UNL ACADEMIC SENATE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

PRESENT: Albrecht, Past-President Bleed, President Ford, President-Elect Kennedy, Baum Kuska, Japp, Latta, Mayo, Sartori, Shoemaker

ABSENT: Scheideler, Williams

DATE: February 4, 1998

PLACE: 201 Canfield Administration, Academic Senate Office

__________________________________________________________________________1.0 Call to Order

Ford called the meeting to order at 3:05 PM.

2.0 Announcements

2.1 NCAA Site Certification

Ford announced that on February 11^th there will be a NCAA site certification which he will not be able to attend due to the Kellogg Conference and asked if anyone would go in his place. Mayo agreed to attend.

3.0 Chancellor Moeser

3.1 Email Issue

Chancellor Moeser and the Executive Committee discussed the current email situation and the Committee commended Chancellor Moeser for his quick response.

3.2 Meeting with the Legislature

Chancellor Moeser reported that he attended a hearing with President Smith of the Legislature's Appropriations Committee to discuss the issue of deferred maintenance. He reported that all members of the Appropriations Committee endorsed President Smith's proposal. Chancellor Moeser stated that UNL was establishing a comprehensive plan which should be completed in October. He reported that the deferred maintenance bill and the E coli research bill were both well received.

3.3 Student Regents

Kennedy asked whether student regents had voting privileges at the Board of Regents meetings. Chancellor Moeser stated that they could vote but that their votes were not counted.

3.4 Administration-Faculty Ratio

Bleed stated that the Executive Committee, in response to President's Smith statement that there were too many administrative units on campus, requested information on the growth of administrative budgets as compared to academic budgets. Chancellor Moeser agreed that this was information that he, Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards and Vice Chancellor Omtvedt were also interested in obtaining. Chancellor Moeser suggested that Ford ask this question at the next Board of Regents meeting. Ford asked if there is information on faculty/administrators ratio available to compare with our peer institutions. Chancellor Moeser asked if chairs would be considered administrators or faculty? He stated that Central Administration counted support staff and all other university personnel who were not faculty as part of administration. Ford stated that they were looking for two kinds of data: proportion of funds for administration functions and historical data for the past 10 years. Chancellor Moeser stated that he would also like to compare these data with other institutions and to review the trend on campus. He stated that when the new Administrative data system is in place, it will be much easier to obtain this type of information. Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that it may be difficult to obtain historical data.

3.5 Consolidation of Services

Albrecht stated that there appears to be some redundancy of services in some areas and that in the restructuring process these areas could be examined. Chancellor Moeser stated that they were not ready to set up a task force to deal with restructuring and that he was interested in having campus-wide faculty and staff town hall meetings to answer such questions as what kind of academic institution do we want to be and do we currently reflect the modern world in our teaching? He stated that he would like to challenge people to bring controversial issues to the town hall meetings. Chancellor Moeser stated that he wanted to give faculty an opportunity to be heard and that this would be an excellent way to test the concept of shared governance. Bleed asked if there was a plan to move the campus administration to Central administration and stated that he was concerned with the loss of independence. Chancellor Moeser stated that President Smith had no plan to eliminate control of the individual campuses. Chancellor Moeser stated that some options to possibly consider for restructuring was the merging of some units or another alternative solution would be to leave the units alone but create business centers of support staff which would serve several departments. Coordinator Griffin suggested to Chancellor Moeser that support staff should be involved in the discussions if such changes are considered. Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that this model was currently being tried out in Filley Hall and that support staff were crucial in the implementation and planning of the business center. Chancellor Moeser stated that another model would be to change the locus of tenure to the college or the campus rather than to a particular department. Sartori asked if this would change the method of decision making for tenure and promotion. Chancellor Moeser responded that this would not have to be changed. Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that in the merging of some departments in the School of Natural Resource Sciences that a tenure committee was established to handle this process. Chancellor Moeser stated that the restructuring process should not be a top down process. Baum Kuska asked how faculty would play a role in the shared governance at the college and department levels in the restructuring process. Chancellor Moeser stated that clearly faculty and possibly external people would be involved in the restructuring process.

3.6 Rescheduling April 28^th Senate Meeting

Ford reported that there was a conflict with Chancellor Moeser attending the April 28^th Senate meeting due to the Faculty Service Award ceremony which he was expected to attend. Chancellor Moeser stated that he would check into the matter.

3.7 TKE House

Ford reported that the Executive Committee was not content with the arrangements made for the Senate office in the TKE house and stated that the committee decided to remain at the current location hoping for a more suitable site in the future. Chancellor Moeser stated that he was not sure where this would put the Academic Senate Office as the current location was scheduled for demolition sometime in the near future and that other alternative sites were not available at this time. Latta asked what the Senate's connection was to the other programs located in the TKE house and Bleed stated that we did not have the desire to interrupt the TKE house programs. Ford suggested a compromise in that the Senate office temporarily move to the TKE house with the understanding that when a more suitable location becomes available, that the Senate be relocated to that site. Chancellor Moeser agreed to speak to John Benson, Director of Institutional Planning and Research, about the Senate's discomfort with the TKE house location and for him to keep in mind alternative sites for the Senate office.

3.8 President's Council

Chancellor Moeser stated that they were currently reviewing the way non-faculty staff are classified and that they are considering broader definitions of job classifications which would allow support staff to advance without having to leave their current department.

3.9 Replacement of Kim Todd

Kennedy asked if Kim Todd's position will be filled. Chancellor Moeser stated that the position would be split into two positions: 1) campus planning and 2) a new Assistant to the Chancellor for Community Affairs to handle the enormous amount of requests for data.

3.10 Post Tenure Review Policy

Chancellor Moeser stated that the Board of Regents will be presented with the post tenure review policy at the next meeting and he felt that it would be approved. Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that the statement at the end of the document calling for rigorous and equitable annual reviews contributed to the overall acceptance of the document.

3.11 Academic Rigor and Grade Inflation

Chancellor Moeser stated that the history of grade averages on campus did not reflect a large grade inflation. Ford stated that the real issue was not grade inflation but academic rigor. Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that there was little difference in the grade point averages in the past 20 years. He stated that the important point is where is teaching going in the future? Ford reported that a UNO professor was quoted as saying that he reduced the class requirements due to the complaints of students. Kennedy stated that it was important to have the resources to be able to improve teaching and to have full-time faculty members who were committed to teaching in order to improve the academic rigor of the campus.

4.0 Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards

4.1 Academic Climate Survey - Class Absence Policy

Baum Kuska reported that the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee conducted a survey of athletes on academic climate and the perceived response was that the athletes felt discrimination towards them, particularly in regards to class absence, due to their sport activities. She stated that the issue was taken to the Office of Academic Affairs and to the Deans but that nothing appeared to have been done. She asked if the Senate policy could be presented to all faculty. Baum Kuska also asked if other groups, such as judging teams, were required to keep a record of their absences from class as the athletes are required to do. Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that Mike Reilly, Chair of Industrial and Management Systems Engineering, gave a report on the survey and that the report indicated there was one department where most of the incidences occurred. Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that he would follow-up with the Deans to request that the information be given to department chairs. Baum Kuska stated that as representatives of the University, the athletes should be supported but that an excused absence did not mean they were excused from the course work Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that it was imperative that the student and the instructor work out an arrangement on the first day of class.

4.2 Faculty Forums

Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards reported that attendance at the first faculty forum was modest but that the responses he received from members of the Town Hall Committee, the Chancellor's Commission on the Status of Women and the Chancellor's Commission on the Status of People of Color were right on target. He stated that the suggestions will be incorporated into a revised document.

5.0 Vice Chancellor Omtvedt

5.1 Agricultural Research and Development Center

Vice Chancellor Omtvedt reported that the issue regarding the building of the Agricultural Research and Development Center at Mead was coming into conflict with the proposal to build a prison at Wahoo. He stated that the issue will be presented to the Board of Regents at their next meeting.

5.2 Search for Associate Vice Chancellor of IANR

Vice Chancellor Omtvedt reported that there have been four candidates interviewed for this position and that members of the Chancellor's Commission on the Status of Women and the Chancellor's Commission on the Status of People of Color were very active members in the process. He stated that they hoped to fill the position with a starting date of July 1. Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that when this position was filled it would allow him to spend more time on extended education.

5.3 Distance Education

He stated that the university has appointed a University-wide Distance Education Operation Committee which Lee Jones will chair. Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that he and Rod Bates will be members of the committee.

6.0 Approval of 1/28/98 minutes (Albrecht)

Mayo moved and Baum Kuska seconded approval of the minutes as amended.

7.0 Faculty for Teaching and Learning Center Review

Ford reported that eight faculty members were needed for the Teaching and Learning Center review which will be held on February 23^rd from 8:00-8:30. The committee nominated a number of people for the review.

8.0 New Business

No new business.

9.0 Unfinished Business

9.1 Florida Bank Letter

Latta reported that she had received one response for a change to the draft letter on the Florida Bank system which she will incorporate into the letter and that it would then be ready to be sent to Chancellor Moeser.

9.2 Computer Security

Mayo suggested that people take measures to secure access to their computers so that other people, who may have access to your computer, can not send email messages out under your name.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:04 PM. The next Executive Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 18, 201 Canfield Administration Building. Respectfully submitted, Julie Albrecht, Secretary.