Faculty Senate Minutes - 2/17/2005
Missouri Western State College
Faculty Senate Minutes
February 17, 2005
SU 220
Senators Present: President Andrews, Vice President Hegeman, Secretary Ottinger, Past President Greiert, Senators Caldwell, Gregory, Haney, Holian, Nandan, Noynaert, Tapia, Tushaus, Voelkel, Williams
Senators Absent: Senators Heider and Hunt
Ex-Officio Members Present: President Scanlon
Ex-Officio Members Absent: Vice President Arnold
Guests Present: Members of Senate Ad Hoc Peer Review Committee (Phil Mullins, Chair), Steve Lorimor (Curriculum Committee Chair) and Shauna Hiley (Curriculum Committee Chair)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call to Order: President Larry Andrews called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
Approval of February 3rd Minutes: (Haney/Williams)
Minutes were approved by unanimous voice vote.
Approval of Agenda: (Haney/Caldwell)
Agenda was approved by unanimous voice vote.
Report from College President:
· Budget Report: Governor Blunt recommended a flat budget for higher education institutions. However, that seems unlikely now, as other cuts (such as Medicaid) are not holding in the House. Possibly cuts to K-12 and higher ed may be needed to make up the difference. Legislature does not want to cut K-12 budget as it may trigger a court mandated full formula funding. MWSC is expecting about $1M in increased spending for FY2006 due to increases in MOSERS, Scholarship, and utility costs. Reserves are good for now, but it is only one time money.
· People in the legislature are taking interest in Higher Education. There is talk about subjects such as Teaching Loads, Required Graduation Hours, Tenure/Post Tenure Reviews, and National Recognitions.
· Legislature is currently looking at tuition caps, but there is no mention of guaranteed state funding. Other schools are announcing only modest (3-4%) tuition increases.
· The legislature is again looking at equity funding.
· University Designation has passed the senate. Senator Shields is optimistic that it will pass in the house as well.
o Name change costs will be minimal. Friends of the College (University) have volunteered to pay the costs of changing the signs in front of campus.
Report from Vice President for Academic & Student Affairs: None
Report from Senate President: See Minutes Appendix A for report.
Vice President Hegeman reported that at the last CGAC meeting Vice President Arnold announced that he would be calling up the Curriculum Committee in April for an “Emergency Session” to discuss name changes for the developmental reading and mathematics courses. The Chair of CSMP was unaware that any name changes had been proposed. The outside consultant had suggested the names “Quantitative Analysis” and “Computational Analysis” for the math courses, but these names are associated with upper division courses.
Dr. Martin Johnson explained that he was chairing the Developmental Education Committee which has been discussing the name changes:
MAT090 would change from “Beginning Algebra” to “Fundamentals of Arithmetic”
MAT095 would change from “Intermediate Algebra” to “Fundamentals of Algebra”
RDG095 would change from “Reading Skills Improvement” to “Analyzing and Studying College Texts”
Report from Peer Review Committee: See Minutes Appendix B for report.
Phil Mullins, chair of the committee, briefly discussed the contents of the report. Suggested that we read through sections A & B to get an understanding of the reasoning for the proposals outlined in section C. The appendices contain ideas on what could be included in peer review. A matrix was also included which shows a break down of the review practices of each department, as reported a couple of years ago. This matrix is a report back to the faculty, it is not a policy piece.
The committee has determined that MWSC needs a stronger peer review component, and “up or out” is an expression of that standard.
Questions to the Committee:
· If new faculty (with no experience) demonstrate exceptional talent could they go up for tenure/promotion early? --That possibility is not in the current plan.
· Proposal 1:
o Should administrators go through a tenure review? --There is currently no formal process for this. President Scanlon said we could develop a process, but it would need to be an expedited process as the hiring of administrators must be done quickly.
· Proposal 2:
o Isn’t this the equivalent of the chair’s 2 year review of new faculty? --No, this is not intended to replace that review. M. Johnson –this would be a critical review. Let candidate know his/her weak areas so that they could be improved.
· Proposal 3:
o Having a department committee acting as an “evaluator” and not “advocate” would hurt relationships within the department, especially small departments.
· Proposal 4:
o When papers are reviewed for publication there is an analysis of their work. Is this proposal different than including those reviews in the portfolio? --those should be included, even positive reviews of rejected papers. M. Johnson –This would be a review of the persons entire body of work, not just a single artifact. Judge how the persons work fits into their field of study.
o Should the reviewers be “scholars/artists/professionals/practitioners”, limiting it to “scholars/artists” may exclude good reviewers. – The intent was to be inclusive, not exclusive when writing “scholars/artists”.
o Should the candidate have control over his materials, and not have the review sent directly to his chair?
· Proposal 5:
o It would be important to have a set standard for “support”
· Proposal 6:
o How do we know department committee is on the right track, when making suggestions to the candidate based on their review of the mid-term portfolio? B. Blessing –We will need a workshop for chairs so they know what would be required.
· Will there be a college wide list of expectations for peer review? B. Blessing – The chairs need to meet together to see what others are doing, but the ownership of the review remains with the department.
(Noynaert/Williams) Motion to accept report.
Approved by unanimous voice vote.
Old Business:
SB-12-05 (Hegeman/Haney) Enact changes to Faculty Senate Bylaws as recommended by Ad Hoc Senate Bylaws Committee Report (3 Feb 2005)
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. (2/3 vote was necessary for bylaws change). See Minutes Appendix C for full text of approved motion.
Motion to take SB-10-05 off the table (Caldwell/Tapia). Approved by unanimous voice vote.
SB-10-05 (Caldwell/Tapia) Establishment of Sunset Clauses for Curriculum Proposals: Adoption of recommendation 2) from Curriculum Committee Report (20Jan05)
Discussion: Should the bill have a retroactive date? Will this affect the Business proposals that have been passed, but not yet enacted? --No. As written, this would only affect future proposals.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. See Minutes Appendix D for full text of approved motion.
Motion to take SB-11-05 off the table (Caldwell/Tapia). Approved by unanimous voice vote.
SB-11-05 (Tapia/Hunt) Directives on Spring Call-up for Curriculum Committee: Adoption of recommendation 1) from Curriculum Committee Report (20Jan05)
(Tapia/Gregory) Motion to amend bill to replace “Faculty Senate” with “Faculty Senate Executive Committee” as the body who would review the merits of a curriculum proposal’s need to be reviewed in a special session.
Discussion: This would make it possible for the committee to be called up in a more timely manner if necessary. If it was not urgent, the Executive Committee could refer the matter to the entire senate for their opinion.
Amendment approved by unanimous voice vote.
Motion approved by unanimous voice vote. See Minutes Appendix E for full text of approved motion.
New Business:
None.
Adjournment: (Tapia/Noynaert)
Senate adjourned at 5:21 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Michael B. Ottinger, PhD
Senate Secretary.
Minutes Appendix A
Faculty Senate President Report
February 17, 2005
The following reviews work of the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate since the last meeting of the 2004/2005 academic year. The committee met once with both the college president and vice-president since the last meeting.
o MAFS meeting in Jefferson City –updates – new commissioner of education
o University status and proclamation – letter from Senator Shields
o Survey to MAFS – from MWSC
o School meetings February 24, 3:30 pm for Senate nominations
o Senate meeting changed to “All Faculty Forum” on March 3 at 4:00 pm, (Note: room MC 205)
o Shared Governance – MAFS- American Association of University Professors National Report and Survey
o CGAC – Curriculum issue – Vice President Hegeman
Additional comments from Senate Vice President Hegeman, Senate Secretary Ottinger, and Senate Past President Greiert.
|
