EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Bryant, Fuller, Peterson, Sawyer, Spann, Whitt, Wolf, Wunder
Absent: DiMagno, King, Logan-Peters, Miller, Siekman
Date: Wednesday, January 22, 2003
Location: Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace
1.0 Call to Order
Wunder called the meeting to order at 2:50 p.m.
2.0 Interview Candidate Mary Ellen Poole for Dean of Undergraduate Studies
The committee interviewed the first candidate for the Dean of Undergraduate Studies.
.
3.0 Announcements
No announcements were made.
4.0 Approval of 1/15/03 Minutes
Peterson moved and Fuller seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
5.0 Unfinished Business
5.1 UNO Representatives Speaking to Academic Senate
Wunder noted that Professor Beck, Animal Science, requested at the December Senate meeting to have the bargaining representatives for the faculty at UNO come and speak at the February meeting. Wunder pointed out that if this is done, representatives from UNK should also be invited. He stated that the presentation could be informative. Fuller noted that the faculty members of UNK belong to a different union than those at UNO. She wondered whether this presentation is a move towards unionizing UNL. Peterson pointed out that it will be interpreted as such. Bryant stated that he would want to ask his constituents their feelings about this presentation before he feels comfortable on voting to approve the presentation. Fuller stated that it should be made clear if this is an effort to unionize. She suggested having an open faculty forum that all faculty members can attend instead a presentation limited to the Senate. Peterson noted that it would be legitimate to say that we are looking into unionizing. He pointed out that unions do more than just negotiate salaries. However, he noted that there are many people who are opposed to unions.
The committee discussed the timing of having such a presentation. Wunder suggested that the committee should poll the senators to see if they want an informational session. Fuller noted that the issue will generate controversy no matter when it is presented. Wunder stated that the issue will be very relevant if UNO receives a 3 percent increase and UNL does not. Peterson moved that a brief statement be drafted and sent to senators to determine whether they are interested in having an informational presentation on salary negotiations and bargaining. Fuller seconded the motion. Motion approved.
5.2 Intercollegiate Athletics Coalition
Wolf moved that the committee designate Professor Ed Lawry from Oklahoma State University to observe the coalition for UNL, with the understanding that he is only an observer and that he does not represent UNL. Fuller stated that she is concerned with linking the committee with the coalition or with someone when we are unsure of what his agenda is. Wolf stated that we could hold Lawry to his email messages. He noted that the New York Times article lays out the problem with college athletics. He stated that the committee has a responsibility to national education to get involved in some way with the coalition. He pointed out that the athletic entertainment industry has pushed out of kilter the function and mission of universities. He suggested that at least an observer be sent to the conference the coalition is sponsoring.
Whitt offered as a friendly amendment that no official designation be given to Professor Lawry. Spann pointed out that more information is needed before the committee should endorse someone to be a representative or observer. He suggested that the coalition be asked to send President Miller copies of the minutes from their meetings. Bryant stated that we should not align ourselves with a representative or organization without having more information. Sawyer agreed that more information is needed. Whitt withdrew his friendly amendment. Peterson seconded Wolfs original motion. Five in favor, two opposed. Motion approved. Wolf suggested that President Miller communicate with the leadership of the coalition to get more information.
6.0 New Business
6.1 Open Forum Meetings to Discuss Faculty Governance Issues
Wunder asked the committee whether it should devote some of its meetings to open forums for faculty to come and discuss faculty governance issues as suggested by Professor Beck. He noted that the committee could have a meeting on East Campus and one on City Campus. Fuller questioned why faculty members could not bring any governance issues to their department senator. She asked if the Senate could do anything specific to help situations in individual departments. She stated that she has problems with the suggestion that anonymous letters or testimonies be accepted. Bryant moved that the Executive Committee set aside time on certain agendas to hear faculty concerns on governance issues. Motion seconded by Peterson.
Spann asked if anonymous emails and letters will be accepted or whether only testimonies made in person will be accepted. Wunder stated that no report will be made that will implicate anyones testimony. Spann asked if the forums would be open to anyone outside the faculty. Peterson suggested that emails and letters could be collected and stated as being anonymous. Bryant pointed out that the committee does not have a vehicle for collecting a large number of email messages. The motion to apportion executive committee agendas to the hearing of issues regarding faculty governance was approved 6 to 1.
6.2 Possible Meeting with Curriculum Committee Regarding ES/IS Courses
Wunder asked the committee if they should meet with the Curriculum Committee about simplifying ES/IS. Wolf stated that he understood that the Curriculum Committee does not have the authority to do what the committee is asking. Wunder pointed out that meeting with the Curriculum Committee is the last formal step that needs to be taken before a resolution is presented to the Senate. He suggested that the Curriculum Committee chair and some of the other members be invited to discuss ES/IS reform with the Executive Committee. Fuller moved that the committee meet with some of the Curriculum Committee members. Peterson seconded the motion. Motion approved.
6.3 Possible Meeting with Athletics Director
Wunder stated that questions need to be asked of the new athletic director on issues affecting student athletes. The committee agreed to invite the new athletic director sometime during the spring semester. Bryant suggested that ASUN President Ryan Wilkins and First Vice President Michelle Schrage be invited to attend the meeting.
6.4 Changing Rules Regarding Annual Reviews
Wunder stated that he received a call from SVCAA Edwards who stated that he is interested in working with the committee to decrease the workload of faculty by removing unnecessary work. Wunder noted that SVCAA Edwards suggested that it would be more advantageous to bundle a number of these processes together. Wunder suggested that the committee agree to work with the SVCAA on this issue. Bryant asked what would be included in the bundle. Wunder stated that things such as annual faculty evaluations, the ES/IS courses, and the Graduate College 2-tier system are examples of what could be included.
Fuller moved that the committee support the concept of eliminating unnecessary work for faculty and that the specifics of what to eliminate and how to proceed be worked out at a later date. Sawyer seconded the motion. Motion approved.
7.0 New Business
7.1 Presidents Fellows
Wunder reported that the committee has been asked to have the Presidents Fellows for this year attend an Executive Committee meeting. The committee agreed and suggested that the fellows come at a later date.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, January 29th at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in 201 Canfield Administration Building. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and James King, Secretary.
