1998-1999 - March 31, 1999
Faculty Senate Minutes
March 31, 1999
Present: John Alexander, Bruce Barber, Paul Bauschatz, Mary Ellen Camire, Steve Cohn, Ted Coladarci, Chris Cronan, Lee Davis, Dan Dwyer, James Fastook, Ed Ferguson, Ivan Fernandez, Marc Girard, Mac Gray, Michael Grillo, Dan Harrison, Knud Hermansen, Jim Horan, Richard Judd, Leonard Kass, Justin Kelleher, Irv Kornfield, Janice Kristo, Phil Locke, Kathleen March, Kyriacos Markides, Jim McClymer, James McConnon, Henry Metcalf, Harlan Onsrud, Connie Perry, Paula Petrik, Alan Rosenwasser, Steve Sader, Thomas Sandford, Therese Shipps, Jane Smith, Kristin Sobolik, Mary Ellen Symanski, Gloria Vollmers.
Absent: Francois Amar, Dan Belknap, Tony Brinkley, Tai Cheng, Robert Cobb, Steve Colburn, George Criner, Ray Fort, Michael Greenwood, Tim Griffin, Mel Johnson, Alan Kimball, Roger King, Cynthia Mahmood, Mary Malone, Bruce Nicholson, Tina Passman, Hemant Pendse, Eric Peterson, Wesley Petteway, Owen Smith, Hayden Soule, Sydney Thomas, Ione Hunt Vonherbing, Judy Walker, Gail Werrbach, Anotole Wieck.
President Mary Ellen Symanski called the meeting to order at 3:15 PM.
II. Approval of minutes for February 24th. A motion was made and passed to approve minutes as presented.
Both the April 14th Elected Members’ meeting and the April 28th Regular Faculty Senate meeting will be held in Dexter Lounge.
NEASC accreditation team will be visiting campus the week of April 5th and the final report should be available to everybody.
Next meeting will include a summary report from all committee chairs.
There is a new Memorandum of Understanding with AUBG. AUBG will not be under the umbrella of the University of Maine Accreditation. They will be accredited independently with NEASC.
Faculty Senate Evaluation event will take place on Friday April 30th in Wells Commons Main Dining Room at 3PM. Refreshment will be available including a cash bar.
Dawkins lecture is rescheduled for April 8 at 7 p.m. at the Maine Center for the Arts.
Elections for president-elect and secretary will be held at the next meeting, the last meeting of the year (April 28).
Questions of Administrators. No questions were asked.
Sherman Rosser, Executive Director for University Recruitment, briefly explained to the Faculty Senate his job description. He spoke about how his office is working on a support network to encourage people of color to come to UM for positions of employment or study. He welcomes suggestions from the faculty on how he could improve his program. He stated that the Diversity Plan of the University of Maine addresses issues for encouraging and retaining minorities on campus. Sherman said the faculty should see a difference in color on campus the beginning of fall 1999. He asked that faculty continue to greet parents and students warmly who will be visiting the campus. He mentioned ALANA an organization of African American, Asian, Latino American and Native American students organized to give people of different ethnic background the opportunity to dine and share conversation with members and friends of UMaine’s ALANA Community. Question: Does the University have the financial resource to attract people of color? Ans. Yes. Question: How did the meeting on Ethnic Studies go? Sherman said his office is working together with Dean Eilers to develop an academic program on Ethnic Studies.
John Gregory, Executive Director of Information Technologies, would like to meet with any technology committees in individual colleges. He has spent these 4 months in an “intake mode” learning about the campus. Bearworks mandate is to develop informational technology plan, which was in the works when he arrived.
People are encouraged to read Bearworks and make recommendations. Gregory says there is a lot of technology on this campus, but we seem to have problems where we do not have a uniform network mechanism in place. The bringing of uniform network is a very high priority. There could be more collaboration among areas such as UM, UNET, et al. Presently, UNET provides most of campus networking to desktop. IT has done more of the clusters, e.g. dorms. As more buildings are renovated, they have more concentrations of network devices. How much does the university spend on networking? What electronic equipment do we have? Whose property is it? The System’s or UMaine’s? The answers are not clear. What revenue stream do we have? How old is the equipment? Gregory is working in a collaborative way with UNET, to develop a standard for the campus to be able to have assurance that technology can be used across campus. Another issue is faculty development. There is variation in levels of technology usage around campus and thus differences in support needs. The Teaching-Learning Technology Roundtable model is effective at a number of institutions. TLTR will be held May 10-11 here. The system has been informed and is helping subsidize the attendance of at least 7 teams, from around UMS, plus there should be other faculty teams from the area. AAEHG.org on web provides information. Steve Gilbert will be the leader of the workshop. The workshop is about learning how to put a roundtable together, the participants will then come back to campus to organize our own. Another item is the help center in the basement of Shibles. Its work could be greatly enhanced; this ties to faculty development. We are not documenting the kinds of assistance being provided; new software will allow us to log that information and the nature of interactions (solutions, etc.). We can then organize training seminars to address repeated needs.
Dan Dwyer, Vice Provost for Research & Graduate Studies. Provost Dwyer gave a Presentation, titled “Maine’s University Research and Development Enterprise.” Most Research & Development activity is done by universities rather than by private companies. Nationally, $16 Billion is awarded to universities for R&D each year. Research is important to the state economically, but also to Umaine. 1. It is important for faculty development. 2. It builds the campus infrastructure (students, buildings, and equipment). Umaine does good job of attracting extramural funds: last year $31+ million, up from $20 million. 84% is from federal, 8% is from state agencies, and 6% is from private. UMaine’s R&D has strong local impact: At UM, 325 professionals are on soft money, $15 million goes into payroll, thus supporting local jobs, with $7.5 going into local goods and services. Examples: shellfish technology, blueberry industry, lobsters, wood composite technology, sensor technology, geographic information systems, seafood processing, 200+ products in past 5 years, patents pending. However, Maine is at the bottom for R&D funding nationally; is EPSCOR state, meaning does not get its share of federal funds. Out of 18 such states, Maine is very low. We ought to strive for Research I institution, which depends on size, and funding and qualifies an institution for further support. We won $20 million bond, and request $10 – 20M annually for R&D operating funds. Investment in modern facilities has stopped. We need $15M every year in addition to the $10-20M for base budget. Where did $20M go? UM received $10.8M, USM received $2.7M, $2M to aquarium, $4.9 to MSTF. Out of our portion: Boardman and Crosby are being renovated; large chunk was allocated to renovation and addition to Hitchner; new building for Food Science; funds to Aquaculture Research Center.
We also receive funds for underwriting our research enterprise. $400,000 received 2 years ago, an additional amount ($3.6M) last year. Next year UMS should receive about $10M, with 80% coming to UMaine.
We can use the state money to attract federal money by putting it into programs as matching money for federal funds. The $3.6M for FY 99 has been turned into $18M. UMaine is decades ahead of USM and is in fact carrying the UMS in this. We look to be able to sustain this activity for a period of time. We always note the difference in our mission from that of other campuses.
Question: Could UMaine serve as cultural center as well as a center for scientific research, given that cultural activities generate funding? A. Dwyer’s office does not do that. It is harder to sell. We need to set aside funds to do that, such as significant pools for faculty outside science and engineering to carry out their research. Question: Why is it UMaine cannot attract funds? A: Because our faculty do not have the resources, such as matching funds, in order to get federal funding. Another problem is physical infrastructure. Question: Does legislature have any interest in micromanaging university research? A. They do want to make sure investments are made wisely and as we have said they will be done. Accountability is important. Question: how is money going to trickle across the whole institution? A. It helps build our reputation as an institution, thus attracting more students, and gaining revenue. We also get greater money for indirect costs and have greater money for other needs, such as enhanced retirements.
VI. Committee reports
Library (Grillo): The committee plans to submit a motion soon.
Research & Public Service (Sobolik): Will be discussing workers’ compensation and the liability issues with Dwyer et al.
Constitution & By-Laws (Vollmers): no report
Committee on Committees (Perry): Openings are posted, and still exit. Volunteers are needed.
Academic Affairs (Horan) There is continued discussion of evaluation of faculty. See motion under new business. The committee also discussed an attendance policy (see motion later on agenda). People are in process of reading books for 2001 class book.
Finance & Institutional Planning (Metcalf): met with Academic Affairs in February with Division of Lifelong learning, concerning CED class cancellation policy. Minimum enrollment is required, although some departments negotiate this. The DLL is looking to offer at summer courses for honors for high school juniors. There is a class book program with sessions in Camden, Portland, and Orono. Metcalf also reported for Facilities Planning Committee with reference to postponement of union expansion plan due to greater cost. An ambulance bay is being planned for Stewart Commons. The retirement community plan was not presented at BOT in March; may be presented in May. Catalogs from UNET were passed out for summer course listings.
University Environment Committee (Rosenwasser): Will look to finish up the several items. Phil Pratt has been authorized by UEC to do follow-up survey on the academic climate survey from last year.
BOT (Fernandez): Met at Presque Isle in March. Campus diversity plans were approved. UMaine plan looks exciting. A Committee will be formed. Major conference to be held on campus next year. Each campus needs to submit a report to BOT in July subsequent years as well. Tenure applications were approved. Five new programs approved at UMA. UM residence hall planning discussed (3 new halls for 600 additional students). USM establishing a Biosciences Institute and a Ph.D. program. Community college concept also discussed at length. This will strongly affect our institution.
VII. Old Business. No old business.
VIII. New Business
Motion presented by K Hermansen to create committee for further development of a faculty evaluation form.
Motion to Form and Charge a Special Committee for Further
Development of a Faculty Evaluation Form
The evaluation of faculty and courses by students is important, respected, and appreciated by the faculty and administration at the University of Maine. In order to improve faculty and course evaluation, both the administration and the engineering faculty have proposed evaluation forms that would replace the present evaluation form used by students. Both forms have been discussed and reviewed by the Academic Affairs Committee. Engineering faculty has tested the form proposed by the engineering faculty during the Fall Semester 1998. Based on the recommendations and results:
The motion is made to form a special committee of the faculty senate to receive the recommendations of the Academic Affairs Committee and to place on the web one or more faculty evaluation forms for further testing and possible revision.
The special committee shall be called the Special Committee on the Development and Implementation of a Faculty Evaluation Form
The objectives of the committee will be to:
examine and make recommendations to the Faculty Senate on a faculty evaluation form(s)
Integrate and test one or more evaluation forms on the web or the campus first-class system.
determine if a web based or first-class based evaluation form is feasible and practical
The committee shall be composed of volunteers that can include faculty, administration personnel, and students.
The chair of the committee shall determine the number and members of the committee.
The chair of the committee shall be Harlan Onsrud
One or more test should be completed by the end of Spring Semester 1999 but in any event all tests shall be completed no later than the end of the Fall Semester 1999.
The special committee shall report back to the Faculty Senate at the next meeting following a test of an evaluation form.
Hermansen noted that naming chair is according to motion rules in Robert’s Rules of Order.
Metcalf called for a friendly amendment by Metcalf to change the statement “The chair of the committee shall determine the number and members of the committee” to read “The president of the Faculty Senate shall …”
In favor: all in favor except 1 opposed.
Motion presented by J Horan. Text to be included in faculty handbook:
“Faculty are expected to provide reasonable opportunities to make up examinations and/or other course requirements to students absent from class for such legitimate reasons as illness, death in the family, jury duty, and official participation in athletic, band, and other University sponsored events.”
Typos corrected: athletic to athletics
After band, should add “drama”
Rosenwasser asked for the origin of motion. Horan explained that some faculty refuse to accept make-ups for certain types of absences, and a guideline is necessary. Gelinas clarified how the handbook review process is taking place. Students come to him over issues of this sort, fearing retaliation if they speak up.
Gelinas asked for clarification on athletics – Is it just varsity? A. No.
In favor, except 1 no and 1 abstention.
Move to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 4:58 p.m.