Faculty Senate Minutes - 5/6/2004
MISSOURI WESTERN STATE COLLEGE
FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
MAY 6, 2004
Call to Order:
Senate President Barry Nelson called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm.
Senators Present:
Blessing,Caldwell, Cluff, Haney, Hegeman, Hennessy, Hunt, Ottinger, Wacek, Williams Senate President Nelson, Senate Vice-President Tapia, Senate Past-President Greiert, Senate Secretary Andrews
Senators Absent:
Mikkelsen,Wagner
Ex-Officio members present:
MWSC Vice-President for Academic and Student Affairs David Arnold
Guests present:
Kevin Anderson, Kristy Hill, Phil Mullins, Ian Roberts, Shawna Heily, Steve Lorimore
Approval of minutes:
Corrections were made to the minutes of the April 15, 2004, page 18 (scholarship committee) Brian Cronk deleted and Michael Ducey, Chem 05 included.
(Senator Cluff/Senator Wacek)
(vote 11 yes, 1 abstention)
Approval of agenda:
The agenda of the May 6, 2004 meeting was approved
(Senate Vice-President Tapia/Senator Hunt)
Report from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee:
Faculty Senate President Nelson’s report follows:
Executive Committee Report
May 6, 2004
The faculty senate executive committee met on April 21. In attendance were Professors Larry Andrews, Steve Greiert, Barry Nelson, and John Tapia of the current executive committee. Also present were Dr. James Scanlon, Dr. David Arnold, and Professor Phil Mullins. In addition to the regular agenda items of discussing the minutes, receiving reports from the college president and vice president, and proposing senate meeting agenda items, Professor Mullins gave a short report in which he indicated that the Peer Review Committee may likely make available for faculty's perusal, copies of the academic departments' peer review material that had been submitted in May, 2003.
The executive committee met again on April 28, 2004, at the request of Dr. Arnold for the purpose of getting input from the committee concerning possible means or directions in which faculty monetary compensation might be adjusted. In addition to executive committee members' attendance, some members of the faculty senate salary committee were present, as well as Dr. Scanlon and Dr. Arnold. It was requested that the salary committee call another meeting (scheduled for the following Monday) for the purpose of prioritizing and further discussing their recommendations for faculty salary and compensation and present any resulting recommendations to the full senate at its May 6 meeting. At this executive committee meeting, it was also announced that the ad hoc faculty salary parity committee would meet again at 2 p.m. on May 11 to discuss the continuing salary parity adjustments.
The executive committee met again on May 5, 2004. Present were Professors Greiert, Nelson, Ottinger, and Tapia, in addition to faculty salary committee chairperson Professor Kevin Anderson. Professor Anderson distributed copies of the revised salary committee recommendations, which were briefly discussed by this committee (to be presented at the full senate meeting of May 6). In addition, Nelson announced that the senate action which would provide release time to the chairperson and the secretary of the curriculum committee was discussed at the recent CGAC meeting and was referred back to the senate for further discussion, pending a more complete analysis of its overall impact across campus. In addition, the executive committee suggested that faculty senate committee structures, procedures, and reporting schedules be seriously reviewed during the coming academic year (preferably during the fall semester), perhaps through a senate ad hoc committee. Also, the suggestion was made to the new executive committee that summer meetings might be beneficial for preparing the agendas and committee charges for the coming year. Finally, the committee suggested that President-Elect Andrews assume the senate presidency for the remaining two months of the current senate year (June 1 through July 31), due to the premature resignation of President Nelson.
Senate Vice-President Tapia reviewed information concerning the two different ongoing Dean searches.
Senate Past-President Greiert discussed the issues of evaluations of Vice-President Arnold, School Deans and Department Chairs.
Senate Secretary Andrews discussed information from the Senate Curriculum committee relating to a later motion to be made concerning an additional member being added to the committee.
Senate Vice-President elect Hegeman introduced modifications to Senate committees for next year. The changes offered follow:
Evaluation:
Remove Deborah Freedman (LAS)
Add Earl Haynes (PS)
Salary:
Remove Earl Haynes (PS)
Add Nannette Wolford (PS)
Scholarship:
Remove Nannette Wolford (PS)
Add Deborah Freedman (LAS)
General Studies:
Change year of service for Susie Hennessy from 1st year to 3rd year
Change year of service for Greg Kriewitz from 1st year to 2nd year
Senator-elect Holian was appointed to as a co-liaison to serve with Senator-elect Tushaus for the Faculty Senate Curriculum committee.
(Senate Vice-President Tapia/Senator Haney)
(Vote unanimous)
Report from MWSC Vice-President of Academic and Student Affairs:
Vice-President Arnold introduced Kristy Hill from Alumni Services who presented a video and two short commercial spots prepared for advertisement purposes of MWSC and the new branding campaign “Discover Gold”
VP Arnold then presented information concerning new budget projection that may add $461,000 if signed by the Governor. Robert Hughes, new student regent, has been approved by the Governor.
Searches are currently underway for the Dean’s position in Professional Studies and the new Dean for the Western Institute. VP Arnold also spoke to the previously discussed “bridge to retirement program” for better understanding by the Faculty Senate.
He also indicated that the MSU consortium was ending as several other institutions had withdrawn thus not leaving a reason for Western to continue. New insurance coverage will be reviewed by Ron Olinger and appropriate committees on campus for MWSC.
Faculty Senate Service Awards:
Senate President Nelson presented awards to the following outgoing Senators;
Senator Wagner ---------------------------------------------2003-2004
Senator Hennessey------------------------------------------2000-2004
Senator Mikkelsen (previous Senate President)---------1998-2004
Senator Cluff-------------------------------------------------2000-2004
Past-President Greiert---------------------------------------1995-2004
Past-President Greiert presented the service award to outgoing Senate President Nelson for service from 1999-2004
Faculty Senate Salary Committee Report:
Faculty Senate Salary Committee
Report to the Faculty Senate
2003-2004
The Committee’s charges for 2003-2004 were:
1. As part of its annual report to the Faculty Senate, make recommendations for the upcoming fiscal budget regarding improvements in salary for the Instructional Faculty of Missouri Western State College, and justify these recommendations with appropriate data.
2. Upon its appointment in the Spring Semester, study available institutional budgets and previous Salary Committee reports in order to make recommendations for the next two institutional budgets, the first of which will go into effect during the next calendar year after the committee’s appointment.
3. Work with the college president, as appropriate, in developing a system of distributing salary parity among the faculty.
These charges are addressed in the following proposals in what the Salary Committee views as the order of importance to the faculty at MWSC:
Proposal #1: The Salary Committee recommends an across-the-board percentage increase in salary that would be fair and equitable for the school & concurrent with other state colleges in order to maintain the equity that has been achieved this year.
Proposal #2: Continuation of the Faculty Salary Parity Plan.
As noted last year the salaries of Missouri Western’s faculty do not compare favorable with those of their peers in similar institutions. The results currently indicate a total adjustment of $1750 for full professors, $350 for associate professors, and $0 for assistant professors whose salary is currently comparable to peer institutions. These salary adjustments could be made incrementally or in one year, depending on financial resources available. (See Appendix 1)
Proposal #3: Increasing part-time faculty salaries from $600 per credit hour to $750 per credit hour.
Many local colleges and community college have adopted a variable pay scale for part-time faculty. Their averages of which are $727 starting to $883 on the top end of the pay scale. We recommend increasing part-time faculty salaries, and regular faculty overload, to $750 per credit hour in order to attract part-time faculty. Funds permitting, we commend that this increase be phased in over a three year period raising part-time salaries $50 per year over the next 3 years. (See Appendix 2)
Charge #3
In Fall 2003 the Salary committee calculated the current Faculty Salary Parity as of Fall 2002. This data was presented to the “Faculty Salary Equity Task Force” headed my Dr. Arnold. The head of the Salary Committee also met with the Task Force on Dec. 5 2003, which developed the plan to distribute salary parity among the faculty; which went into effect in January 2004. The data gathered by the salary committee expedited the Task Force’s work and the Task Force completed its distribution plan in one meeting.
Recommendations for the next faculty salary committee
· Continue to look at Faculty Salary Parity, to determine if the current plan is effective.
· Look at the possibility of a graduated pay scale for Part-time Faculty Salary, which could include salary adjustments for experience and/or education.
APPENDIX 1 FACULTY SALARY PARITY PLAN
Peer institutions used for comparison.
Missouri Southern State University, Lincoln University, Central Missouri State University, Truman State University, Northwest Missouri State University, Southeast Missouri State University, Southwest Missouri State University.
Method used to determine disparity:
Average salaries for peer institutions for 2003-2004 at each rank were averaged and compared to MWSC’s average salary at each rank. MWSC averaged salaries were not used in computing average peer institution salaries.
Proposed
Rank Peer Institution Avg. MWSC Avg. Adjustments
Professor $64,296 $62538 $1750
Associate $51161 $50818 $350
Assistant $43329 $43654 $0
The committee proposes to increase the salary of each faculty member by the amount of difference from peer institutions at his/her rank. At current staffing, the total increase would be:
Rank Number Adjustment Total(# x Adjustment)
Professor 40 $1750 $70,000
Associate 58 $350 $20,300
Total $90,300
APPENDIX 2 PART-TIME FACULTY SALARIES
Local institutions used for comparison:
Central Missouri State University, Maple Woods Community College, Penn Valley Community College, Johnson County Community College, Saint Mary University, Wentworth Military Academy, Rockhurst University, UMKC, William Jewell, North West.
Method used to determine averages:
Average Part-time faculty salaries of local institutions for 2003-2004 were compared to part-time faculty salaries at MWSC. MWSC part-time salaries were not used in computing average local institution part-time faculty salaries.
Report from Academic Regulations and Standards Committee:
MEMO
To: Faculty Senate
From: Academic Regulations and Standards Committee, Lee Evinger, Chairperson
Date: April 22, 2004
Re: Committee Recommendations / Senate Charges
The Academic Regulations and Standards Committee (ARS) has been active this year performing its duties in several different areas. We have served as an appeal board for students who have been placed on academic suspension and have acted as a final review board for two student grade appeals. Both of these duties are standard constitutionally-mandated fare for the committee.
In addition, ARS has attempted to address the Faculty Senate’s other two charges- namely the issues of “Dual Credit Courses” and the advisability of instituting an “IP Grade”.
To accomplish these goals, ARS met to discuss the problems associated with each charge and developed questionnaires (one for “Dual Credit Courses” and another for the “IP Grade”) to solicit opinions and information from chairpersons of every department on campus. These questionnaires, along with an explanatory cover sheet, were sent to chairpersons on January 26, 2004. (Please refer to Attachments A, B, and C.)
Despite the requested February 6 return date for the questionnaires, only 8 departments responded to the Dual Credit survey by mid-March. The IP Grade survey only returned information from 8 departments as well, although not the same departments as responded to the DC survey. (Please refer to Attachment D.)
ARS compiled the responses to our surveys, and met to analyze and interpret the results in an attempt to make reasonable recommendations to the Faculty Senate. Transcribed chairperson responses were collected and organized. (Please refer to Attachments E and F.)
ARS also solicited information about the practice, history, and extent of Dual Credit Courses from Continuing Education, the office that administers these courses. (Please refer to Attachments G, H, and I.)
With all the background information at our disposal, it is apparent that ARS cannot adequately and completely “resolve” all of these issues. The Dual Credit issue needs a larger perspective than the view from the inside of a Faculty Senate Committee. Considering the difficulty in obtaining campus information and cooperation, it would seem that a more august body with more authority should address this issue.
RECOMMENDATION #1: A campus-wide committee shall be formed to investigate the issue of Dual Credit Courses.
At the least, a general concern for the maintenance of appropriate college-level quality and rigor in Dual Credit Courses was evident.
RECOMMENDATION #2: Each academic department shall continue to oversee their Dual Credit Courses and shall submit an annual written report to the appropriate Dean documenting that the rigor and standards of Dual Credit Courses are equivalent to MWSC on-campus courses.
ARS concluded that the “IP Grade” issue was a “manageable” topic. Our survey seemed to indicate that the perceived problem of workload allocation was unique to each department and, therefore, would have unique and individual solutions for different MWSC departments. The value that such a grade can bring to the conduct and administrative structure of developmental courses, independent study courses, independent research, recitals, seasonally-defined courses, practicums, and internships was evident to the committee. The “IP” grade (“In Progress”) is not meant to replace a grade of I/Incomplete, but rather is to be used for academic experiences which may continue beyond one semester or for courses whose meeting times do not coincide with the regular semester.
RECOMMENDATION #3: Missouri Western State College shall add the grade designation of “IP”, which stands for “In Progress”.
Respectfully submitted to the Faculty Senate, on April 22, 2004, by the Missouri Western State College Academic Regulations and Standards Committee.
Mary Jo Gay, Nursing
Gary Moore, Military Science
Ann Thorne, English/Foreign Languages/Journalism
Sharon Vestal, Computer Science/Mathematics/Physics
Lee Evinger, Biology / ARS Chairperson
Directory to ATTACHMENTS
Page 3 A Cover Sheet sent to Department Chairpersons
Page 4 B “Dual Credit Courses” Questionnaire
Page 5 C “IP Grade” Questionnaire
Page 6 D Summary of Responding MWSC Departments
Pages 7-8 E Chairperson Responses to Dual Credit Survey
Page 9 F Chairperson Responses to IP Grade Survey
Pages 10-12 G CHE111 Dual Credit Study
Pages 13-18 H Continuing Education Study of Dual Credit Courses
Pages 19-20 I Dual Credit “Outreach” Spreadsheet
Report from Ad-Hoc Peer Review Committee:
Preliminary Report of Peer Review Committee
May 6, 2004
The Peer Review Committee met five times during Sp 04 (2/20, 3/10, 3/24, 4/14, 4/28); a sixth meeting is tentatively scheduled for 5/11 during exam week.
In our early meetings, the Committee read and discussed some of the literature generated in the last 15 years that is concerned with redefining scholarship/professional development. Particularly, the writings of Boyer have focused attention on broadening the understanding of scholarship in colleges and universities. We reviewed discussions in a two volume series, The Disciplines Speak, which are the reactions to the Boyer proposals by a number of scholarly/professional disciplinary associations. On the web site for the Peer Review Committee (http://www.mwsc.edu/acadaff/readings/), a reading list is provided.
We gathered and examined some information on evaluation procedures at other institutions; we may gather more such material for further examination later. We have discussed many of the apparent difficulties in the current evaluation system at MWSC. We have struggled to begin envisioning some constructive alternatives to the status quo that seem appropriate for an institution moving through a lifecycle that began as a community college, moved to a 4 year institution and appears soon to be a university.
We reviewed and discussed the material that the FS provided from academic departments. The Faculty Senate asked for ageneral statement about what is worthy of tenure and promotion (by rank) in each respective discipline that composed each academic department. The draft material provided by departments in response to this request is quite diverse. The Committee, working through sub-committees, tried to digest these responses and find some common threads and issues. We presently anticipate that we may need, in the fall, to go back to departmental chairs and departments for additional input. We are presently trying to draft a template that has as a vertical axis the three general types of scholarship identified by Boyer (discover/basic research, integration/research on connections across disciplines and application/ research applying theory to particular service area problems) and, as a horizontal axis, some stages in the growth in scholarly productivity. We believe that such a template can serve as a concise way to present expectations in a continuum of professional development. We anticipate that we will do further work on this template and perhaps, in the fall, give it to departments for response and completion of the details tailored to disciplines. We also will recommend review of a short Boyer article (on the redefinition of scholarship) and review of the response to Boyer (in The Disciplines Speak) by the discipline or disciplines represented by each department.
In sum, the semester’s work has taken the Peer Review Committee into an exploration of some of the extra-institutional discussions of promotion, tenure, professional development and peer review. We have also looked at the FS generated material from academic departments. We are putting together some resources that we hope can be used for further dialog with academic departments. We anticipate that we will continue with our work, possibly during the summer but certainly during the fall semester. We should have a concrete set of recommendations for the FS in Spring 05. Notes for the five meetings are posted at http://www.mwsc.edu/acadaff/notes/.
Old Business:
Senate Recommendation from the April 15, 2004 (Senator Hegeman/Senator Ottinger)
SR 01-04
We, the faculty senate of Missouri Western State College, in order to ensure
that policy proposals are announced and presented for discussion to all
College constituencies before their implementation, do hereby affirm these
principles and procedures as specified in page 8 of the Missouri Western
State College Policy Guide 2003-2004:
"The College Governance Advisory Council was established to facilitate
communications within the college. It is not a voting body. The CGAC acts as
a
clearing-house for proposals originating within the college and has three
primary
functions:
. To insure that proposed changes in existing policies and procedures have
been
discussed by all campus governance groups,
. To compare new proposals with existing policies and procedures, and
. To submit proposals with CGAC-related discussion to the President for
action."
(Senator Hegeman/Senator Ottinger)
(vote 12 yes )
New Business:
Proposed Change to Policy Guide at the Request of the Curriculum Committee:
Senate Bill 13-04
Proposal:
Change p. 255 of the Policy Guide under membership, to put one more “at large” member on the committee.
Current:
Membership:
a. This committee is composed of five faculty members from each division plus three members chosen from the faculty at large. The term for this committee is three years.
Proposed:
Membership:
a. This committee is composed of five faculty members from each division plus four members chosen from the faculty at large. The term for this committee is three years.
Justification:
Since the motion to award release time for chair and secretary was sent back for discussion from GGAC, the committee wishes to add another member in order to relieve the Secretary from having to serve on a subcommittee as well. [The current review structure is to have 4 subcommittees of three members each. That requires the secretary to, in essence, perform “double duties”.] This will alleviate conflict for the member having to perform secretarial duties and presentations as well.
The current load of the chair, secretary and all members of the Curriculum Committee were described in the “Justification for Release Time” previously presented to Faculty Senate and GCAC. In that document, this proposal was listed as a possible option. [See attached.]
Motion:
(Senator Caldwell/Senator Williams)
Motion to Suspend Rules:
(Senator Blessing/Senator Cluff)
(vote 9 yes, 3 no, motion to suspend rules carried)
Motion to approve SB 13-04 on curriculum:
(voice vote motion carried)
Senate Bill 14-04 (Senate Vice-President Tapia/Senator Caldwell)
(From Faculty Senate Academic Regulations and Standards Committee recommendation #3)
Missouri Western State College shall add the grade designation of “IP”, which stands for “In Progress”.
Motion to Suspend rules (Senator Ottinger/Senate Vice-President Tapia)
(Vote 6 yes, 6 no motion fails)
Motion to adjourn:
(Senator Ottinger/Senator Hennessey)
(vote unanimous)
Respectfully submitted,
Larry D. Andrews, EdS
Professor
MWSC Faculty Senate Secretary
|
