A. Provost William Walker

Dr. Walker introduced the new Assistant Provost for Multicultural Affairs, Dr. John Bello-Ogunu. He is in charge of coordinating the activities associated with recruiting and retaining minority faculty members and students.

The governor’s recommendation to the legislature was to allow Auburn to receive 5.3% of the education trust fund. Dr. Walker met with Mike Hubbard who felt that the letters to the governor with respect to this issue helped in securing some of the money for Auburn. This money will be restricted to salary raises.

There was a Board of Trustees meeting Monday. First, the Board established a managerial group to allow Auburn to continue classified research programs. As a result of the recent situations at Los Alamos, the Department of Energy has become more concerned about classified work. The President, Provost, and Vice-President for Research have been established as the managerial group for classified research.

The Board made a change in the category of Distinguished University Professor. They reaffirmed the position, but specified that it should be reviewed on a five-year basis. It is their intention to be able to recognize more faculty this way. This was in the original proposal that Dr. Martin made to the Board in 1984, and therefore, the Board has now incorporated a review into the process.

The Budget Committee adopted the recommended changes in the life insurance program for all employees. Dr. Walker has already received his notification in the mail regarding the change in life insurance, and he urged the Senate to turn those forms in by the deadline. This is a much better policy than those in the past.

The Planning and Priorities Committee approved the shared foreign language baccalaureate program between Auburn and Auburn at Montgomery. This is the first such program between the two campuses.

Dr. Christine Curtis presented a report on the progress toward the transition to semesters. The Board is concerned that the students are not adversely impacted by this transition.

Dr. Walker made a report to the Board about conforming to the guidelines for departmental status. He pointed out that there are 23 departments that did not meet the quantitative guidelines for departmental status. There are also qualitative guidelines that are a part of the status. Eight of those programs have already been reviewed by the Program Review Committee. That Committee will also look at the remaining 15 and make recommendations to the President concerning those departments.

The Board is determined that the university should have an Academic Forgiveness Policy. The problem is in coming up with a precise definition of forgiveness. The Board would like some sort of recommendation for this policy by the April meeting. Dr. Walker has asked Jo Heath, Bruce Gladden, John Pritchett, and Linda Glaze to meet with their counterparts at AUM on Thursday to discuss this issue. AUM is also included in this policy. He hopes they can come up with a plan that can be brought before the Senate at the March meeting.

There was also a report given on the progress of priority areas. The Board is very pleased with the prioritization that has taken place and the progress of faculty salaries, deferred maintenance, operation and management, and Peaks of Excellence. They instructed Dr. Walker to have additional recommendations for Peaks of Excellence by the April meeting. There were several areas that were recommended originally and Dr. Walker thinks that they might suggest those areas again as well as the recommendation for Graduate Student Tuition Waivers. He is open to any suggestions in this area.

The Property and Facilities Committee approved the budget increase for the Jule Collins Smith Museum of Fine Art, and planning for this is well underway. They also selected a new site for the new Poultry Science Building.

Renee Middleton (Counseling and Counseling Psychology): What does a "forgiveness policy" mean to the Board of Trustees?

Dr. Walker: The original plan that the students proposed included up to 15 quarter hours of D and F grades could be forgiven if those courses were taken over. The original grades would remain, but they would not be calculated into the GPA. Students would be able to retake a course up until their senior year. A survey was conducted by the Center for Governmental Services concerning such a policy. Two-thirds of the faculty were opposed to the policy and 80% of the students were in favor of it. Faculty and students were both concerned about the transition from high school to college and in the retention of students, but they disagreed on the means to do this. He tried to convince the Board that Auburn has a very rational, well thought out program for addressing academic forgiveness through the activities in Student Affairs. Fifteen out of 16 sister universities are doing something in the area of academic forgiveness. He is not sure what the Board would accept for a reasonable policy. Dr. Walker hopes that the Senate can put together a possible recommendation by the March meeting.

Jo Heath (Chair): Andrew Nix was accidentally left off the list of members on the committee for academic forgiveness.

Randy Bartlett (Industrial Design): He recalled that the Senate discussed the Guidelines for Elevation of Departments, and in that discussion, the guidelines were to apply only to programs being considered for elevation. He did not think that they were to be used retroactively where a department could lose its status. Is that resolution for departments still true?

Dr. Walker: No, it is not still true. The Board looked at those guidelines and wondered if they could be used for elevation of a unit, why could they not be used for the opposite? They wanted to take a look at existing departments under these guidelines and see what happens. It was not Dr. Muse’s or Dr. Walker’s intention that those criteria be used for that purpose.

Cindy Brunner (Pathobiology): The Program Review Committee just received a letter from the President charging them with reviewing the 16 units that have not already been dealt with, but that are at risk because they do not meet all the criteria. They will be meeting on a weekly basis to discuss this issue. No one on the Committee is happy with this charge.

Richard Saba (Economics): Where will the Poultry Science building be located?

Christine Curtis: It will be located on Lem Morrison Parkway where some old buildings are now located.

Steve Knowlton (Physics): He encouraged Dr. Walker to present the Graduate Student Tuition Waivers to the Board as one of the Peaks of Excellence. He also asked why the Board meeting was recessed and not adjourned?

Lynne Hammond (Executive Assistant to the President): In recessing a meeting, the Board is allowed to call other meetings if needed in between scheduled meetings. Meetings are required to be set one year in advance. All of the meetings are recessed except the last one of the school year.

Herb Rotfeld (Marketing & Transportation): He is a member of the Academic Standards Committee. When his Committee did research into the area of Academic Forgiveness, the results were not impressive. In many cases, about 50% of the students and most of the faculty did not like these policies.

Glenn Howze (Immediate past-Chair): Dr. Howze hoped that Dr. Muse, Dr. Walker, or Dr. Heath would express to the Board their concerns about second guessing the faculty with regards to Academic Standards. He feels that it would be a very brave step if the Board does not take the recommendations of the faculty on this issue and it may influence the reputation of this University.

Renee Middleton: Is the Board asking the faculty to consider a policy or is it requiring the faculty to come up with an acceptable policy?

Dr. Walker: The Board is very hopeful that this body will come forward with a policy that is reasonably acceptable to faculty members. There are members of the Board of Trustees who are very sensitive to the issues that Dr. Howze mentioned.

Jim Hansen (History): How would this type of policy affect the status of student-athletes?

Dr. Walker: The question did come up about students on scholarships and those on financial aid. A student on financial aid or a scholarship would be impacted the same way they would be if they dropped below a full load of courses. They may be asked to pay some money back. More than 50% of students are receiving some financial assistance. The NCAA states that each university should set its own retention standard. The school should make "suitable progress," and the school defines that phrase. The compliance officer thinks that it will not be a problem since many other schools already have such a policy.

Doyle Bickers (Director of Admissions): Would this impact how the GPA is calculated for admission of a transfer student? Now the GPA is recomputed based on Auburn’s policy.

Dr. Walker: He thinks that students do not understand this. When a student applies to a professional or graduate school, the GPA is often recalculated. This type of policy is designed to help the student, but in some situations, it does not help.

June Henton (Dean, College of Human Sciences): Has anyone considered the financial implications of offering additional sections of classes for those who would need to retake courses?

Dr. Walker: No, and they have not looked at the cost to the university every time a student takes a course over. How many students would be affected by this policy depends on the policy itself.

Mary Boudreaux (Secretary-Elect): One thing that could be considered for a Peak of Excellence is employee benefits. She asked the senators to consider this type of recommendation.

B. Senate Chair: Dr. Jo Heath

Dr. Heath recognized Byron Blagburn for his presentation to the Board of Trustees concerning his research on animal parasites as well as Marie Wooten and her Peaks of Excellence presentation. The Senate is trying to show the Board some of the academic accomplishments of the University.

A. Rules Committee—Committee Volunteer form: Dr. Jo Heath

A. Employers’ Child Care Alliance: Ms. Lynn Hammond

Family Friendly Benefits, like Child Care, are important to employers by increasing productivity of employees, reducing absenteeism, reducing turnover, reducing recruitment costs, improving employee relations, improving a company’s image, and increasing the contributions to the community. The main reason to include family friendly benefits is because the children of today are the workforce of tomorrow.

Ms. Hammond discussed the history and development of the Employers’ Child Care Alliance. A needs assessment was conducted by the Child Care Alliance and revealed two broad areas of need: availability of child care and quality of child care. Now there are four projects that were developed to meet the needs of the community in the area of child care. These activities include Enhanced Resource and Referral, Quality Enhancement Partnership, Bridges, and Non-Standard Child Care. The Bridges program will be available over spring break. There is a flier being mailed out in order to decide the amount of interest for this program over spring break. At least ten children are required for the program to be cost effective.

A. Nominations for Rules Committee: Dr. Jo Heath

There are four positions available on the Committee. Nominees must be current senators.

Those nominated were Greg Pettit of Family Studies and Human Development, Paula Sullenger of the Library and Steering Committee, and Steve Knowlton of Physics. Other nominations can be made to Jo Heath or Marcia Boosinger. A ballot will be available in the next Senate meeting.

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