Minutes of the Senate Meeting
January 9, 2007
3:00 p.m.
Broun Auditorium
Submitted by Kathryn Flynn
Present: Rich Penaskovic, David Cicci, Kathryn Flynn, Ann Beth Presley, Conner Bailey, Royrickers Cook, Stewart Schneller, Drew Clark, Fran Kochan, John Heilman, Wendy Pechman, Roger Garrison, Gary Martin, Ronald Clark, Sondra Parmer, Charles Mitchell, Keith Cummins, Charlene LeBleu, Barry Fleming, Anthony Moss, Timothy McDonald, Larry Crowley, Debra Worthington, Carol Carruth, Alvin Sek See Lim, Carol Centrallo, Dan Gropper, James Witte, Scotte Hodel, Jon Bolton, Robin Huettel, Claire Crutchley, Michel Raby, Alice Buchanan, David Carter, Raymond Kessler, Thomas A. Smith, Chris Arnold, Saeed Maghsoodloo, Andrew Wohrley, Roger Wolters, Hugh Guffey, Darrel Hankerson, Bart Prorok, Robin Fellers, Jim Wright, Forrest Smith, Salisa Westrick, Bernie Olin, James Shelley, Francis Robicheaux, Anthony Gadzey, Robert Voitle, Dan Svyantek, Peggy Shippen, William Shaw, Carole Zugazaga, Howard Thomas, Scott Phillips, Todd Axlund
Absent, sending a substitute: Overton Jenda (Florence Holland), Barbara Kemppainen (Dawn Boothe), Anoop Sattineni (Bruce W. Smith), Suhyun Suh (Annette Kluck), Larry Teeter (Kathryn Flynn)
Absent, no substitute: Don Large, Debbie Shaw, June Henton, Johnny Green, Bonnie MacEwan, George Stegall, Ethan Trevino, Drew Burgering, Jack DeRuiter, Jim Bradley, Winfred Foster, Norbert Wilson, Brian Gibson, Robert Chambers, Rik Blumenthal, John Saye, Allen Davis, Jim Saunders, Richard Good, John Rowe, Don-Terry Veal, Randy Tillery, Tom Williams
Rich Penaskovic called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
Approval of Minutes: Rich Penaskovic welcomed everyone back and introduced the Minutes of the November 7, 2006. He noted that Scotte Hodel, Senator from Electrical Engineering, had contacted Kathryn Flynn because the draft minutes did not reflect the remarks he made on Post-Tenure Review. Rich Penaskovic said Scotte Hodel had provided a transcript of the remarks he made at the November meeting. Rich Penaskovic read Scotte Hodel’s transcript and asked for a motion to accept the minutes with the addition of this transcript.
Drew Clark, Director of Institutional Research and Senator, stated that if we allow Senators to revise their comments for the minutes we should rename them as the Gettysburg Address.
Rich Penaskovic said that Kathryn Flynn had problems hearing Scotte Hodel’s comments on the recording and introducing this transcript corrects the problem.
Scotte Hodel, Electrical Engineering, stated that what had been introduced was what he read into the microphone in November.
The minutes were approved by voice acclamation.
Remarks and Announcements:
Dr. Richardson stated he and the Senate leadership have had good, civil discussions even when we have disagreed with each other. He noted that Rich Penaskovic had asked him to address two topics: an update on the Knight case and the implications of the new Alabama Senate pro tem. Dr. Richardson called Lee Armstrong forward to give a summary of the Knight agreement.
Lee Armstrong said he would give a brief overview of the Knight case settlement and would address questions as appropriate. He said that after 25 years the higher education desegregation litigation, which had affected all of higher education in Alabama, had been resolved at the end of 2006. He said the purpose of this suit was to remove the vestiges of segregation. He said the last fiscal year had a large surplus in the education trust fund that went to historically black colleges for capital improvements. He said this helped lead to the resolution of the suit. He said another very important contribution to the settlement was Auburn’s strategic diversity plan. He said it was agreed that if all Alabama Universities would adopt virtually the same policy the case would be settled. He said all of the hard work on the diversity plan here at Auburn become the vehicle for resolving most of the remaining claims. Lee Armstrong said this plan would create a path to having more black administrators, one of the issues in the lawsuit. He said Auburn and all other universities in Alabama have agreed to implement the diversity plan. Lee Armstrong said Auburn is in the process of doing so now and details will be made public soon. He said the settlement agreement involves Auburn main campus and AUM. The University would have to post certain data annually, include African-Americans on all search committees for faculty and administrators to the extent practicable, and hold an annual conference on campus focused on best practices for improving diversity. He said everyone would be invited to attend and participate. He said AUM is catching up with the main campus and he noted the Board had endorsed the diversity strategic plan during their November, 2006 meeting.
Lee Armstrong also said there had been issues related specifically to Auburn in the areas of agriculture and extension but these had been resolved. He said one issue is that there are so many institutions in Montgomery and Huntsville and that duplication of programs has been a concern. He said there were orders in 1991 and 1995 that ASU and AUM develop cross enrollment agreements. He said implementation of these orders proved problematic and they have been eliminated. He said ASU has been given some high demand graudate program such as the EdD in Educational Leadership. He said this was done in an effort to diversity ASU’s campus. He said the cooperative EdD program in Educational Leadership between Auburn main campus and AUM will be dismantled for the next 5 years. Lee Armstrong said those students currently enrolled in the AU-AUM program will be allowed to continue but no similar programs will be developed that could be seen as detrimental to the viability of ASU’s program.
Lee Armstrong said this completed his comments and he and Dr. Richardson opened the floor for comments.
Howard Thomas, Polymer and Fiber Engineering, commented that, as a nation, there is no longer any dominance of one specific group anymore. He said we are segmented into several minorities including Caucasian, African-American and Hispanic. He said we also need to address gender and sexual orientation issues and asked if we will need a separate plan for each of these groups.
Lee Armstrong said the diversity plan is designed to address diversity in general and is not specific to African-Americans.
Howard Thomas said his comments had related only to African-Americans.
Lee Armstrong said the plan addresses groups beyond African-Americans but the settlement documents are specific because that is what the lawsuit was about. He said all of the information is available on the website of the Office of Multicultural Affairs.
Dr. Richardson emphasized the 5-year window upon settlement of the case during which Auburn will adhere to the agreements; after that time Auburn can expand as it sees fit. Lee Armstrong noted that Auburn is legally required to adhere to the agreement for 5 years but our commitment goes beyond that time period.
There were no more questions on this topic.
Dr. Richardson said the second topic Rich Penaskovic had asked him to address was the implications for Auburn of Jim Prueitt as pro tem of the Senate. Dr. Richardson said Senator Prueitt was not elected pro tem of the Senate because he withdrew his name from consideration. He said if Sen. Prueitt had been elected it would have been good for Auburn University because he had been the one who made the Auburn University-University of Alabama partnership successful in the legislature two years ago. He said Sen. Mitchum, who was elected this morning, would also be good for Auburn University. He said the committee chairs would probably remain mostly unchanged and that the rules established for operation by each committee would have an impact on how things go for Auburn. He said Auburn University and University of Alabama have met about three times already and are fairly close to a legislative agenda. He said Auburn has a good team and thinks all will go well for us in the Legislature this year. He expects a good, but not great, legislative session.
Dr. Richardson said the finances/revenue collections are still exceeding initial projections. He said there is a strong commitment to repay the rainy day trust funds, taking $100 million off the top, and this would reduce the amount available somewhat. Dr. Richardson said he believes higher education will be in a good position.
Dr. Richardson said the Chronicle had listed anticipated percentage increases in funding for various institutions. He said the Chronicle predicted Auburn’s increase would be 17.5%. He said it is important to remember we don’t spend percentages, we spend money. He said the Chronicle’s report did not include Divisions 3 and 4 of our budget or the additional $2 million committed for this fiscal year. He said if you add all this together you get an increase over last year of approximately 19.5%. He said our finances are in good shape this year although not as good as last year.
Dr. Richardson said there were priorities. He said for the first time since 1998 there will be a good bond issue and it will range from $500 million to $1 billion. He anticipates we will pump our pro rata share to Auburn and push the value and need for research dollars for research institutions like Auburn and Alabama. He said salary increases were included in the state budget for the first time three years ago and we should get money for salary increases. He said if this happens we will not need to increase tuition to cover salary increases.
Dr. Richardson said research priorities would be pushed again this year in the bond issue and in the trust fund allocations. He hopes to get this money in the budget so this will become the practice in the future as has been the case with salaries. He said the priority would be to make sure we get money for research priorities and these will be what we can best sell to the legislature so we can get our foot in the door.
Dr. Richardson said if anyone has thoughts on research priorities they should let the Provost know within the next two weeks at most.
Dr. Richardson mentioned issues related to salaries and fringe benefits. He said there had been a number of changes in PEEHIP (Public Employee Health Insurance Program). He said currently the only higher education participant is Jacksonville State but Auburn is examining this program. He said PEEHIP could save substantial monies for Auburn University and individuals while meeting or exceeding current benefits. He said this would be a major change requiring a lot of discussion. He said he needs to talk to people with the Retirement System of Alabama but they are out of the country right now. He said we have a window of opportunity to explore this and make a decision.
Dr. Richardson said he anticipates good revenues, salary increase money in the budget, and that research priorities will be in the bond issue.
Dr. Richardson said he now wanted to discuss several things pointing to the future. He noted that Conner Bailey could speak to us on the Presidential search. Dr. Richardson noted that he has been told the search is on schedule and believes the president will be appointed this semester and will assume office by June 30, 2007 although there is flexibility in the schedule.
Dr. Richardson said he wanted to talk about the definition of two types of positions at Auburn as we look to the future. He said he first wants to define “termed positions” as used here at Auburn. He said a person in a termed position at Auburn would continue to serve in that position until the next President is selected and chooses to conduct a national search to fill the position. He said he believes we have 5 such positions at Auburn: the Provost, the Vice-President for Alumni Affairs, the Vice-President for Research, the Executive Director of the Institute currently called Natural Resources, and the Chancellor at AUM. He said we probably will not see five simultaneous searches. He said having these positions filled as termed positions gives the next President considerable latitude in building his/her administrative staff.
Dr. Richardson said the second definition is for “contract positions”. He said there are three such positions: Sid McAnnally who has served as Chief of Staff and will serve for one year after Dr. Richardson leaves; John Waggoner who will serve as Special Counsel for two more years; and John Mouton who serves as Senior Presidential Advisor and who can be replaced at the pleasure of the next president. He said John Mouton is working on facilities and would probably be busy for the foreseeable future. He said when John Mouton completes his time as Senior Presidential Advisor he would return to the faculty.
Dr. Richardson noted that both Academic Program Review and Post-Tenure Review are being piloted this semester and he hopes a report on both of these processes can be made during the April 27 Board meeting. He said the reports would be made by Dr. Heilman and left on the table. The next President and the Board would use the reports to decide how to proceed in the future, a process consistent with recommendations in the Fisher Report.
Dr. Richardson mentioned the appointment of Larry Fillmer as Director of the Institute for Natural Resources. He also said he was pleased with the progress of the Alternative Fuels Initiative, and said the new Water Initiative would be equally as important. He said both of these initiatives would be part of the Institute and hopes there will be a conference on water in early June so that financial commitments can be made in this important area of research. He said he would push this as a research priority.
Dr. Richardson said an outside firm would conduct focus groups around the state to name the Institute. He said this Institute involved a blending of units. He said he anticipates a report on the Institute at the April Board meeting so the next President would have something to consider.
Dr. Richardson concluded his comments by saying he had three basic objectives when he came to Auburn three years ago this month. He said he was successful with SACS, he believes institutional control is in place and respected by the Board and he is comfortable that the presidential search should be a success. He said he is close to meeting his three-year timeline.
Dr. Richardson opened the floor for questions.
David Carter, Department of History, thanked Dr. Richardson for coming to speak to the Senate. He noted the absence of a statement on sexual orientation in the diversity plan, an omission he had noted at an earlier Senate meeting, and remarked that a recent candidate for a faculty position had turned an offer down because of the lack of such a statement in our diversity plan. David Carter asked if Dr. Richardson could speak briefly about the potential addition of such a policy in the near future.
Dr. Richardson thanked David Carter for bringing this issue up and said he should have included a comment on this in his report. Dr. Richardson said he had made a commitment during fall semester 2006 to include reference to sexual orientation in our policy. He said this deadline had not been meet. He said Lee Armstrong is working on documents to make the changes in the diversity statement. Dr. Richardson said this would required a change in policy that he has the authority to carry out. Lee Armstrong added that he should have the documents ready by the end of next week and Dr. Richardson said reference to sexual orientation should be added by the end of two weeks. Dr. Richardson said he is committed to doing this because it is appropriate and should already have been done.
There were no more questions for Dr. Richardson.
Remarks from Senate Chair Rich Penaskovic
Rich Penaskovic thanked Dr. Richardson for coming to the meeting. He began his comments by addressing security issues on campus first mentioned in November. He announced that a task force had been formed to address this problem. The task force consists of representatives from the City of Auburn police department and Auburn University (Tim Boosinger, Dean of the Vet School and Bob Ritenbaugh, Vice-President of Auxiliary Services). Rich Penaskovic said he expects there will be a report on this issue at the February Senate meeting.
Rich Penaskovic asked Marcie Smith, Associate Vice-President of Business and Finance, to come forward and provide information on the salary data available on the web. He said the data is there but is not user-friendly.
Marcie Smith said the big issue with providing the salary data in a more useable format is that priorities lie elsewhere: W2s, 1099s and the budget. She noted that Fred Bobo, Banner Project leader, was present and could also answer questions. She said what is available on the web is a stopgap developed by the library due to high demand for the information. She said the format would be converted once some of the higher priority issues have been completed.
Rich Penaskovic said he was under the impression it was a simple matter to convert the format.
Marcie Smith said this would not be simply a dump of the budget workbook because this is a dynamic document. She said some people receive increases during the year and there are questions about other compensation. She noted that some people would prefer not to see this information readily available on the web. She said this was because the information had, at times, been conveyed to others outside Auburn, for example during job searches. She said this had not been at the top of the priority list but that Rich Penaskovic is right: it is not a complicated technological issue and she hopes to get it done soon. She said she is not sure where the information will be housed or how users will get to the link but she will let everyone know.
Rich Penaskovic thanked Marcia Smith and opened the floor for questions.
David Cicci asked Rich Penaskovic to comment on the article in this morning’s Opelika-Auburn newspaper on the Presidential search. Rich Penaskovic deferred to Conner Bailey on this question.
Conner Bailey, Immediate Past Chair, said an article on this topic had also appeared in the Birmingham News on Monday. Conner Bailey said that, as reported at the last Senate meeting, roughly 60 people had been reviewed and committee members have talked face-to-face with 16 of these people. He said the committee is working on a shortlist that would consist of a handful of names or less. Conner Bailey said the committee has not yet met to vote on who would be brought to campus. He said these people would be brought to campus. Conner Bailey said that due diligence background checks would be done before anyone was brought to campus. He said the committee had to ascertain the availability of each individual for interviews and recognized the problem faced by some at their home institutions. He said there are some very good candidates and the schedule for interviews on campus will be driven by the need to get the best person we can not by an arbitrary timeline.
Rich Penaskovic thanked Conner Bailey and asked if anyone had any questions for Conner Bailey. There were no questions.
Revision of 2008 Spring Semester Calendar (Stan Reeves, Chair, Calendar and Schedules Committee)
Stan Reeves said the issue of revising the previously approved 2008 Spring Calendar was being brought forward because the timing of spring break does not mesh with the Auburn City School System’s spring break. He said the committee had attempted to synchronize the schedules and thought they had done so. He said the City School system could not accommodate a change in the timing of their break because of required standardized tests. He said for that reason the Calendar and Schedules committee wants to shift spring break from March 10-15 to March 17-22.
Rich Penaskovic called for a vote and noted the change would go to Dr. Richardson for final approval because the Senate vote is advisory only. The change in the calendar was approved by voice vote.
Information Items:
Update from the Administrator Evaluation Committee (Charles Mitchell, Member, Administrator Evaluation Committee)
Charles Mitchell, Department of Agronomy and Soils, came forward to present information on the Administrator Evaluation Survey as a substitute for Joe Molnar, Chair of the committee, who was teaching. Charlie Mitchell, who has served on this committee for 2 years, said he was asked to present this information this morning and would do his best to cover the topic. He used Joe Molnar’s power point presentation to provide an overview of the process. Charlie Mitchell said the evaluation of upper-level administrators, would probably take place in mid-February, and the results summarized and presented to the Senate by April of this year.
Dr. Heilman asked if the slide referencing Deans and Department Heads reflected what was done last year.
Charlie Mitchell said that slide did reflect what had been done last year. He said he is not sure how newly appointed administrators will be handled in the evaluation process. He thanked Drew Clark’s office for helping identify individuals for evaluation and for identifying faculty who should receive the survey. He said Joe Molnar will report to the Senate on the results of the evaluations.
Conner Bailey asked if the committee discussed the pros and cons of evaluating an out-going president.
Charlie Mitchell said the committee did discuss this and decided that all upper-level administrators, coming, going, new or not, would be evaluated. He said we have so many termed and interim administrators on campus that if we left them out there would not be many administrators left to evaluate.
Conner Bailey said the difference between some of the other administrators is that we know Dr. Richardson is leaving but the others will be here for some unknown amount of time and review information on them would be of use to the next President.
Dr. Heilman commented that the next President would be an important user of these data and it would be good to see a high participation rate in this survey. He said this would be seen as a positive sign for Auburn. He also said the information would be very useful to the next President in much the way last year’s information had been useful to him. He noted he would see information only on those administrators reporting to him.
Charlie Mitchell noted that the Provost’s office had been very helpful. He said the Provost had told the committee the data generated during last year’s survey had been very useful.
Gary Martin, member of the Steering Committee, asked if there would be a report to the Senate like last year and if the data presented would be in aggregate form.
Charlie Mitchell said he is not sure how the date will be presented since single individuals are being targeted.
Gary Martin said the implication is that the data presented would be aggregate data.
Charlie Mitchell said he is not sure how the data will be presented.
Rich Penaskovic thanked Charlie Mitchell for filling in on such short notice.
Report from the Teaching Effectiveness Committee (Gisela Buschle-Diller, Chair, Teaching Effectiveness Committee)
Gisela Buschle-Diller, Chair of the Teaching Effectiveness Committee, used a power point to provide a status report on the development of a new teaching evaluation instrument. She noted that the charge of the committee needed to be revised because the Biggio Center is now doing some of the things this committee is described as doing in the Faculty Handbook. After her presentation she opened the floor for questions.
Rich Penaskovic relinquished the Chair to David Cicci. Rich Penaskovic commented that he liked the University of Washington form because of its flexibility. He noted that she had mentioned the Biggio Center planned to develop a campus handbook for teaching evaluations. He asked if there was any timeline available for this project. He noted the timeline is critical because it is essential to have a viable evaluation process especially in light of post-tenure review.
Gisela Buschle-Diller said she was hesitant to give a specific date but thought the new instrument might be available for review by the Senate in the next 1-2 months.
Rich Penaskovic resumed his role as Chair and asked if there was any unfinished business. There was no unfinished business. Rich Penaskovic asked if there was any new business. There was no new business. The meeting was adjourned at 4:17 p.m.