Draft Draft Draft (00dec13mins)



Present:          Bender, Humes, Jackson, Miller, Prochaska-Cue, Scheideler, Whitt, Zorn


Absent:           Bryant, Fuller, Latta, Siekman, Swoboda    


Date:               Wednesday, December 13, 2000


Location:        420 University Terrace

1.0       Call to Order

            Scheideler called the meeting to order at 3:06 PM.


2.0       Announcements

            2.1       Request for Funding

Scheideler reported that the Academic Senate office received a letter from the UNL Women’s Studies Association and the Women’s Studies Program asking the Senate to help provide funding for the No Limits Conference.  The committee agreed last year that the Senate was not in the position to provide financial support to such events.   The committee suggested that the sponsors apply for funding from the Convocations Committee.  A letter will be sent to the Women’s Studies Program explaining the Senate’s decision.


3.0       Interim Chancellor Perlman

            3.1       Prioritization Process Update

Scheideler stated that she has concerns that the programs identified as priorities submitted by the colleges/IANR may be too broad and will be unacceptable.  Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that some colleges were asked to refine their prioritization list for the very reason identified by Scheideler.  Scheideler raised the point that if programs are too broad it could create a situation where faculty feel they need to compete for funds.  Perlman stated that he hoped some competition or incentive would exist for faculty, where appropriate, to conduct some programs under the umbrella of the identified priorities. 


Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that faculty input would need to be gathered upon distribution of the initial priority list, although he was unsure how this could be accomplished.  Scheideler stated that the Senate would be happy to help. 


Interim Chancellor Perlman reported that the prioritization process has been a very positive exercise and that possible links between programs have emerged; he stated that they hoped to be able to pull common program themes together.  He indicated that he has not told the Deans what can and cannot be priorities.  Scheideler asked if Deans would be evaluated on whether they achieved success with the priorities they identified.  Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that he would expect the Deans to be evaluated on whether or not their funding and other decisions were consistent with their priorities. 


3.2       Issues on the Horizon

Interim Chancellor Perlman reported that he has received the report from Associate Vice Chancellor Jim O’Hanlon on Distance Education.  Scheideler asked if the report would be provided to the faculty.  Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that it would be available after it has been reviewed.  He noted that there are structural issues, such as registration, that need to be carefully examined.  Scheideler pointed out that the UNL Bylaws state that the Division of Continuing Studies is suppose to oversee distance education.  Interim Chancellor Perlman noted that distance education activities have converged and that it is unrealistic to expect the Division to have sole responsibility in this area.  He stated that Distance Education would be on the agenda for discussion during the spring semester.


Interim Chancellor Perlman reported that Linda Crump, Assistant to the Chancellor for Equity, Access & Diversity Programs, and Meg Lauerman, Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Institutional Marketing, are working on campus climate issues.  He noted that Lauerman is conducting focus groups to look at this issue.  He pointed out that feedback from faculty who have resigned or retired indicate that management issues were of the greatest concern; Interim Chancellor Perlman indicated he is unsure how to address all of the management issues highlighted, although he was examining the issue.


Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that while there are some people who are unhappy with the plans for the new Culture Center, there is a strong desire, particularly on the part of students, to move the project forward providing that private funds for the construction of the project can be found.  He stated that one of the arguments being made against the center is that it should not be a separate facility.  He pointed out that they are in the preliminary planning stages.  Zorn stated that the driving force behind the project should be to bring people together.  Interim Chancellor Perlman noted that the outside community views the new culture center as a commitment to diversity.  He pointed out that it would also be helpful in student recruitment. 


Interim Chancellor Perlman reported that the visitor’s center construction has been delayed until after the spring semester to minimize the impact of loosing the Temple parking lot.  He noted that parking is typically less of a problem in the summer and that the new parking garage should be completed by this fall.


Interim Chancellor Perlman reported that the Board of Regents is concerned with student recruitment and would like  to see more faculty involvement in this area.  He stated that the Board requested that a written recruitment plan, including a budget, be presented to them at the March meeting.  Scheideler reported that comments expressed at the December Academic Senate meeting indicate that there are no incentives for faculty and departments to spend additional time to recruit students.  Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that he is sensitive to the many roles that are demanded of faculty.


Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that real strides were being made by the working group developed from the Life Sciences Task Force that is reviewing collaborative research.  He noted that the group has devised a reporting  structure that will clarify the reporting/administrative structure for faculty that are working on collaborative research projects.  He stated that all areas have agreed to this management system and that biotechnology will be the first area to implement it.  Scheideler asked for a progress update on potential modifications to the Life Sciences curriculum.  Interim Chancellor Perlman stated that this effort is a bit more difficult to accomplish and that faculty will need to be pulled together to discuss and implement changes.  Scheideler pointed out that the sciences have grown so rapidly that it is difficult for only a few programs to handle the diverse curriculum that students need.  She noted that collaboration on the curriculum would provide tremendous potential to improve student recruitment. 


4.0       Approval of 12/6/00 Minutes

            Prochaska Cue moved, and Whitt seconded approval of the minutes as amended.  Motion approved.


5.0       Unfinished Business

            5.1       Email Policy

            Item postponed due to lack of time.


            5.2       Revised UNL Bylaws

            The Executive Committee continued to review the revised UNL Bylaws.


            5.3       Proposed Grading Motion

The Executive Committee discussed referring the issue to the Grading and Examinations Committee for review.  Miller moved and Humes seconded that the Executive Committee refer the matter to the Grading and Examinations Committee at the January 9th meeting.  Motion approved.


5.4       Research Council

The Executive Committee discussed the concerns related to the shortfall of funds available to the Research Council.  Humes pointed out that the reduced funding penalizes new faculty.  Scheideler reported that Interim Vice Chancellor for Research Helmuth and Professor Asgarpoor, Chair of the Research Council, would be reporting on this issue to that Academic Senate at the January 9th meeting.


The meeting was adjourned at 5:02 PM.  The next Executive Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 10th at 3:00 PM, in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace.  Respectfully submitted, David S. Jackson, Secretary.