUN was so in support of the liaison person that they are now paying for the position out of student fees. She noted that there is a huge compliment here that requires contact with community resources.

4.0 Announcements

4.1 Safe Assignment Policy

Flowers reported that the Dean of Arts & Sciences has distributed a draft of the policy. He stated that he is not sure whether they are looking for feedback on the policy or how it is being handled.

Griffin asked if the Senate will be voting on it since this is an academic policy that applies to all of the colleges. The Committee agreed that the Senate needs to vote on it. Moeller stated that she will send an email message to Dean Giesecke, chair of the committee working on the policy, and SVCAA Couture asking when the policy will be ready for the Senate to vote on since it is clearly an academic issue.

4.2 Legislative Hearing on the Retirement Cap

Moeller reported that there will be a hearing at the capital on LB 679 on February 27^th at 12:15 in Room 1525. She noted that this is the bill that will eliminate the current restriction of the retirement cap for the university. She stated that currently the university is restricted to contributing only 8% towards retirement. The bill would just remove the cap so that if, in the future, the Board of Regents wanted to raise the contribution rate they would be free to do so.

4.3 National Graduate and Professional Student Appreciation Week

Moeller stated that she received a request asking that the Senate recognize the appreciation week which is April 2 – 6. Ledder stated that it would have to be declared as an emergency motion. Bradford stated that he was opposed to making a motion because it could open the door to all other kinds of groups wanting recognition. The committee agreed that an announcement should be made at the March Senate meeting.

5.0 Approval of 2/14/07 Minutes

Bradford moved and Zimmers seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.

6.0 Unfinished Business

6.1 Reduction in Force Procedures

Moeller reported that she received an email message from Beck with suggestions on how to handle the revision of the RIF procedures. The Committee agreed to discuss the issue at the next meeting so members have an opportunity to review Beck’s suggestions.

6.2 Diversity Committee

Moeller reported that all members are now in place for the committee and she sent them steps on how they are to proceed with it. She noted that Professor Haller, English and Academic Planning Committee members, will be chairing the committee.

6.3 Academic Dishonesty Committee

Moeller announced that everyone who was asked to serve on this committee has agreed. She reported that the co-chairs of the committee will be Flowers and Ledder. Other members will be Greg Gifford, ASUN graduate student, Matt Hecker, Director of Student Judicial Affairs, Professor Tracy Bicknell-Holmes, Libraries, and Vice Chancellor Franco. She stated that another student from ASUN will serve on the committee once the new officers have been elected.

6.4 Update on Syllabus Policy (Ledder)

Ledder distributed the most current draft of the policy. He noted that the draft has been written by Greg Gifford, ASUN graduate student representative, and then edited by Ledder with input from Bradford.

Ledder stated that two things need to be addressed. He noted that one issue that needs to be addressed is whether syllabi need to include references to policies. He stated that the students feel that there needs to be some policies recognized but the difficulty is finding some of these policies on the web. Bradford stated that the policies should be right there on the student webpage. Ledder stated that there should be one website with all of the links to policies on it. The Committee agreed that this should be approached with the administration.

Ledder noted that the policy states that a syllabus can be disseminated in a variety of ways but in a manner that it can be read. He stated that there needs to be discussion about whether to include two issues: what are instructors going to collect from students to determine their grade and how the grades will be determined. Should papers, exams, and other materials, along with the approximate value of these items be posted on the syllabi? He stated that he thinks students need to be protected and these kinds of items should be included in all syllabi.

Ledder stated that the policy draft is much less specific on how students are going to be assessed. He pointed out that it is up to the instructor to determine how a student is going to be graded. He noted that the students tend to think of college courses like a contract and this might work for some courses but not for all. He stated that an instructor cannot necessarily state in advance what A work will be like. Moeller pointed out that students sometimes do not understand what quality work constitutes and need rubrics to assist them in defining quality work. Ledder stated that some things might be different for different assignments and some instructors do not use a point system when grading.

Stock stated that the item about the grading scale would be ignored by his department. He stated that he believes that providing percentages of the grade to assignments is okay on the syllabus.

Bradford suggested that the item dealing with grade scales be placed under the section where applicable. He stated that he prefers more general language on the syllabus. Alexander pointed out that creating a syllabus based on this policy for an independent study course would not be possible. Ledder stated that due to the nature of some courses, it is not possible to adhere to a schedule.

Bradford noted that there is a potential problem with scheduling required exams. He pointed out that some courses are more fluid than others in what the course is going to do. Ledder stated that required text, if applicable should be on the syllabus. Flowers stated that instructors need the ability to assign readings to a course if they come up during the semester.

Ledder stated that instructors cannot be forced to follow the syllabus policy but students can make a formal complaint if a situation arises regarding the lack of a syllabus.

Ledder stated that he will discuss the proposed policy further with Gifford. Ledder stated that his goal is to present the policy to the Senate at the March meeting.

6.5 General Education Discussion

Ledder stated that he thinks the Committee needs to start discussions for the next phase of the Gen Ed revisions. He suggested four possible ways of getting faculty input to the Gen Ed committees.

Flowers noted that one of his concerns is that if the Gen Ed courses are based on individual contracts we could run into the same problem that we have now with not having oversight of the program. Ledder agreed and stated that contracts do not solve the problem of consistency with the courses because it is not possible to compare the courses. He pointed out that there could be a rush by departments and colleges to offer the easiest way for students to get through an outcome so the departments could have more credit hours produced.

Bradford noted that colleges could say that they accept any courses approved by the curriculum committees. Ledder pointed out that some faculty members are not comfortable with this idea. He stated that he thinks the current idea is that each college would have a representative on a committee and would have veto power. This way each college wouldn’t have to take courses they did not want to include in their requirements.

Alexander stated that another issue is that ethics doesn’t come under once course. He noted that one of the problems is that the language of the outcomes states that an outcome has to be completed in one course, for example writing. He noted that many courses require writing and these would meet the requirement of the outcomes. Ledder stated that this is why guidelines are needed. Otherwise you could have someone saying that writing courses only count if they are in an English class. The guidelines would say how much writing a course should have. He pointed out that the guidelines that specifically explain the outcomes are needed. Ledder stated that he would like to see the whole faculty weigh in on these issues before the Gen Ed committees present a proposal. Moeller stated that the members of the GEPT and GEAC see themselves as representatives of the faculty. Ledder asked how these people were chosen to be on the committees.

Ledder stated that the Senate could influence general education in different ways. He noted that the Senate could hold an open forum devoted just to the issues. A Senate resolution could be passed that would address some of the concerns. There could be a Senate debate. He pointed out that any motions made by the Senate would need to be done in March.

Alexander pointed out that one of the issues that the Gen Ed program needs to address is how to make it easier for transfer students coming into the university. He asked how a transfer student’s transcripts would be evaluated as meeting the guidelines of the Gen Ed program. He pointed out that this needs to be discussed extensively. Ledder stated that there would need to be a committee that would evaluate the student’s program and the student would have to provide evidence of meeting the outcomes.

The Committee agreed to discuss the issue further at its next meeting.

6.6 Vacation Leave Policy

Zimmers asked if there has been anything done further on the vacation policy. He noted that some faculty members are concerned that if the Board of Regents put a cap on the amount of vacation time employees can earn that it will be a reduction in benefits. Bradford stated that he thinks the Board will rephrase the carryover restrictions but they will not change the amount of vacation time that employees can earn according to their length of time employed at the university.

7.0 New Business

7.1 University Use of Optional Evaluation Forms (Bradford)

Bradford stated that due to lack of time he would email the Committee about the issue.

7.2 Report on UNL Employee Benefits Meeting (Bradford)

Bradford stated that due to lack of time he would email the Committee about the issue.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:58 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, February 28 at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Rick Alloway, Secretary.