Chair’s Report for March 27, 2001
Senate update
1. Important links to
agendas, minutes, Chair's Reports and other sites of interest are available
on the Senate web site: http://www.uwec.edu/Usenate.
Senate Chair’s Report will be available on this site by noon on the day of the Senate
meeting.
2. During debates, Senators
may speak only twice to any motion or amendment. Each speaking term is limited to 10
minutes. The Chair will add names of those wishing to speak to a speaker's list upon
recognition.
1. Discussion
of Request for Non-Senator Membership on University Senate Academic Policies, Budget, and
Technology Committees
· Copy
of statement of support from faculty member with proposal distributed and read; discussion
followed
· Standing
Technology Committee formed to watch for technology issues curriculum and personnel
implications to make certain shared governance involved with policy decisions in these
areas
· To
open committee to non-senators defeats and expands purpose of committee
· Took
being on Senate for me to gain respect for purpose of University Senate
· Oppose
opening to non-senators; of three justifications listed two not forceful, other weak
· Closed
session only allowed for few very specific issues, not policy decisions
· These
three committees only ones besides Executive and Nominating without elected non-senators
serving
· At
times shortage of senators to fill all committee positions; this would mitigate problem
· Talked
at length about committee membership when last restructured Senate (spring 1998)
· Decision
at time for majority or all of committee to be senators
· If
not enough senators to staff committees, then maybe need to increase size of body
· See
value in requiring Senate membership because representative body
· Opening
up committees may not result in more people forthcoming from groups needed for positions
difficult to staff
· Not
sure where stand on issue, but see inconsistency in committee structure as problem
· All
committee structures open for changes at restructuring
· Membership
on Academic Policies Committee not addressed (during restructuring) other than to remove
restriction on Library member being senator because is only one senator from Library and
that representative already required to sit on Budget Committee
· Budget
Committee perceived to have too many non-senator members so changed to increase number of
senators
· Technology
Committee restricted to senators because of proposed purpose
· Personnel
Committees did not believe changes necessary at that time (of restructuring)
· History
of formulation of personnel and compensation committees with elected at-large membership
unknown
· Since
probably not time to get constitution changed this spring, consensus to report
discussion to Senate as part of Chair’s Report, garner comments from senators,
send copy of minutes to concerned faculty member, and further discuss as necessary
Faculty Reps Meeting,
March 2
1. Associate Vice President
of Budget and Planning Kathleen Sell and Vice President of University Relations Linda
Weimer provided an overview of the Biennial Budget. [Available in Senate Office]
2. Assistant Vice President
for Academic Affairs Larry Rubin provided a copy of the new Systemwide AODA Policy. [Copy
is available in the Senate office.]
3. Senior Academic Planner
in Academic Affairs Fran Garb provided a preview of the PK-16 Curriculum Alignment project
to be presented at the Board of Regents meeting (see Board notes)
4. Lengthy discussion
occurred concerning the problems various campuses are having with PeopleSoft –
especially in the area of student records used for academic purposes. One campus reported
the degree audits was only accurate through December 1999 and any course taken since then
had to be manually included in the record. Suffice it to say, the discussion was tense at
times. Regent Vice President Gerald Randall was present for this discussion during lunch.
Board of Regents Meeting,
March 8 & 9
1. All regents were invited
to a review of the Governor’s Budget Proposal. Concerns in the proposed budget and
statutory language were highlighted. The Regents reaffirmed the financial aid funding
principle “GPR financial aid and graduate assistant support increases should be kept
commensurate with general tuition increases” and encouraged the Governor and
Legislature to fund state-supported financial aid programs to achieve this goal.
2. President Lyall provided
an Economic Stimulus Proposal. (see attachment) This Economic Stimulus Package outlines
the Regent’s priorities if additional funding is received from the
legislature for 2001-2003. During the discussions, Regent Boyle stressed the need to
maintain the quality of faculty and staff – “we must put this ahead of access;
we must make it very clear the need to support 4.2%”. Regent Krutsch encouraged
campuses to see if businesses in the area would fund positions to help retain students in
the area and work on internships. Regent Olivieri said it was sad that the instructional
technology component in the budget was being sacrificed and he hoped System could look at
ways to reallocate funds for IT. He also stressed the need for financial aid to be in
alignment with tuition. Regent Mohs stressed the need to pick up the extra 4.7 million not
received last time to support the libraries. Regent Grottschack expressed concern that the
current budget backs away from partnerships established in the last budget and that donors
in the future may resist being asked to substitute for state funds rather than supplement
state funds. Regent President Smith again reminded everyone that we must work as a team as
we go forward working with the legislature. Regent Mohs offered a resolution thanking
President Lyall and all UW-System staff for their role in making UW Day such a success. [Full
text of Governor McCallum’s speech at UW Day available in the Senate office.]
3. During the Education
Committee, a review of the work of the PK-16 Standards and Alignment project was
presented. The project involved investigating the continuity between what students are
expected to learn in high school and what they must know to succeed in college. [Briefing
paper available in the Senate office.] Responding
to findings showing gaps in the high school preparation and college expectations in
mathematics, “Regent Krutsch proposed several policy considerations intended to help
remedy the situation: (1) requiring four years of mathematics for admission to UW
institutions; (2) having UW institutions give no credit for remedial math courses; and (3)
recommending interactive mathematics software that students could use to improve their
math skills before entering the university”… Regent Axtell asked presenters
“to comment on the use of the high school graduation test as a requirement for
admission to UW institutions…. Regent Benson predicted that requiring the test for
admission would put an end to remediation courses. Regent Olivieri proposed the following
policy initiatives: (1) advocate continued work on alignment issues; (2) encourage
exposure to math in each year of high school; (3) eliminate the negative connotation of
the word ‘remediation’ in light of the increasing number of older, returning
students; and (4) make explicit the assumption that a student cannot complete high school
without being ready to attend college.” {from System draft minutes of the meeting}
4. An overview of the
process of Academic Program Review and Development was given. Regent Axtell stressed the
importance of market research for new proposed programs and the importance of
institutions’ monitoring program health since Regents do not have a role in
discontinuing programs. “Regent Boyle urged development of standard criteria for
reporting resources to the board and expressed the desire that campuses be required to
specify what resources are available and to what extent it will commit those resources to
a proposed new program. Interim Senior V.P. Beaver suggested the possibility of expanding
the Executive Summary to include this information. … Regent Boyle stated that
campuses should describe their funding strategy in the executive summary.” Regent
Olivieri stressed the need for greater consistency in presenting market information and
the need for a campus history regarding programs eliminated to be provided when a new
program is brought forward. “He emphasized the need to discuss collaboration and the
use of technology in program delivery very early in the process, urging that collaboration
be a requirement for all proposed new programs…. Regent Boyle suggested getting a
better sense of how a proposed program fits into campus program array and conforms to
campus mission.”
5. At the Friday meeting,
different Chancellors, including Chancellor Mash, provided updates on regional Economic
Summit events.
6. President Regent Smith
introduced the topic of Plan 2008 (which was not listed on the agenda). After a general
discussion, Regent Alexander introduced a resolution to show continued support for Plan
2008 “Be it resolved that the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
hereby renews its commitment to promoting diversity, opportunity, and access for all its
students, faculty and staff, and be it further resolved, that the Board of Regents of the
University of Wisconsin System directs the President and each campus’ Chancellor and
staff to seek new and innovative measures that will bring said goals of the Board of
Regents and of Plan 2008 to fruition.” One Regent wondered why they were doing this.
Regent Mohs asked what was new in this motion. The motion passed.
The Plan 2008:
Educational Quality through Racial and Ethnic Diversity Interim Report was distributed. [Full
report available in the Senate office.]
7. President Regent Smith
then introduced a motion affirming the existing policy for Freshman Admissions (which was
not listed on the agenda). Regent Mohs wondered how insecure were the proponents of this
motion to bring it up without proper notice. “How is it that the usual collegial
relationship of the board was set aside?” Mohs
is a strong advocated for removing the minority element from the current Freshman
Admissions Policy, that is to strike the word ‘minority status’ from the
following: “Students who do not meet the above criteria but are members of specific
groups, for example, students in programs because of physical status or learning
disability, minority status or because of substandard income level; veterans;
incarcerated; or foreign students. These students may be admitted but considered
exceptions.”
Fairly strong discussion occurred over the next 45 minutes to an hour. While a large portion of the discussion centered around the idea of race-based admissions, the discussion also focused on Open Meeting Laws and following established Board procedures. Once when a motion was made to table the discussion (a non-debatable motion), others wanted to speak and debate why the motion should not be tabled. It was determined by System Legal Council that one could speak on the non-debatable motion if there was unanimous consent to allow the person to speak. After one speaker was allowed to talk, Regent Gracz who originally made the motion to table informed the Regents he would not give further consent for other to speak. The roll call vote to table was taken and the motion was defeated. After more lengthy discussion, the policy was reaffirmed by a 13-3 roll call vote.
Regent Boyle asked the Education Committee to review, analyze, and carefully study the present admission policy and provide opportunities for all Regents to understand the policies. The Regents also asked to have specific admissions numbers relating to Plan 2008 reported in the September report on Plan 2008.
8. A resolution was passed
showing Regent support for the continuation of human embryonic stem cell research and
support for continued federal funding that will enable research on human embryonic stem
cells to move forward rapidly and, at the same time, ensure public access to such
advances. Further, the Board opposed any state or federal legislation or administrative
action that would have the effect of slowing or banning research in this area.
9. Finally, a Report of the
Regent’s Personnel Review Committee was presented (another item not on the agenda).
The committee recommended that the record concerning allegations against John Marder made
before the Faculty Termination Committee of UW-Superior was insufficient for dismissal for
just cause and therefore directed proceedings to be discontinued but made note that any
items may be used for future proceedings.
Regent Berry commented that the Chancellor of Superior had acted in good faith, but was dealt a poor hand. Regent Gracz wondered who “dealt” the poor hand? Berry responded that within our system, we expect administrative leadership out of those who may not have had training and stated that the case also dated back to a prior chancellor. The need to put more effort into management skills of Department Chairs and Faculty Committees was stressed. This ruling upholds the procedures established for faculty governance at UW-Superior while putting Marder on notice to be careful.
Legislative Update
See attachments.
Announcements
1. Dialogue
with the Provost on Faculty Roles and Rewards at UW-Eau Claire, Wednesday, March 28,
Presidents Room, Davies Center