|
D
R A K E U N I V E R S I T Y
FACULTY SENATE MEETING MINUTES
March 16, 2005
The regular meeting of the 2004-2005 Faculty Senate was called
to order at 3:30 p.m. by President Klaus Bartschat. The following senators were
present for all or part of the meeting. Alexander, Allen, Bartschat, Courard-Hauri,
Dore, Esposito, Freeman-Miller, Gilbert, Gillespie, Lyons, Morrow, Pandit, Reincke,
Rozycki, Sanders, Simpson, Tice, Wade.
Absent: Clapham, Frank, Petersen
The February 2005 minutes were accepted with corrections.
President Maxwell’s Report – no report given due
to his absence from the University.
Provost Troyer’s Report
Senator Reincke asked if all were full time tenure track positions. Provost
Troyer replied that all are full time but not all are tenure track as not all
of the positions to be filled held that status. In reply to a follow up question,
the Provost did not yet believe that there was a clear sense of how many persons
would be leaving Drake at the end of this year.
Senator Pandit asked if the positions were all replacement or new positions.
Provost Troyer replied that the positions are mostly replacement and some have
been redefined positions.
President Bartschat’s Report
Bruce Gilbert, Chair of the University Benefits Committee (UBC), indicated that
the committee has received the figures for the insurance premium increases which
are to begin June 1, 2005. The increases will be approximately 16 to 18% higher
than this year. The UBC will meet to discuss this situation. During their review,
they will discuss suggesting changing deductibles or other measures to off set
the increase. Information to individual employees is due to be distributed in
late March. Senator Gilbert noted that those individuals who may move to the
Humana plan will not be affected by this increase.
Unfinished Business – none presented
New Business
Senator Dore moved and Esposito seconded motion 05-11:
The Faculty Senate approves March 20-24, 2006 as Spring Break
Without discussion, the motion passed with one dissenting vote.
Senator Wade moved and Pandit seconded motion 05-12:
Accept the Sabbatical Task Force report
A summary was presented by Senator Bartschat. He highlighted that there was
some interest in having the split sabbatical available to senior/tenured faculty.
Provost Troyer indicated to Senator Bartschat that he would consider this recommendation.
Senator Rozycki indicated that he was unclear as to what the administrative
implication would be of the tenured faculty use of the split sabbatical. President
Bartschat indicated items such as there may be difficulties to fill the position
for less than one year or individual courses might not be able to be offered.
Senator Rozycki stated that he believed that there would be some real costs
to allowing senior/tenured faculty to take split sabbaticals. Neither Bartschat
nor Rozycki had a sense of how many current tenured faculty would or would not
use this feature of the sabbatical policy if offered.
Senator Tice asked if there were any comments directly to the competitive change
which was in the survey. Senator Bartschat indicated that there were some comments;
but most respondents were reasonably satisfied. The current administration asks
for full reports from the individual faculty person at the end of their sabbatical
which helps to strengthen the whole program.
Senator Allen pointed out, in her opinion, that there is no difference in a
tenured person taking split sabbatical and then leaving Drake is equal to a
non-tenured person taking a split-sabbatical and then leaving Drake.
The Sabbatical Task Force did conclude that the survey did result in a sense
of the faculty that the current policy is achieving what is desired with the
sabbatical opportunity.
The motion was passed on a voice vote.
Senator Alexander moved and Courd-Hardi seconded motion 05-13:
Accept Environmental Task Force recommendation
Recommendation: The Environmental Task Force recommends adoption of the following Statement on Sustainability, and the formation of a Faculty Senate standing committee to oversee its implementation.
Drake’s Statement on Sustainability:
Drake University is committed to taking a proactive stance on issues of sustainability. This includes striving to be a model of environmental responsibility with regard to energy conservation, recycling, waste reduction, building design, landscaping, and integration into the local economy. Drake is committed to promoting environmental literacy in all aspects of University life, and Faculty, staff, and students are encouraged to take part in making Drake an innovative leader in sustainability.
Definition of Sustainability: Drake defines sustainability as acting in such a way as to meet our own needs currently without compromising the ability of others, present and future, to meet their needs.
Definition of Environmental Literacy: Environmental literacy is the capacity to understand evidence-based arguments concerning the interactions among human populations, technologies, and ecosystems and to participate knowledgeably in decisions based on those arguments.Sustainability Oversight Committee
- Responsibilities. The Sustainability Oversight Committee will serve in an advisory capacity to the President’s Cabinet through the Faculty Senate on issues related to the environmental and social sustainability of Drake University in its actions, infrastructure, and activities. The Committee will monitor progress in working toward the goals set forth in the Statement of Sustainability Sustainability Guidelines, and will report this progress in an accessible way to the campus community. The Committee will also recommend further steps which the University can take to improve and promote sustainability at Drake.
- Membership. The Sustainability Oversight Committee is chaired by a faculty member and consists of one additional faculty member, the director of facility services (or their designee), one other staff member, and two students. Appointments are for two years and are staggered for each group, with the longer-serving faculty member serving as chair (or the member whose term expires first in the case of simultaneous appointments). The members are appointed using the standard procedures for appointment of standing committees.
Senator Courard-Hauri began by thanking the Task Force members for their work
on this project. He noted the desire is to acknowledge the efforts of sustainability.
This statement and committee creation offers a valuable showcase for Drake and
our students. This would set out in writing what Drake is doing constructively
in the environmental realm and be a communication mechanism for that work. He
continued by stating that the Task Force wanted to do more than just stating
Drake’s good intentions. This committee can monitor the university and
be an information dissemination group, perhaps via the web.
There was a question as to what was meant by social sustainability. The answer
was that it is more complicated that the physical meaning of sustainability.
It refers to not meeting your (Drake’s) total needs at the expense of
others. An ultimate global definition includes the non-exploitation of workers.
There was a friendly amendment offered and accepted.
(Secretary’s note: these additions are noted above in bold)
There was discussion as to how vague or open-ended the nature of the Statement
of Sustainability. It was written not to be deceptive, but allow for implementation
flexibility.
Senator Allen stated she felt the idea was long over due, the committee membership
was small and focused and she supported the motion. There was some concern amongst
the Senators about the creation of another committee and the impact that has
on all the faculty’s time.
Senator Esposito indicated he is in favor of this project, especially noting
the cross-functionality of the goals. Senator Alexander noted that committees
which are interesting to faculty do have membership. He believed this would
be one of those committees.
The motion passed with one dissenting vote.
Senator Esposito moved and Alexander seconded motion 05-14:
Motion to accept the University Curriculum Committee (UCC) recommendation to change the “Day Free for Study” policy found in the Faculty Manual Section 2.16 Day Free for Study:
The last class day prior to the beginning of the final examination period is designated as a “Day Free for Study,” commonly called “Dead Day.” During this time, no committee meetings may be held, and classes/laboratories (including make-up sessions) do not normally may not meet. Individual colleges and faculty members may schedule voluntary review sessions for their classes, with the provision that attendance by students is voluntary and no new material can be presented which will be included in the final examination. Laboratory reports and term papers previously assigned may be assigned due dates during the Day Free for Study. No examinations or quizzes may be given during the Day Free for Study. Honors and Capstone projects and music juries may be scheduled to facilitate faculty attendance.
(New wording is bold, old is crossed italics.)
President Bartschat indicated that this topic was sent to the University Curriculum
Committee because there was concern that Drake policy is one way but we actually
do things differently. Our rules either need to be enforced or the rules need
to change to what is happening. He further supplied information from a late
May 2004 email exchange between a student and the Dean of Students. Student
Body President Drew Gulley offered that there is a very diverse set of sentiments
on this topic amongst the students. The opinions depend on the discipline, he
stated. He offered that the largest voice was to keep the Dead Day (Day Free
for Study) to one day.
Senator Freeman-Miller indicated that the Music department regularly requests
and receives permission to use Dead Day for their juries. These are 10-15 minutes,
depending on the student’s program. She indicated that the time needed
for this activity by the student on that day was about an hour, which allows
for warm-ups. She continued that the greatest scheduling crunch was for the
limited number of accompanists, and thus the use of Dead Day.
Senator Simpson indicated she had concerns that the motion focuses on exceptions.
She wondered if there was a strong philosophy here in the Senate that a one
day Day Free for Study should be kept and managed so many exceptions.
Senator Morrow desired that the focus on students not be forgotten. Faculty
should be available for students on that day.
Motion was made and passed to delete the word committee from the second sentence
of the motion.
During this time, no committee meetings may be held, and classes/laboratories (including make-up sessions) do not normally may not meet
Senator Lyons noted that there are two ways of evaluating students; active
learning and traditional. She thought there was a bigger issue such as what
Drake is scheduling and what we are requiring.
Senator Wade noted that end of term issues have come to Senate over and over.
Provost Troyer offered some history (over twenty years ago) on how the present
one day period for study began. His comment was that a fundamental issue here
is that Drake has changed how it teaches from that time period. He commented
that he thought this motion was a band-aid.
Mr. Gulley noted that from the experience of the student, the time period when
most exams are given is during the week before finals week. He was uncomfortable
with the amendment, if there are much larger issues to be decided.
Senator Sanders mentioned that as the Director of the Honors Program, he appreciates
that presentations are included in the motion. He is not really in favor of
the amendment.
Senator Simpson noted that the policy was established a long time ago and asked
if there was some consensus to abolish Dead Day.
Senator Pandit saw the value in not having any scheduled classes. Senator Esposito
favored having faculty available on that day for students. Senator Sanders was
in favor of a university wide policy as to when classes are to be held.
Senator Alexander was concerned as to whether there had been abuses to the present
policy. A couple of examples of frequent exceptions were given. There was a
concern that the sessions became mandatory attendance rather than voluntary.
There was concern that the Deans may be using different guidelines or reasons
as they allow for exceptions.
Upon proper motion and vote, the rules were suspended to allow the session to
continue past 5:00 p.m.
Upon proper motion and vote, the motion was tabled.
The body adjourned at 5:05 p.m. Secretary, Nancy Geiger