UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EAU CLAIRE

UNIVERSITY SENATE MEETING

VOL. 43, NO. 4

November 14, 2006

Members Present:

Judy Blackstone, Janice Bogstad, Marcia Bollinger, Jacqueline Bonneville, Don Bredle, Maria DaCosta, Barbara Davis, Patrick Day, Gary Don, Michael Dorsher, Selika Ducksworth-Lawton, Leslie Foster, Jessica Franson, Mitchell Freymiller, Warren Gallagher, Alan Gallaher, Andrea Gapko, Susan Harrison, Robert Hollon, Larry Honl, Robert Hooper, Todd Hostager, Bill Jacobsen, Rose Jadack, Debra Jansen, Jennifer Johs-Artisensi, Harry Jol, Fred Kolb, Heather Kretz, Jennifer Lee, Bruce Lo, Barbara Lozar, Steven Majstorovic, Susan Mc Intyre, Sean McAleer, Mike Morrison, Donna Raleigh, Scott Robertson, Sherrie Serros, Nick Smiar, Lorraine Smith, Jan Stirm, Kent Syverson, Lois Taft, Steve Tallant, Max Von Klein, Charles Vue, Sharon Westphal, Scott Whitfield, Michael Wick, Marty Wood

Members Absent:

Robin Baker, Rose Battalio, Jennifer Brockpahler, Paul Butrymowicz, Margaret Devine, Jeff Erger, Ann Hoffman, Brian Levin-Stankevich, Tim Lippold, David Lonzarich, Karl Markgraf, Sue Moore, Tarique Niazi, Jill Prushiek, Mehdi Sheikholeslami, Earl Shoemaker, Laurie St. Aubin-Whelihan, Troy Terhark, Deborah Wright, Rebecca Wurzer

Guests:

Donald Christian, Karen Havholm, Stephanie Jamelske, Jan Morse, Andrew Soll, Elaine Wendt, Christopher Wagner, Marnie Wetzstein

The regular meeting of University Senate was called to order by Chair Harrison at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 in the Tamarack Room of Davies Center.

I. Minutes of October 24, 2006 University Senate meeting approved as distributed

II. Chancellor’s Remarks – Delivered by Provost Tallant

· Chancellor in China this week and at conference next week; gave me notes to pass on

· In China for 100^th anniversary of Jinan University, long-standing partner for student and faculty exchange

· Presenting paper on improving competitiveness of higher education institutions at conference in China with university presidents

· Faculty and academic staff representatives will cover Board of Regents (BOR) meeting

· Highlight of two days was recognition of our history department

· On Friday, received Outstanding Department Award from University of Wisconsin System

· Exciting day – well earned and deserved recognition

· Chancellor wanted to note that since last update, have been visits and presentations by major authors and scholars sponsored by Geography and Anthropology and History Departments

· Very appreciative of those efforts; encourages other departments to hold similar events that enrich academic life at university

· Grateful to everyone who attended his inauguration

· Important day in his life; well run, well attended

· Appreciative of support since he has been here as well as at inauguration

· Very pleased with high turnout of student voters – 63% increase

· Regardless of side they voted for, important that students involved in democracy

· Election changed local politicians – chancellor already phoned and set up meetings with new folks to talk about what is important for this university and university system

· New Assistant to Chancellor for Affirmative Action Theresa O’Halloran now on board

· Screening committee making progress on Assistant to Chancellor for Strategic Planning

· Provost update on Department of Public Health Professions in College of Nursing and Health Sciences

· College formed after dismantling of College of Professional Studies

· Department includes three programs - Health Care Administration, Music Therapy, and Environmental and Public Health

· Was faculty vote in department after extensive discussion and debate

· Faculty in programs collectively voted to pursue other options

· Last spring Music and Theatre Arts Department went through accreditation by National Association of Schools of Music

· Accreditation of department dependent upon either Music Therapy moving to music department with additional resources allocated to that program, or Music Therapy program eliminated

· That started conversation with Dean Christian – working with individuals within College of Arts and Sciences and will be making recommendation on future of that program

· Leaves two programs, each with two faculty, in Department of Public Health Professions

· Health Care Administration will be moving at beginning of next semester to College of Business

· Faculty have met; discussed curricular issues, as well as promotion issues and offices – looks very promising

· Substantial part of Health Care Administration curriculum comes from College of Business

· Model seen elsewhere in country

· Dean Christian investigating possibility of placing Environmental and Public Health program within one of Arts and Sciences existing departments

· Lots of complicated issues – curricular, and otherwise, that need to be solved

· Dean working closely with chairs and faculty on that

· Provost met with Chair Harrison early in semester; concern was that while changes to departments must go through shared governance, can move programs without shared governance

· So, wanted to keep everyone informed along process

· Presented this to Academic Policies Committee and reporting to you today

· Response to question from floor

· Vice Chancellor Soll indicated have received over 50 applications for Assistant to Chancellor for Strategic Planning

· Screening committee has narrowed that to ten

· To set up telephone interviews immediately after Thanksgiving break

· Hope to schedule campus visits before winter break – to be publicized to give opportunity for people to participate

III. Chair’s Report –Chair Harrison

· Called upon to answer questions about Department Personnel Committee (DPC) policies, use of detailed minutes, and processes involved in filing complaints or grievances

· Met with Chair-Elect Wood to discuss senate items

· Holistic admission motion signed off by Chancellor

· Appreciate turnout for open discussion on goals of baccalaureate

IV. Faculty Representative’s Report – Senator Wick

· Attended BOR meeting – relatively uneventful except history department award was significant

· Currently language about criminal background checks pending action by BOR

· President Reilly will propose policy at December BOR meeting

· Number of faculty representatives concerned about how policy and local implementation of policy developed

· President Reilly sent requests to campuses to comment on draft policy and to develop implementation policy

· At UW-Eau Claire, Jan Morse headed up development of local implementation policies; shared those with personnel committees along with draft policies from UW-System

· All comments were collected and shared with UW-System and used to both update our local policy and UW-System proposed policy

· Some faculty representatives believe process was not sufficiently bottom-up – basically faculty were asked to give editorial comments, suggestions, and slight modifications to proposal

· Faculty Representative Wick will not move resolution because disagrees individually, but didn’t want to make decision for campus

· Other campuses are considering similar motions

· If someone does want to move this, can do so under Miscellaneous Business

· Questions and comments from floor

· Information about what will be done with criminal background checks, when to run them, where they will be housed, and how they might affect employment included in proposed system policy as well as in local implementation policy

· Information from criminal background check would be used during hiring process – would have to consider offense and position applied for to see if substantial likelihood of overlap

· Are guidelines, references and definitions as to how that process would be done; local implementation is delegated to specific individuals and offices on campuses

· Background check policy is in response to isolated events in Madison; is no real evidence that problems would have been solved by doing background checks

· Essentially all campuses could decide individually to enact same policy, but not necessarily

· Regardless of whether we start with policy already drafted or start over, eventually have to come up with own local procedures

· Is link on UW-System website to draft policy

· Pretty clear not looking for minor infractions, such as speeding tickets

· Those may show up, but will not be judged

· Are criteria about considering findings in employment

· Presumption is that BOR will pass policy to do criminal background checks on all new hires

· Faculty representatives may have been bothered because Chapter 36 of state statutes says faculty and academic staff have primary responsibility for development of all policies and procedures concerning faculty and academic staff personnel matters

· Yet system developed policy and passed it along asking what we thought

· Is matter of interpretation of primary responsibility – faculty are saying we ought to be ones developing draft policy and share it with others as opposed to responding to drafts developed by system administration

· Resolution may go beyond just this policy – faculty have responsibility for developing these regulations and are not ready to turn that over to system to develop and pass them down for implementation

· Not what this motion says; it does not make any general statements, but could interpret that way

· Already doing criminal background checks on employees and students in positions as required by Wisconsin Caregiver Law

· Have mechanism in place for those

· Majority of employees have not undergone criminal background checks

· Proposed policy coming out of Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) audit of personnel practices

· LAB did check on every UW employee in system in September; were a number of people who had criminal records that LAB thought perhaps should not have been employed

· System decided to write this policy

· In beginning discussions, UW-System opted to go this way rather than directly to governance because considered this pre-employment, not current employees

· Students at agencies off campus are often checked by those agencies before serving with them

· Seems mechanism for doing this is out there, so talking about fundamental creep of doing more

· From time perspective alone, having system create something to which all campuses respond makes more sense; easier to have something to start with

· Only so many ways to come at background checks

· System has accepted considerable suggestions to changing document

· May be moot discussion since people not yet considered employees

· If was affecting governance of employees and could set precedent, then in spite of efficiency argument, would want to make sure governance rights retained

· Local implementation policies have gone to Executive and Faculty and Academic Staff Personnel Committees; suggestions made were incorporated into policy

· With change in political climate, bit of delay might affect urgency of this

· Still considerable urgency to get message to BOR before consideration of this policy

· Whether regents decide this is still an urgent matter is up to them; would guess they would still want to move quickly to make sure public knows we are watching the shop

· Proposed policy applies only to new hires, or if individuals moving to new job that state law would require check, which is true now as well

· Faculty representatives choose not to vote on anything – not a governing body

· To get this resolution on floor, would need to be brought up under miscellaneous business

V. Academic Staff Representative’s Report – Senator Blackstone

· Board of Regents meeting relatively uneventful

· System, however, did begin discussions trying to persuade regents more money is needed

· Remind academic staff senators that revisions of UWS 11 (Dismissal for Cause) done

· Many of our suggestions incorporated

· Will be in Madison on Thursday; to meet committee looking at criminal misconduct policy

· Committee wants to know if academic staff and faculty representatives suggest any final revisions

· Will be last time they ask for opinions – let me know what you think so I have a sense of what to say

· Academic staff representatives don’t vote, but seen by administration as buffer and conduit to get sense of what academic staff think

VI. Announcements

· Next meeting of University Senate on November 28, 2006

· Last spring senate passed resolution to establish one clicker vendor on campus

· Now through process; committee selected criteria, held vendor demonstrations and based on faculty and instructional academic staff opinion will go with i-Clicker

· System has low learning curve for faculty and low cost for students

· If want to use i-Clickers in spring semester, let Donna Raleigh or Catherine Artac know how many students and which classrooms

VII. Unfinished Business

· None

VIII. Reportable Items from Committees

· Executive Committee decided at last meeting to change committee reports to save time

· Only those committees with reportable items, such as decisions, for the record items, and major topics being considered at a future meeting need to report

¨ Technology Committee – Senator Jol

· All technology committees on campus are exchanging minutes so more like single technology venue

· Distributed draft Potential Deployment of Vista and Office2007 Offices; please share with others

· Potentially labs and teaching stations will be changed next summer – this is heads up

· Trying to get everyone upgraded by that time

· Chip Eckardt put together document – committee felt all of us should be aware of this

· Looking at updating quite aggressively

· If interested, have concerns, or would like to be an early or late adopter, email vistaofficeupgrade@uwec.edu

· Trying to individualize for each professor and academic staff on campus

· Vista being delayed by Microsoft so students will not have new packages next semester

· LTS staff of about 10-15 has been beta testing

· Every time Microsoft upgrades, particularly Internet Explorer (IE), programs that compete with Microsoft suddenly glitch out and stop running; creates major problems to get up and running again

· That is one reason to personalize this right now – trying to head off these kinds of issues

· If have such issues, let Chip Eckardt know

· Microsoft Office2007 will be significantly different; new way of saving documents as well

· If this goes through as Microsoft indicates, looking at January for beginning training for early adopters

· Assume will be fixing known conflicts as quickly as possible

· Have used IE7

· There will be issues; reason for early adopting is to identify those issues

· IE7 also being tested at UW-Madison with Desire2Learn

· Are gathering list of known issues of which there are very few

· Document distributed will be made available on senate website

· Podcasting is another major issue on campus

· Many possibilities and implications

· Any inquiries, suggestions, or directions would be appreciated as have to adopt policies

· Send to Donna Raleigh in Learning and Technology Services

· Meet this afternoon about how to roll out pilot projects

· Would like to work with couple people spring semester; let Donna Raleigh know if interested

¨ Compensation Committee – Vice Chair Gapko

· Committee looking at survey results of faculty not in alternate pay plans

· Still welcoming responses

· Results so far pretty noncommittal

· About 50% of people report they don’t understand and don’t have an opinion

· Anyone with suggestions for next pay plan, send them to committee

¨ Academic Policies Committee – Senator Hollon

· Today approved new prefix for materials science courses, approved having those courses located in GE II-F, and changed name of dual degree emphasis to dual degree engineering emphasis in the major: Physics, Liberal Arts

· Those items are coming to full senate in two weeks

¨ Faculty Personnel Committee – Senator McAleer

• Met and approved motion that will receive first reading today

¨ Executive Committee – Chair Harrison

• Was determined Academic Calendar 2008-2009 followed approved guidelines this body set forth

· Copy of calendar available online

• Consultation held with Vice Chancellor Soll about possible name change of Institutional Planning Office to Office of Institutional Research

FOR THE RECORD ITEM

Academic Calendar 2008-2009

Discussion

· No fall break even though longer fall semester than spring semester because adding fall break in would result in only 12 full weeks of classes, which would not fit guideline requiring 13 full weeks

Without objection, item entered into record.

IX. Special Reports – Report on Provost Search and Screen Committee – Co-Chair Karen Havholm

· Chancellor made decision not to use outside search firm

· Was concern about value added versus cost since unable to get first or second choice of firms and would get rookie in firm ended up with

· Committee did vote to keep search firm, but had concerns about value

· Chancellor wrote:
After weighing the benefits and costs, I cannot support the use of a search firm to assist for the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs search. I believe that if we can announce the position immediately, we will carry a strong attraction for many outstanding candidates as we do have an extraordinary university and benefit from a strong externally validated reputation. I cannot see that a search firm, particularly the option that is left available to us, will add value equivalent to the funding level that would support a faculty member for a year or more. While the funds that would be spent are not necessarily exchangeable in this way, we certainly have many one-time uses for these resources. My office can also assist by contacting colleagues across the country to seek nominations and solicitations of interest.

· Ad going out today; website should be up by beginning of next week

· Now even more important for committee to receive nominations – will be form on website to make suggestions for people committee should pursue

· Current working schedule is to have candidates here week after spring break

X. Miscellaneous Business

A. First Reading – Motion from Faculty Personnel Committee

Report on Non-Participation in DPC Actions – Senator McAleer

· Issue of what happens if member of DPC does not participate came up mainly for small departments

· Handbook language currently says if member not participating because of conflict of interest, then functional equivalent takes over; otherwise, DPC continues with two members

· Struck some of committee as problematic as would give one member effective veto over tenure

· Proposed changes would clarify those instances

· Questions for clarification

· Sentence in original that an individual must decline to participate in certain decisions of this committee when there is a danger of conflict of interest struck and replaced with may be excused

· Concern is use of may does not make it clear who decides if person is excused or forced to be excused

· Are situations where members, whether they want to or not, should be removed from DPC for decision

· Committee focus was other legitimate reasons someone might have for not participating

· Could have person who doesn’t believe conflict of interest exists, but others do

· Could be excused by dean of college

· Share concern; in attempt to broaden this out so it doesn’t apply only to cases of conflict of interest, made it look like conflict of interest is optional

· Might be preferable to find single place within personnel rules that states unequivocally that no one can vote on a personnel matter if there is a conflict of interest

· Confusion is in phrase may be excused

· Thought we had a nepotism law which would make this unnecessary

· Are other areas for conflict of interest – does not have to be for nepotism

· Dean Christian puzzled by kinds of circumstances for which personnel committee thought dean might excuse participation in DPC actions

· Not sure you want to give this authority to dean

· Issue is only reason DPC would be replaced by functional equivalent is in case of conflict of interest – struck us that there might be other legitimate reasons

· This is responsibility of tenured faculty consistent with language senate passed last year about synchronous connection involving deliberations, so unless someone hospitalized and unavailable, they need to participate

· Can’t believe there are other circumstances that should be approved, but can conceive of number of requests coming forward wanting dean to intervene

· Don’t see that as appropriate role for dean

· Nepotism clause in current handbook pertains only to conflicts of interest involving immediate family

· Really should be no way of resigning from committee because is part of professional obligation

Motion 43-FP-01

MOVED and seconded by Faculty Personnel Committee (6 for, 0 against) that the University Senate approve the following three changes to the Faculty and Academic Staff Handbook, Chapter 5.

1. Department Personnel Committees

Organization

… Each eligible faculty member has a responsibility to serve on the Department Personnel Committee, and there is no provision for resignation from this committee. An individual must decline to participate in certain decisions of this committee when there is a danger of conflict of interest. In unusual circumstances, including but not limited to conflicts of interest, eligible individual members may be excused from participation in certain DPC actions with the approval of the dean of their college. If the failure of an individual faculty member to participate in this committee's actions reduces the resulting number of participating members to is fewer than three, then for the purpose of those actions, the functional equivalent (see below) shall replace the committee.  (FASH 5.10)

2. Promotion Subcommittees

Organization

… Each eligible faculty member has a responsibility to serve on the appropriate promotion subcommittee. Moreover, there is no provision for resignation from this committee. An individual must decline to participate in certain decisions of this committee when there is a danger of conflict of interest. In unusual circumstances, including but not limited to conflicts of interest, eligible individual members may be excused from participation in certain promotion subcommittee actions with the approval of the dean of their college. If the failure of an individual faculty member to participate in this committee's actions reduces the resulting number of participating members to is fewer than three, then for the purpose of those actions, the functional equivalent (see below) shall replace the committee.  (FASH 5.25)

3. Post-Tenure Review Subcommittee of the Department Personnel Committee

Organization

… Each eligible faculty member has a responsibility to serve on all appropriate post-tenure review subcommittees. Moreover, there is no provision for resignation from these subcommittees. An individual must decline to participate in actions of the subcommittee when there is a real or perceived conflict of interest. In unusual circumstances, including but not limited to conflicts of interest, eligible individual members may be excused from participation in certain post-tenure review subcommittee actions with the approval of the dean of their college. If the failure of an individual faculty member to participate in the sub-committee's actions reduces the resulting number of participating members to is fewer than three, then for the purpose of those actions, the functional equivalent (see below) shall replace the committee.  (FASH 5.29)

Debate

· Job of dragging irresponsible faculty to do what they don’t want to do is chairs’ job – don’t need policy

· Committee thought policy needed because number of reasons other than conflict of interest why a person would not serve on DPC – family medical emergency, sabbatical – and in those cases two person DPC continues to operate

· This takes flexibility away from department and chair

· This could happen – one person could say no and a junior faculty member would be done

· Trying to find way to accommodate this situation

· Alternative to having two people make decision is to have department chair, or one person, make recommendation

· Situation has not occurred to date

· Important that handbook be forward looking – important if it is your case

· This solution may not be right one, but committee thought something ought to be done

· Approval of dean inserted to make it quasi-official that someone was going to review and made decision about legitimate reason not to participate

· Possible way to resolve would be to keep some of original language about conflict of interest, but also include in unusual circumstances eligible members may be excused and then decide if want dean in

· If dean is out, decision is made by chair and chair would also make personnel recommendation

· Individual must decline to participate is little like self-reporting in dismissal for cause cases

· Like new wording because other members of DPC could bring concerns

· Think dean’s role is appropriate because functional equivalent has chair making decision

Without objection, editorial change replacing committee with subcommittee in items two and three accepted

Without objection, second reading of this motion to take place at next meeting

B. First Reading – Motion from Academic Policies Committee

Report on Reorganization within College of Nursing and Health Sciences from Three Nursing Departments to One Nursing Department – Senator Hollon

· Commend faculty and staff for attention to governance – all proper motions from departments to curriculum committee to college taken care of

· College trying to address number of issues with proposal – such as efficiency and program effectiveness

· Was discussion about role of department chair, tenure and promotion of faculty, and impact on programs in college

· Heard from provost that other department in that college might be shipped out to other places – would then have college with single department

Motion 43-AP-02

MOVED and seconded by Academic Policies Committee (9 for, 0 against) that the departments of Adult Health Nursing, Family Health Nursing, and Nursing Systems in the College of Nursing and Health Sciences be eliminated and that a Department of Nursing be created in the College of Nursing and Health Sciences.

Debate

· Is precedent in other institutions (Madison, Milwaukee, Oshkosh) to have one department in College of Nursing

· Assumption that remaining program ENPH will be moving to Arts and Sciences not yet fully established

· According to Dean Wendt, college will organize similar to other nursing colleges across nation

· Would continue to be an associate dean

· After discussion with provost, someone will be named chair

· Will also have an undergraduate program coordinator and a graduate program coordinator

· Of those eligible to vote, 27 faculty and instructional academic staff make up those three departments

· Speak for motion – commend nursing faculty for hard work

· Represent Public Health Professions Department – colleagues understand why motion put forward

· Support idea of nursing moving to one program

· In light of some of proposed moves of other programs, might at future time make sense to have conversation about name of college; hope to be consulted on that

· Seems like good idea; certainly nursing knows how best to align programs for efficiency

MOTION by Senator Stirm that we suspend the rules to vote on this today seconded and PASSED by two-thirds vote.

Continued Debate on Motion

· Has been concern about representation on bodies such as senate

· Discussed this with Chair Harrison previously; may appeal to have two members rather than one from departments with large number of members

· Or have number of at-large members

· As college, need to have representation on Executive Committee and Academic Policies Committee – would be heavy burden for one person

· Were enough other reasons to move forward on this

· Were similar issues with other departments and academic staff units in past – can talk about that at next Executive Committee meeting

Vote on Motion 43-AP-02: Motion PASSED by University Faculty without dissention.

Without objection, meeting adjourned at 4:28 p.m.

Submitted by,

Wanda Schulner

Secretary to the University Senate