1998-1999 - November 18, 1998
Faculty Senate Meeting
November 18, 1998
PRESENT: John Alexander, Paul Bauschatz, Dan Belknap, Robert Cobb, Steve Cohn, Ted Coladarci, Charlotte Herbold for Lee Davis, James Fastook, Ed Ferguson, Ivan Fernandez, Mac Gray, Michael Greenwood, Tim Griffin, Michael Grillo, Dan Harrison, Knud Hermansen, Jim Horan, Fred Irons, Mel Johnson, Leonard Kass, Alan Kimball, Roger King, Irv Kornfield, Janice Kristo, Phil Locke, Cynthia Mahmood, Kathleen March, Mary Malone, Henry Metcalf, Scott Morelli, Harlan Onsrud, Sandy Caron for Connie Perry, Eric Peterson, Alan Rosenwasser, Thomas Sandford, Therese Shipps, Jane Smith, Kristin Sobolik, Mary Ellen Symanski, Sydney Thomas, Gloria Vollmers, Gail Werrbach, Anatole Wieck.
ABSENT: Francois Amar, Bruce Barber, Tony Brinkley, Mary Ellen Camire, Tai Cheng, Steve Colburn, George Criner, Chris Cronan, Dan Dwyer, Ray Fort, George Jacobson, Richard Judd, Kyriacos Markides, Jim McClymer, James McConnon, Lyn McLaughlin, Bruce Nicholson, Tina Passman, Hemant Pendse, Paula Petrik, Steve Sader, Owen Smith, Hayden Soule, Ione Hunt Vonherbing, Judy Walker, Charles Watson.
I. WELCOMES. Meeting called to order by President Symanski at 3:16 PM.
II. Minutes of October 21 meeting. Motion to accept as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
NEASC Reaccredidation (March) – The fora have taken place. Comments about the accreditation document still can be made to Vice Provost Gelinas or Kathleen March through the end of the semester.
AUBG has been approved for candidacy for independent accreditation by NEASC.
Senior administrators search committee faculty participation: Provost search to get under way shortly. Names of faculty announced by Pres. Symanski are: Sandra Caron, Carol Gilmore, Bryan Pierce, Dan Belknap, Michael Grillo, Habib Dagher, Irv Kornfield, Diane Roscetti, chaired by Dean Bruce Wiersma.
IV. QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATORS. None asked.
V. GUEST PRESENTATION. Plans for South Mall portion of campus (area south of Fogler Library) were presented by Anita Wihry, Executive Director of Institutional and Facilities Planning. The Master plan was prepared by a landscape architect for use of the area around the Memorial Union. The Mall area was set up with 1934 master plan, which also called for a south mall at that time. The plan includes the Proposed Art Building, potential Visual Art Building, proposed Union addition, and the proposed south side addition of the library. The proposed Art Building and the potential Visual Art Building are both subject to a feasibility study. The University is exploring private funding possibilities for the library expansion.
The plan is to group all the arts activities and develop an ‘arts corridor.’ Many school children attend events and could use this area for visits. The Union construction will also begin soon. Ms. Wihry explains that the University has a “hidden agenda” to advance the concept of a “pedestrian campus.” Ms. Wihry is interested in people’s reactions as we move ahead on the presentation. Q: What will happen to the Child Studies Center? R: We need to relocate the Center and a few other buildings before starting the new construction. The plan is feasible, even though there are challenges. Cobb observed that parents currently bring children to the back door of Merrill, with no traffic worries. Ms. Wihry commented that easy access to child drop off was not taken into consideration. Q: What happens to the greenhouses? R: They may or may not be removed. Q: For a truly “pedestrian campus,” shouldn’t there be plans for a tunnel system due to harsh weather in winter? R: Tunnel system could help if the buildings were close together. Other issues are security, and whether buildings have full or partial basements for tunnel linking. Q: What will be the proposed access to the South Mall? R: A rudimentary road behind Hitchner can be developed, as well as other options for access to the south end of campus. Grove Street is out of the picture.
VI. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Finance & Institutional Planning (Metcalf). They are working to get more information on the tuition cap proposal. They hope to have a motion by December’s meeting.
Research & Public Service (Sobolik): Moving slowly on resolution. Should be meeting with Dwyer’s ad hoc committee. Only Sobolik is on it from senate.
Library Advisory (Grillo). They have been receiving results of the survey. Spare and predictable responses. December’s meeting is scheduled with Elaine Albright. She has information on the budget. Fogler Library did the survey last May, and results were discussed by the committee.
Committee on Committees: Still need people for several committees (see First-Class)
Academic Affairs (Horan): They are working on refinement of a proposal with respect to charter schools. They are also looking at a proposal for a new student evaluation form submitted by the engineering faculty. They are about to start survey planning on general education requirements to take place during the second semester.
University Environment (Rosenwasser): They met on November 11, 1998 and discussed four issues: (1) Parking. President Hoff has asked Parking & Safety Committee to take a look at parking. The Committee will prepare resolution to express hope that we will not go to a singlesticker system. Morelli is preparing a statement in favor. (2) A draft of a diversity report was discussed. In general a positive response was received, but they hope not to lose sight of the broad view of diversity. They hope for a resolution in the future. (3) Proposal for an ad hoc solid waste management advisory committee. The University Environment expects to support a resolution. 4. Revision of faculty handbook – free speech and assembly policy refers to committee established during the late 60s. The Committee went out of operation and the University Environment saw no compelling reason for reestablishment. It is recommending its formal elimination by this faculty senate since the Council of Colleges created it.
Metcalf asked Rosenwasser when would the survey of student academic life be available? R: UE met with Phillip Pratt once; he will meet with him again this Friday to review. He will also make a presentation at the December senate meeting on the survey.
Constitution & By-laws (Vollmers): No report.
Board of Trustees representative (Fernandez): The Board of Trustees met Sunday & Monday in Machias. The meeting was not controversial. Good things said about bond passage. However, we need to spend funds as promised (the issue of accountability); also, need to develop realistic planning for R&D. Should be a challenge for UMS and BOT, since issue focuses on one or two campuses rather than on entire system. Also there is concern about how we report back to the public. Nothing new on 3.4% increase of base funding from the legislature.
The Board of Trustees discussed the Preparation for Life and Work in the 21st Century. (Russ and Swintzer for UM) group. Community College of Maine: develop electronic catalog and add tech college system to our transfer system on web DSIS; also promote 2 + 2 articulation agreement. Diversity initiative mentioned. Talk of Trustee professorships. Currently there are 7. They will reward teaching more. Debate about using the Libra professorships internally not favorable.
Q: Tech college system expert in BDN article. Implied they would become community colleges. Does this mean there would be no liberal arts at these institutions? R: Not clear. The idea is to package existing programs so as not to have overlap, without discontinuing programs. Looks more like packaging than substantive changes. Not planning curriculum review. Q: Didn’t chancellor say there was some concern about the balance in funding from bond, not just using it for R&D? R: The bond was for certain kinds of areas, but the base increase should go for raising the level of scholarly activity across campus, as base money.
VI. OLD BUSINESS.
Changes to Electronic Communications Policy.
(Rebecca Salsbury presenting) – Last spring the draft of the policy was approved, pending review by university counsel. Counsel made several recommendations. The new form is presented now. Changes are highlighted in boxes in margins. Changes are fairly cosmetic, except for page 4. Here there an entire section was removed, because counsel felt no need to encourage separate enforcement procedures for computing issues and the eliminated section was redundant. Vollmers moved we accept policy as now presented. Motion seconded. Discussion: Q: Were there student members on the committee? R: Yes. Q: And they are aware of revisions? R: Morelli noted that students were concerned about the censorship issue and that these concerns have been cleared up. Vote of approval: 3 abstentions, all others cast yes votes on policy.
VII. NEW BUSINESS.
Vollmers: Proposed amendment to Constitution related to Elected members’ meetings. It cannot be voted on until the next meeting. The first step is presenting the amendment. Harrison asked for background on the concerns that led to the amendment. Vollmers: It appeared that senate business was being performed in elected members’ meetings. The constitution is silent on this. These meetings have evolved enough to require some parameters in the constitution. Symanski noted that they currently fall under “Special, Separate Meetings.” Clarification is needed, because they have taken on a certain character over the years. Rosenwasser requested changing ‘tasked’ to an alternative verb.
Meeting adjourned at 4:05 PM.
Kathleen March, FS Secretary 98-99