Minutes

AUBURN UNIVERSITY SENATE MEETING

13 May 1997

Broun Hall Auditorium

ABSENT: T. Boosinger, M. Bryant, R. Burgess, C. Dupree, M. Friedman, B. Gladden, D. Icenogle, C. Johnson, R. Kunkel, E. Moran, D. Norris, G. Ramey, A. Reilly, S. Schneller, D. Shannon, J. Sheppard, A. Tarrer, D. Teem, H. Thomas, W. York.

ABSENT (SUBSTITUTE): C. Alderman (P. Cook), R. Beil (D. Laband), A. Cook (J. Pittari), J. Henton (D. Canender), F. Lawing (L. Enloe), T. Lee (D. Rosenblatt), S. McLaughlin (M. Tillson), L. Myers (R. Kemppainen), T. Smith (J. Mize).

Chair Gary Swanson called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. The minutes of the April 1, 1997, meeting were approved as distributed.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

A. Provost's office: Paul F. Parks

Dr. Parks did not have a formal speech, but answered questions from the senators.

K. Zagrodnik (GSO) asked about how graduate students' work and teaching loads will change with the semester transition. Parks said that the Transition Executive Committee is currently investigating how the transition will effect faculty teaching loads; once that issue is resolved, he will share it with the faculty. He said the Committee would try to do the same thing with GTA loads, and would also share that information in the future.

Immediate Past Chair John Grover asked about where Auburn stands in terms of the state budget and the Trustees. Parks expected that Mr. Tatum and Mr. Lowder would be at the June 2, 1997, meeting of the Board. The House of Representatives has voted for a 1% increase in funding for Auburn University. However, the language of the action requires that Auburn increase the percentage or our contribution to the Teacher Retirement Program. The proposed gain of $1.75 million will be offset by a loss of $800,000 to the Teacher Retirement Program. The (state) Senate approved a 2% increase in Auburn's budget, but there is still the requirement of increased contributions to the Retirement Program. If the budget is not settled on by May 19, 1997, there will be no education budget. Parks added that there are many methods being used to improve the budget problem for Auburn, such as contacting legislative liaisons, alumni, and family. The core of the problem is that there is no money for increased funding.

J. Dane (Agr. & Soils) asked about the ~20 teaching awards given out recently; he wanted to know if there had been a call for nominations and if a committee had reviewed such nominations. Carol Daron said that announcements had been sent out in early January; those announcements stipulated that this year's awards would be about $1000 each. These awards will be given yearly, with the Teaching Effectiveness Committee reviewing the nominations.

B. Senate Chair: Gary Swanson

Chair Swanson commented on the football ticket allocations this year. Faculty purchased 3,764 tickets, of which 3,600 had been held for faculty and the remaining were assigned by lottery.

In 1993, Gene Clothiaux initiated "Lunches with the Trustees". This program has begun again, the most recent lunch being held on May 15, 1997, with Henry Cunningham. People who are interested in attending future lunches with the Trustees should contact Swanson, the Rules Committee, or the Steering Committee. It is intended that these lunches be held once-a-month, and includes a free meal.

C. Faculty Web Day: Cathy Ramey, Division of University Computing

Ramey invited the faculty to participate in "Faculty Web Day" on May 20, 1997. This activity is designed to show the faculty how technology is being incorporated into the classroom. Auburn has been named "the most wired school in Alabama"; additionally, Auburn is among the top 25 schools in the nation in the use of computers and technology in the classroom. Web Day will also show how the technology works as well as showing faculty how to bring technology into their classrooms if they are interested.

"AU Study" will be introduced, which will enable faculty to place syllabus and course material on the World Wide Web without having to learn special technical skills. This resource will enable faculty to reduce time and energy traditionally required to produce, distribute, and update those materials. "AU Study" will also increase accessability of the faculty to the students.

P. Johnson (Pol. Sci.) asked if there are any plans to expand public access to computers. Ramey said an additional 40 station labs will be created in the central part of campus. There are on-going discussions about establishing a teaching facility, which will be used for instruction during the mornings and be available for public use in the afternoons. Ramey also pointed that the plans to "wire" the dorms this year will help alleviate the problem of there not being enough public-access computers.

NEW BUSINESS:

A. Handbook Committee Report: Samia Spencer

The revisions proposed by the Committee were provided with the agenda for the current meeting. Two additional proposed revisions were distributed at the meeting (see attached).

Spencer began by thanking the members of the Faculty Handbook Review Committee for their work: Glenn Anderson (RBD Library), Gisela Buschle-Diller (Text. Eng.), Patricia Duffy (Ag. Econ. & Rural Soc.), Provost Paul Parks, Ralph Paxton (Phys. & Pharm.), and Randy Pipes (Couns. & Couns. Psych.).

There were four categories of changes proposed by the Committee. The first group is revisions involving administration, structure, or benefits. The second category of revisions pertain to the composition of various committees. The third group involves new information that needs to be added to the Handbook. Finally, the fourth group of revisions consist of clarifications of procedures.

Spencer announced that Section VII, Item 22, should be amended to read "... Auburn University Medical Clinic provides medical screening and referral services, as well as office treatment of routine non-emergency complaints, on a fee-for-service basis."

B. Liddle (Couns. & Couns. Psych.) moved that the Handbook be revised to include the Auburn Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual Caucus as a faculty/staff organization that meets on a regular basis; the motion received multiple seconds. The amendment was approved by had vote.

R. Gandy (Physics) moved that "Dental Insurance Program" in Section VI of the revisions be amended to "Dental Program"; he expressed that he does not feel the program is "insurance". The motion was seconded, and was carried by voice vote.

J. Grover (Immediate Past Chair) asked if the revisions that were distributed at the current meeting would be included in the report that Spencer was discussing. Spencer said the Committee would include those revisions if the Senate approves them.

K. Easterday (Curr. & Teach.) asked about the policy on promotion and tenure (Section I), saying that the new language seems more stringent than what is currently used. Spencer said that the old language for early promotion was not clear in the Handbook. The Committee consulted with Provost Parks, who indicated the spirit of (the group) when requests for early promotion are received. The standard time is five years for promotion; consideration for early promotion does not occur before four years, and only when the person has far exceeded the normal promotion standards. The revision is a reflection of what has taken place in the past, rather than a change in policy

R. Gastaldo (Geology) was pleased to see the inclusion in "Evaluation of Teaching" (Section IX) that it is inappropriate for faculty members to contact students regarding their evaluation responses. He asked if a similar wording could be used for administrative evaluations. Spencer said the Committee would consider that if a request was submitted. Glenn Howze (Chair of the Administrator Evaluation Committee) said he and the Committee would consider that.

D. Leonard (Disc. Stat. Sci.) asked why the revisions state that teaching evaluations are to be administered one quarter per year rather than every quarter. Spencer said this was a decision of the Teaching Effectiveness Committee. In most departments, quarterly evaluations are recommended, not mandatory. Leonard moved to amend the revisions to state that faculty members be evaluated every quarter; the motion was seconded. J. Hanson (Steering Committee) was against the motion, stating that many people feel the evaluations are not useful. B. Liddle was also against the amendment, stating that instructors occasionally forget to administer the evaluations. In the case of an un-tenured faculty member, forgetting to administer the evaluation would result in "panic". G. Halpin (Steering Committee) recommended that the relationship between ratings received at different times of the year should be examined. He felt that the ratings an instructor receives are basically the same over time, and that evaluations are a "waste of time". Swanson pointed out that this issue must go to the Teaching Effectiveness Committee before any action could be taken by the Senate. Leonard withdrew his motion, stating that he would submit his idea to that committee.

The motion to accept the revisions with the approved amendments passed by voice vote.

B. Intercollegiate Athletic Committee Report: Dennis Wilson

Wilson began with a description of the commitment of the Athletic Department. He quoted an SCC compliance review that was conducted in February. (This is a voluntary program that the Athletics Department submits itself to.) "The President appears to take a strong oversight role in the maintenance of Auburn's Athletics Program. The President made it clear that there will be zero tolerance for failure to manage its Athletics Program in an ethical and compliant fashion. The Athletics Director is committed to enacting the President's goal and message regarding compliance. The Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics and faculty athletics representatives have established the clear mission to promote academic integrity in intercollegiate athletics, and facilitate integration of the athletic/academic component of the collegiate community, and promote institutional control of athletics. The organization and structure at Auburn appears to foster a strong compliance culture and a great deal of oversight across campus. In short, the systems appear to evidence an outstanding commitment to institutional control."

The NCAA Certification Review is an on-going process, and is an accreditation of sorts. It occurs every five years for Division 1 athletics. Departments have to be reviewed, and they must meet certain standards in four different areas: (1) fiscal integrity; Don Large is Chair; (2) academic integrity; Wilson is Chair; (3) governance and commitment to rules (and) compliance; Stewart Schneller is Chair; (4) commitment to equity; Yvonne Kozlowski is Chair. The resulting document has been in preparation for about a year, and will be available in draft form soon. There will be a visiting team in October, chaired by a University President or Chancellor of a large institution.

In the area of academic integrity, it was clear that the academic support staff was not functioning as well as it should have. To that end, the Athletics Department has brought in Anne Neely as a consultant. Neely has served as Director of Vanderbilt's Academic and Athletics Affairs Office for five years, and the College Football Association chose her as the Outstanding Academic Advisor last year. She will investigate the academic structure related to the Athletics Program, and will provide a report on her findings.

The Associate Athletics Director and Chief Financial Officer, Terry Wendell, has reviewed the financial philosophy and priorities of the Athletics Department. The IAC has also reviewed the Athletics Department's Strategic Plan and Mission Statement, which are complementary to those of the University.

Additionally, the IAC is working to better integrate student athletes into the student body. Last year, 100% of football recruited athletes participated in Camp War Eagle; 65% of all other student athletes that were recruited participated. The Athletics Department has a stated goal of having every new student athlete participate in that orientation program. Additionally, because of NCAA regulations, the Athletics dorm now must be less than 50% student athletes. There has been a strong attempt to enable the counselors in the Athletics Department and advisors in the various schools and colleges to coordinate their objectives. Most student athlete who leaves Auburn (when their eligibility is finished) generally have a positive opinion on their integration with the student body. The IAC is looking into how that may vary between sport, gender, and race.

The Student Athlete Advisory Committee (also mandated by the NCAA) is comprised of student athletes who give information about how their programs are run. Auburn is also one of the pilot schools involved in "Life Skills Program", in which student athletes are provided special seminars on time management, study skills, nutrition, and so on.

The recent "Top Tiger Banquet" recognized student athletes who had a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Wilson noted Marci Clemons won a $5,000 scholarship from the SEC for graduate studies. Clemens, Adam Sullivan, Anne Wenglarski, and Koffi Kla have all been nominated for an NCAA post-graduate scholarship.

Finally, the "Saturday Seminars" have been terminated because of low attendance. The Athletics Department is looking for other ways to better blend the academic and athletic experience at Auburn, and welcomes any suggestions.

C. A & P Assembly Representation on University Committees: Gary Swanson

The A & P Assembly had requested that, on committees where there is a fixed number of A & P representatives, the Senate should approve the number of A & P members, and the Rules Committee meet this summer for nominating people to those committees.

R. Gandy asked in A & P members had been appointed those such committees in the past. Swanson clarified that before the A & P Assembly had been defined, A & P people routinely occupied positions on those committees as faculty. When the A & P Assembly was formed, no compensation was made in the Handbook to include A & P members and they lost representation.

J. Hanson asked about the status of the Assembly representation report. Swanson said that the number (or representative) regarding the "or language" has not been resolved. A committee consisting of Kent Fields, Swanson, Bruce Lewis, and Robert Gottesman is reviewing those specific numbers. Hopefully that information will be included with the agenda for the next Senate meeting.

J. Grover moved that it is the sense of the Senate that the Rules Committee should proceed with the assumption that there will be an approved place for the A & P members on these committees, realizing that this should be resolved before the appointments take place. The motion was seconded and was carried by voice vote.

Swanson then addressed the "or" category. He asked the Senate for permission include "up to, and not more than, one A & P member" on those committees with the "or language". Grover moved accept that statement; the motion was seconded and was carried by voice vote.

RESOLUTIONS:

A. Resolution Concerning the Work of the State-Wide Articulation Committee: Bill Trimble

A copy of the resolution was distributed at the meeting (see attached). This resolution came out of the concern that much of the Committee's work was being driven by two-year rather than four-year institutions. People were "losing track" of what the main attention of the articulation process was, being the facilitation of transfer of credit from two-year to four-year schools.

Another issue is that, initially the articulation was to reflect core curricula of various four-year schools. Now there seems to be an effort to include the curricula in some of the various disciplines. This will especially effect some four-year school's Liberal Arts and Arts and Sciences programs. Larry Gerber and Provost Parks are on the State-Wide Articulation Committee and may be able to provide more specific information about the process. Swanson added that some people feel the articulation process was designed to assure transferability between campuses, while others have interpreted the process one that defines what transferable curricula is. In the latter case, some people would not meet transfer eligibility because of special course requirements at the different institutions. Furthermore, Swanson said it is argued by those people that the Alabama Constitution states that the curriculum at all of the schools shall be governed by the Board of Trustees; the Legislature has no authority to change what the Trustees have already decided. The Faculty Senate will vote on this issue a its June meeting. Swanson urged the Senators to consider whether they feel Auburn should pursue this issue to court if necessary.

J. Hanson requested that more information be provided regarding the current status of the law Swanson had referred to. Swanson said it should be distributed in the near future.

G. Howze suggested that a formal presentation be given, perhaps by Carol Daron and Larry Gerber.

J. Grover stated that Act 94-202 of the 1994 Alabama Legislature created the Articulation and General Studies Committee, and charged the Committee with developing a state-wide general studies curricula by September 1998. Although the Committee had been created by an act of the Alabama Legislature, Grover did not know if the Legislature is legally able to do so if it is in contradiction to the various constitutions of the schools involved.

B. Resolution to Establish an Ad Hoc Committee to Study the Proposed Career Ladder for Non-Tenure Track Research Personnel: John Grover

A copy of the resolution was distributed at the current meeting (see attached). The Rules Committee and other groups have decided that the proposed career ladder be screened by a Faculty committee before the Senate deliberates on the topic. Grover moved that the Resolution; the motion received multiple seconds.

G. Howze said he understood that the proposed "Guidelines for Establishing and Filling Position in the Research Title Series" were not created by a faculty committee; rather, it is a product of a committee of administrators. He felt that, because the issue involved faculty, the faculty should have primary responsibility for dealing with it. Second, he felt the proposed career ladder will affect only a small portion of the non-tenure track faculty. Third, he had several problems with the proposed plan. For example, the initiation of the promotion process somewhat follows the guidelines specified for tenure-track faculty in the Handbook. However, the candidate is not reviewed by the departmental faculty. The review proceeds from the chairman of the department to a University-wide committee, and Howze felt that faculty should not be excluded from this process. Finally, the University-wide committee is not nominated by the Rules Committee; the document reads that "the University-level promotion committee will be established the office of the Associate Provost and the Vice President for Research ...."

The motion to have this issue considered by an ad hoc committee that would report back to the Senate was carried by voice vote.

OLD BUSINESS:

Election of Rules Committee:

The Senate voted for new members of the Rules Committee; Jo Heath (Math.), Hardin Rahe (Anim.& Dairy Sci.), and Bill Trimble (History) were elected.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.