Auburn
University Senate Minutes
11
July 2000
Broun
Hall Auditorium
Absent:S. Taylor, D. Himelrick, R.
Saba, D. Norris, R. Middleton, C. Mullen, D. Pascoe, R. Jenkins, M. El-Halwagi,
J. Melville, H. Thomas, D. Sutton, C. Johnson, J. Hansen, R. Wylie, M. Watkins,
M. Lisano, D. Pugh, R. Paxton, W. R. Brawner, R. Henderson, R. Kenworthy, S.
Fuller, R. Bartlett, L. Slaten, T. Brower, M. Malloy, K. Krueger, H. Maraman,
C. Buchanan, J. Neidigh, D. Large, J. Fletcher, W. Alderman, S. Schneller, S.
Bentley, L. Boney, S. Boback, A. Redman, D. Carey, K. Robinson, P. Sullenger,
D. Sollie
Absent (Substitute):L. Colquitt (C. Hudson), T.
Roppel (C. Gross), A. Dunlop (D. Rygiel), R. Miller (L. Lockson), S. Knowlton
(J. Hanson)
The
meeting was called to order at 3:10 p.m.
The minutes for
the previous meeting were approved as posted.They can be found on the Senate
web page at https://auburn.edu/administration/governance/senate/schedule.html.
Announcements:
A. Provost William Walker
Dr. Muse was in
Montgomery today and was not able to be here. The summer enrollment is 10,495 students. The undergraduate
enrollment is up 3.7%, but the graduate enrollment is down 5.4%. That is an overall increase of 1.8%
which is a smaller enrollment than had been anticipated. There are 1448 students planning to
graduate this summer, which is about average for Summer quarter, and this
figure may drop to around 1200 by graduation.
The conversion to semesters
begins this Fall and Fall payroll begins August 16th. Classes begin August 22nd.
The new Dean of the College
of Architecture, Design and Construction is Dan Bennett from the University of
Arkansas.
There are five candidates
for the Vice President for Student Affairs and those visits are being set up. Please encourage everyone to take the
opportunity to meet with these candidates. It is very important that as many people as possible
interact with these candidates.
Mr. Jim Stone
is retiring effective the end of August.
Provost Walker will name an interim Director of Information Technology
and is in the process of putting together a search committee.
The
Administration is in the process of preparing for the August Board meeting. The budget will be presented as well as
proposals for additional Peaks of Excellence. The committee will be meeting in the next couple weeks and
should finalize the recommendation for Peaks to the President. Provost Walker will also give a report
to the Board concerning viability criteria. Only two or three programs remain in question with respect
to viability criteria. Poultry
Science will present their Peaks of Excellence program, and the location for
the new Poultry Science building will be finalized.
Dr. Cindy Brunner
(Pathobiology): What are the four
Peaks that are under consideration?
Dr. Walker: History of Technology, Transitions
Leadership Institute, Center for Financial Services, and Rural Studio National
Outreach Center.
Dr. Conner
Bailey (Agriculture Economics and Rural Sociology) Dr. Bailey is not a
voting member: Dr. Bailey
understands that there will be a slight increase in the graduates for summer
quarter. There is also a large
increase in enrollment in the Fall.
How was the number 4000 chosen for admission this Fall and what steps
have been taken to ensure that we can handle the increase?
Dr. Walker: The data we have from other
institutions that have converted to semesters indicated that they have suffered
a drop in enrollment the first semester and it has taken a while to recover. We rely heavily on students’ tuition to
fund activities, and so it was the President’s desire that we not suffer the
loss of enrollment and income. He
is committed to faculty salary raises, and deferred maintenance. Therefore, we accepted 400 more
students. Next year we will return
to 3200 students. There is an
enrollment management plan currently being put in place and there are
additional funds available for this year and next year when those freshmen
become sophomores. There are also courses being offered throughout the day to
avoid scheduling problems for the students.
B.Senate
Chair:Dr. Bruce Gladden
Nominations for
the University Committees from the Rules Committee were sent to the President’s
office on June 1st. The
President’s office will have the decisions made so that the new committee
members can begin work in the Fall.
The Rules Committee has sent out letters to nominees for Senate
Committees and those committees should also be in place by Fall semester.
The Provost is
searching for a SACS self-study Director.
This will be a faculty member to direct the SACS process. The search committee would like
applications by July 31st.
Please make recommendations to the committee as soon as possible. David Shannon can be reached at shanndm@mail.auburn.edu or 844-3071. The following qualifications are
required:
- Tenured Associate or Full Professor.
- Job begins August 16, 2000 and continues for 3
years.
- 12-month salary with 10% increase in salary
effective August 16th.
- Respect of institutional community, leadership
and human relations skills, and managerial ability.
- Search Committee: David Shannon (Chair), Gene
Clothiaux, Gerry Gryski, Yvonne Kozlowski, Gary Mullen.
Committee Reports:
A.Non-tenure track instructors
committee resolution – Donna Bohanan
The modified
resolution was included with the agenda for this month’s meeting. Most of the modifications were made to
eliminate ambiguity in the proposals.
There were a couple issues discussed at the last Senate meeting. There was interest in seeing a cost
analysis of provision #5 in the original proposal. This proposal was to extend insurance and benefits to
part-time and temporary employees.
The Committee decided to defer the issue to the Insurance and Benefits
Committee for a cost analysis, and it will be addressed in the Fall.
Hiring and retention of part-time
temporary faculty was also an issue at the last Senate meeting. The Committee is going to address that
in the Fall. This resolution is
the original proposal with some rephrasing. It does not include the proposal for insurance and benefits.
The resolution
was passed by voice vote without dissent.
To view modified Resolution
Informational Items:
A.Information Technology Core
Team Report – Steve McFarland
Under the
guidance of Dr. Walker and Dr. Large, a contract was signed in October 1999 by
IBM to bring in a group of consultants to examine the use of information
technology at Auburn. IBM then
asked that a core team be established to help them with that process. Late in the process 3 members from AUM
were added to the team. After a series of surveys and focus groups on both campuses,
there was a production of a preliminary report in December of 1999. As a result of that report, a final IBM
report was issued in January of 2000.
That report has been posted on the web at https://auburn.edu/itstudy. This report was to be a general
guidance for the University. The
difficulty with this report is that there were no specific recommendations
listed that could be implemented. A
series of studies were then developed based on that final recommendation. These were called Phase 3 Action
Recommendations. The core team
continued after IBM left the University.
They took the IBM study, along with other studies on campus, and in May
2000, these action recommendations were taken to the Provost and to the
Executive Vice-President. This
13-page document included a series of 26 Action Recommendations and 11
Expectations. This full report can
be found on the Auburn home page.
Two committees
were recommended for development including the Academic Information Technology
Advisory Committee and an Administrative Information Technology Advisory
Committee. The former is charged
with all information technologies at Auburn University. The second committee is viewed as not
only being an executive committee, but a vision committee, responsible for
setting goals for Auburn University.
It is charged with the administrative issues of information technology
at Auburn.
One of the
primary objectives was not to prepare specific recommendations; it was to
develop a structure that would allow change and improvement. Another recommendation was for the
creation of Information Technology Services Council that is a workers council. Its function is to coordinate IT
activities across campus. New
funding was not a specific recommendation because the core team did not feel
that money was the problem.
The 11
Expectations attempt to establish what should be occurring, and all employees
and students should work together to ensure a minimum level of IT support and
capability.
Below are
overheads displayed at the meeting:
AUBURN
UNIVERSITY
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE
· IBM
Consultants, October 1999
· Information
Technology Initiative Core Team
·
Bliss Bailey, Campus
Network Manager
·
James Barnes,
Instructional Media Group
·
Jonathan Davis,
Cooperative Extension System
·
Sherida Downer, Library
·
John Fletcher, Student
Affairs
·
Dan Gropper, College of
Business
·
Steve Henderson,
College of Engineering
·
Steve McFarland,
Graduate School (chair)
·
Tammie Patterson,
Information Systems Support
·
Betsy Smith, English
·
Marcie Smith, Controller
·
Mark Steltenpohl,
Geology
·
Robert Candler,
student, Electrical and Computer Engineering
·
Stephen Butler, AUM
Computer Center
·
Carolyn Rawl, AUM
Technology Resource Center
·
Bob Van Der Velde, AUM
Justice/Public Safety/Chair University Senate
·
Phase One--Preliminary
IBM Report, December 1999
§Survey (October-November 1999)
§Focus Groups (December 1999)
·
Phase Two-Final IBM
Report, January 2000
§www.auburn.edu/itstudy
·
Phase Three-Action
Recommendations, May 2000
§
www.auburn.edu/itstudy
·
Creation of Associate
Provost for Information Technology and Chief Information Officer, reporting to
Provost and Executive Vice President
§
Search committee
forming now
§
Finalizing announcement
for Chronicle of Higher Education
·
Creation of Academic
Information Technology Advisory Committee, chaired by Provost or designee
·
Creation of
Administrative Information Technology Advisory Committee, chaired by Executive
Vice President or designee
·
Creation of Information Technology Services Council, chaired by Assoc.
Provost for ITICIO
·
Initiate efforts to coordinate responsibilities and activities of
distributed and central information technology services
·
Implement a cohesive and coordinated enterprise-wide electronic mail and
electronic directory system with electronic signature, electronic imaging,
universal translator, large attachment, multiple alias, and address type-ahead
capabilities
·
Develop incentives and rewards for faculty innovation in the use of
instructional technologies
·
Establish a minimum level of support to all Auburn units, faculty,
staff, and students to encourage and cultivate the expanded use of information
technology
·
Plan
§
11 Expectations
§
26 Specific Recommended Actions
Dr. Jo Heath (Immediate
Past-chair): There was a lot of
talk about the different sections of the IT study. You have used the word “central” many times. Is one of the expectations that IT will
be centralized?
Dr. McFarland: The terms we have been using are
“distributed” and “central.” As a
goal, it was not to simply eliminate, but to balance the IT on campus. To centralize the system would
eliminate repetitive procedures and help some units that do not have the
necessary resources. The goal is
not to eliminate either, but to ensure coordination between the two.
Jim Hansen
(substitute for Physics): How much
did the IBM study cost? One issue
of concern is the ability of individual faculty members to get some level of
support that they need. Was there
an expectation relating to that issue?
Provost Walker: About $250,000
Dr. McFarland: That is a constant concern and it is
difficult to balance the two. We
do not have the resources to support individual situations.
James Barnes:
(Instructional Media Group)Mr. Barnes is not a Senate member: You do not want to tie the hand of the
leaders.
Bliss Bailey:
(Campus Network Manager)Mr. Bailey is not a Senate member: Part of the reason to have a committee
is so that different people could have input.
Dr. McFarland: One of the things discovered was that
there was a gradual shift of responsibilities. You were hired to teach a
certain subject, and yet so much of your workday is spent doing basic IT
functions. The minute you have to
stop and show someone how to do basic IT functions, then we are not doing what
we should be in terms of IT.
Dr. Carl Hudson
(substitute for Finance): How many
units did not have a technology fee?
The Board has given permission to instigate that fee per course hour.
Dr. McFarland: It is coming in phases and in different
amounts.
Provost Walker: He believes that almost every school is
charging a fee for technology. There
are some restrictions including that it may only be used for IT programs. It has been a major help for our
technology. The survey by IBM
indicated that the faculty were pretty happy with their capabilities. That is the reason why we stopped and
took a different approach to the problem.
Dr. Charles
Branch (Chair, Academic Computing Committee): Our Committee had several recommendations last February
concerning IT. In looking at this
report, the one thing that concerns him is the centralization and coordination,
but no references for accountability.
If you start centralizing things, and you do not deal with the users,
then you may actually bring the have’s down to the have not’s. His Committee also felt that the main
IT Committee should be developed immediately and that it should be involved in
the implementation process. The
core team should not be involved in the implementation process.
Dr. McFarland: Part of the plan is to get those
committees into operation as soon as possible.
Dr. Conner
Bailey: (Agriculture Economics and Rural Sociology) Dr. Bailey is not a
voting member: Does this mean
that all the individual servers would go out of operation and there would be
one centralized server?
Dr. McFarland: IBM made that recommendation to create
a “server farm” where they have a technician 24-hours a day. The core team felt that they could not
make that decision, but made that idea as a level of expectation without
specific recommendations. There is
nothing wrong with a central farm as long as there is the constant care that
goes along with the server.
Dr. Bailey: Would they not have control over their
own server?
Dr. McFarland: They would have control over the
software, but not the hardware.
Dr. Cindy
Brunner (Pathobiology): In her
experience, almost all her frustration has been about decisions at the central
level. Almost all her satisfaction
has been because of the local support at the Vet School. She cannot call a central support
person to help with personal software if they do not support that software.
The meeting was
adjourned at 4:00 p.m.