2000-2001 - November 29, 2000
Faculty Senate Minutes
November 29, 2000
Present: Bruce Barber, Paul Bauschatz, Eric Brucker, Willem Brusaert, Steve Cohn, Richard Cook, Chris Cronan, Shirley Lee Davis, George Elliott, Bill Farthing, Ed Ferguson, Marc Girard, Michael Grillo, Cary Jenson for Diane Haslett, Knud Hermansen, Peter Hoff, Jim Horan, Dana Humphrey, Richard Jagels, John Jemison, Harvey Kail, Mel Kelley, Carol Kim, Dennis King, Dorothy Klimis-Zacas, Jan Kristo, Judy Kuhns-Hastings, Phil Locke, Daniel Lux, John Maddaus, Chuck Maguire, Ivan Manev, Kathleen March, Jim McClymer, Jim McConnon, Bruce Nicholson, Raymond O’Connor, Harlan Onsrud, Howard Patterson, Eric Peterson, Paula Petrik, Glenn Reif, Robert Rice, Jane Smith, Roy Turner, Gloria Vollmers, Ione Hunt von herbing, Judy Walker, James Wilson
Absent: Mark Anderson, David Batuski, Hsiang-Tai Cheng, Daniel Dwyer, Ray Fort, Keith Hutchison, Edward Jadallah, Melvin Johnson, Richard Judd, Leonard Kass, Justin Kelleher, Robert Kennedy, Cynthia Mahmood, Kyriacos Markides, Chris Moody, Ali Ozluk, Owen Smith (sabbatical), Anatole Wieck
I. Welcome and signing in:
The meeting was called to order at 3:15 p.m.
Welcome to the new representative from the Deans’ Council, Eric Brucker, BPPH.
II. Approval of minutes from 25 October Meeting:
1) R. O’Connor indicated that the minutes do not quote him correctly and proposed the following correction: “R. O’Connor suggested that a word other than ‘accommodation’ was desirable in the title of this issue: because of the synonymy with ‘housing’, people outside the University might otherwise misunderstand what faculty were seeking”.
From here on, minutes will be sent out as DRAFT minutes until final approval of the minutes at the full senate meeting.
2) H. Kail made a clarification on Motion B regarding the class book: the motion had been revised on the floor to remove the word “revised”.
A motion to approve these amendments was made by R. Rice, seconded by K. Hermansen, and approved.
1) K. Hermansen moved to add two items to the agenda: a reading of the obituary for David Shoemaker and a motion regarding conflict of meetings. The additions were approved by unanimous consent.
The obituary for David Shoemaker was read to the Senate by Michael Grillo, Associate Professor of Art and President of the Faculty Senate.
On Saturday, November 25, 2000, David Eugene Shoemaker, an Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Art, died of cancer at Eastern Maine Medical Center. He was a dedicated and insightful scholar of the History of Art of Pre Columbian and Modern Mexico. His passion of Mexican art and culture led him over the past ten years to develop an internationally acclaimed expertise in this area. In February 2000, he led the first team of archaeologists to locate ancient sites in a remote region of the state of Oaxaca; he had intended to return to the same area in 2001. David’s research was based on an exploration of historical documents, ancient maps and current geographies that he was using to locate undiscovered archeological sites. This research, funded by several prestigious grants, had formed the basis of his doctoral dissertation in art history at the University of Maine. David’s research offers a major contribution to the field through its examination of how a colonized culture can retain its own powerful identity and voice its developing indigenous beliefs by appropriating the language of its conquerors. While centered on Mexico, his work presents a vital model for all studies of cultural interchange.
Over the last few years David had presented his research at various national and international gatherings including conferences in Texas, New York City, Finland, Cuba, India, and Mexico. Through these presentations David established a solid reputation as a rising scholastic star in Latin American studies and Post-Colonial theory.
As an Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Art here at the University of Maine, he taught classes in Aztec Art, Mexican Muralism, and contemporary art forms such as Magic Realism. He had led one travel study course in Mexico two years ago, and had planned on leading another this January to Oaxaca. David was a dedicated teacher; both students and colleagues respected him for his encyclopaedic knowledge of Mexican art and the enthusiasm he brought to his subject. He was a giving and compassionate educator who cared deeply about his students, and shared readily with his colleagues.
As a dedicated supporter of the University of Maine’s Hudson Museum, David volunteered many hours working with museum collections and programs. He co-curated a 1999 exhibit of Mexican art, entitled “Images for Eternity: Mexican Tomb Figures and Retablos.” He was also a member of the Hudson Museum Advisory Board, the Friends of the Hudson Museum and the Friends of the University of Maine Museum of Art.
David has made a lasting impression on Latin American studies at the University of Maine, in his broadening the curriculum of the Department of Art, and also his scholastic contributions to numerous productive discourses reaching across disciplinary boundaries. He will be sadly missed by his colleagues, students and many friends, especially Linwood Colson, his dedicated partner for the past twenty-six years.
Michael Grillo, Laurie Hicks, Roger King, Owen Smith, Krista Smith, and Steve Whittington, 29 November 2000
By unanimous consent, a copy of the obituary will be sent to the family together with the Faculty Senate’s condolences.
2) Forms for the evaluation of administrators are to be sent out soon and must be returned by December 22.
3) President Hoff introduced the draft of the Strategic Plan for Provost Kennedy, who was unable to attend today’s meeting. The document has been in preparation for more than a year with input from Provosts Zillman and Kennedy and the academic deans. The Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate requested that the period for review be extended until 15 February 2001, in order to allow for real faculty engagement and not simply perusal of the document. Please send input via e-mail to Provost Kennedy or President Hoff.
President Hoff stated that this Strategic Plan outlines a vision of what the university should be in five to ten years. It articulates seven key goals with a number of bullet points to build upon historic, real, and present assets and looks for ways to improve and progress. Of note are the proposed Honors College and the university-wide initiative in information sciences. The latter will require considerable attention to define and develop. The plan is clearly much more than that, and President Hoff hopes faculty will be very actively involved in developing the definitive version.
An electronic version is available and President Hoff will let us know where – it will certainly be posted to the Faculty Senate folder on First Class.
Senate President Grillo asked senators to be sure to promulgate the document to colleagues throughout the various colleges.
IV. Questions to the administrators:
Question from R. Jagels: In reference to the Faculty Senate motion from last year regarding environmental planning and the university as a model of environmental responsibility, have the concerns expressed there, specifically those in part 2, been addressed?
Answer from President Hoff: His report in response to that motion indicated that it was better to proceed in a comprehensive way rather than in piecemeal fashion, so all points were referred to the Campus Planning Committee. Mark Anderson’s outlining of that committee’s agenda followed President Hoff’s report, so yes all items have been addressed.
R.Turner brought up an issue that was seconded by a number of faculties (R.Cook, B. Nicholson, and R. O’Connor): Grade reports and updated transcripts were not received until well after advising, which made advising very difficult. Transfer credits were not shown, and there were computer problems, as well, that hampered the advising process. Will the grade reports in spring be made available in time for advising?
Answer from D. Gelinas: Alison Cox instituted a policy whereby transcripts are now sent out once a year, but he will bring the matter up with her and request a return to issuing them twice a year.
Question from M. Grillo: He has received a number of inquiries as to whether the mid-semester evaluation form compiled by H. Onsrud and others could be used instead of the traditional form?
Answer from D. Gelinas: The collective bargaining agreement requires that any semester-end evaluation be approved by the deans’ offices.
Question from P. Petrik: Revised criteria for tenure and promotion have been awaiting approval for as long as two years or more. When can we get them?
Answer from President Hoff: He signs within 24 hours unless there’s a problem and he knows of none that are waiting for his signature.
Further discussion indicated that failure to approve by the president makes the tenure and promotion criteria automatically approved. Any supplemental evaluation form must also be approved by AFUM. It is not clear how the required questions for promotion and tenure guidelines would be transferred from new or supplemental forms. The current document needs tidying up: It is repetitious and certain items are unnecessarily in boldface type.
V. Committee Reports:
A.) J. Kuhns-Hastings, University Environment: The committee will be meeting again to discuss the Domestic Partner non-Housing Accommodation. There is a university-wide procedure of which faculty are not aware: The dean of the hiring college, in consultation with Evelyn Silver, is to act on any request for accommodation once it has been made known to the search committee that such accommodation is required.
S. Cohn asked about domestic partners who might not be ready to teach at that time but would be in a few years. J. Kuhns-Hastings replied that the committee will look into it. Sometimes efforts have been made to connect them with another institution
B.) J. Maddaus, Constitution and Bylaws: No report.
C.) H. Onsrud, Research and Public Service: There is very little hot business now.
J. McClymer inquired about the status of the return of indirect costs. Has there been any progress? H. Onsrud responded, saying that the course we were following now seems unproductive and the committee will look into other ways of achieving the same goal.
G. Vollmers stated that her colleagues in research were unaware of the motion’s existence and some felt it was way off base, to which H. Onsrud replied, saying that of the 100 people (1/6 of our faculty) who produced the most indirect costs in recent years very few are on the Faculty Senate. D. Humphrey also responded with a reminder that senators must disseminate information about the Senate’s actions to colleagues.
B. Nicholson pointed out that some grants are cross-disciplinary, so with five Principle Investigators, the funding appears to be less. H. Onsrud indicated that he had used the
green sheet figures for his calculations.
D.) P. Bauschatz, Academic Affairs: The committee’s Motion on Suspension and Dismissal is on today’s agenda, and it is currently considering other items referred to them at the last meeting.
E.) J. Kristo, Committee on Committees: Howard Patterson has agreed to serve as chair of the Library Committee. Other positions on that committee will soon be filled. All positions on the Scientific Misconduct Committee have been filled. Michael Grillo will be the faculty representative to the Hutchinson Center Advisory Board. Two names of faculty representatives for the search committee for a new Director of Public Safety have been forwarded to Vice President Richard Chapman, as requested. Provost Kennedy has formed several commissions, one of which is the Commission on Summer Programs. Interested faculty should contact Jan on First Class or at 1-2454.
F.) R. Rice, Financial and Institutional Planning: President Hoff requested that Dean Albright and Steve Whittington from the Hudson Museum meet with this committee. There are a number of stories about the museum’s plight in the campus news and local press. The current plan is to raise money for the next year to year and a half and close the building in the spring of 2002 for a whole season in order to make renovations. A pamphlet outlining the renovation plans is available. The plans include the roof over the museum, sealing the building from the outside, and repairing louvers and windows. Money for this will be available in Spring 2001. Museum staff is investigating a number of possible sites for the collection but this info will not be ready for release until the end of spring. None of the options will displace faculty or use space currently being used by faculty. In response to the Faculty Senate’s suggestion for a traveling exhibit, museum staff indicated that there are two traveling exhibits are out on the road now and they do not want to put a third together at this time.
G.) D. Humphrey, Board of Trustees Representative: The BOT met in November. Dean Albright made a very good presentation on the digital library and it needs more public exposure to let citizens know the importance of this endeavor. The Center for Excellence in Research in Math and Science Education was approved and funding for it is currently being sought. A word of note for future: When initiatives come from the faculty, check with colleagues at other UMS campuses so that they don’t come as a surprise to them. The final stop in the process for granting status of professor emeritus will be the individual campus presidents.
P. Petrik raised the issue of the System’s “rainy day fund”. What is its purpose and what legislation authorizes it? She wonders why Maine is different from most other universities that control their own reserves. D. Humphrey does not know but will inquire. R. Duringer might be able to address these questions. President Hoff stated that he would be the last to defend this fund, but he indicated that accrediting and bonding agencies look at the extent and level of a university’s reserves when making decisions about accreditation or giving bond ratings. That said, he also wonders what is a “rainy day”. Any system can create any fund and set up its budget as it wishes but it should be held accountable for it. Perhaps the Faculty Senate should ask Russ Smith, C.F.O. for the University of Maine System to address the Senate before he retires in June.
VI. Special Committee Reports:
A.) J. Maddaus, General Education Review Committee: The committee is trying to identify a smaller number of areas for liberal education, identify a rationale and set up student outcomes. It has identified five areas and is working to define them: communications, critical thinking, cultures, connections, and community. Feedback will be requested once they have done so. Chancellor MacTaggart’s Life and Work initiative and the Maine Idea will be incorporated into the General Education Requirements. The next meeting will be 13 December 9:00-11:00, in the Ham Room of the Memorial Union.
K. March urged faculty to disregard any rumors about how long the committee’s work might take. The committee is working very seriously.
R. O’Connor inquired about the formal process. J. Maddaus replied that it involves a formal report to the Faculty Senate and that any changes will need to be approved by them. D. Humphrey noted that if the Faculty Senate approves changes, they’re to go into effect. It falls within the purview of the Senate’s power to make such changes.
B. Farthing asked why we’re looking at Gen. Eds. now, so soon after implementation of the most recent plan. J. Maddaus said that it’s to meet accrediting requirements for N.E.A.S.C. and to meet part of our mission. D. Gelinas added that there are different levels of satisfaction with the current system so there has been a grass roots desire to do something different.
B.) K. March, Faculty Handbook Committee: The committee continues to seek feedback from faculty and thanks those who have contributed to its development thus far. The first segment is expected to be proposed prior to the 6 December elected members meeting and ready for vote at the 13 December full Senate meeting. The goal is to get a new version approved because the existing handbook dates back to 1983.
VII. Old Business:
A.) Definitions of Suspension and Dismissal
The definitions of suspension and dismissal have been revised to bring them into conformity with the University of Maine System’s definitions. P. Bauschatz moved that they are adopted, and the motion was seconded by E. Peterson.
Dismissal action is normally the final action taken when students are not making satisfactory progress toward a degree or when students readmitted after suspension show no improvement in their grade point average or otherwise fail to meet conditions set by the college.
a. The student is not normally allowed to apply for readmission.
b. The action is posted to the official academic record.
c. A hold is placed on the student record to preclude enrollment at all UMS institutions.
Academic suspension indicates that a student is separated from the University for a minimum of one semester. A student must file an application for readmission. Suspension is the usual action when a student fails to make normal progress toward graduation. Situations that lead to academic suspension are any one of the following:
a. Students receive a semester grade-point average at or below 1.0;
b. Students continued on academic probation fail to meet conditions as defined by the college dean, program director, or school director;
c. First-year students (0-23 hrs) acquire an accumulative average less than 1.50 at the end of the first two semesters; Sophomores (24-53 his) acquire an accumulative average of 1.7 or less; Juniors (54-83 his) acquire an accumulative average of 1.8 or less; Seniors (84+ hrs) acquire an accumulative average of 1.9 or less.
Regulations under c. above also apply to transfer students. Exceptions may be made for students who have earned a semester average of at least 2.0 while on probation but have not achieved the required minimum accumulative average (Faculty Senate 3/31/93).
First-semester students who are experiencing academic difficulties may be placed in a provisional continuation status. This intermediate status requires the student to discuss her or his academic record with the associate dean of the college, program director, or school director to determine whether the student will be placed on academic probation, suspension, or dismissal.
Academic Activity during Suspension/Dismissal
Students under dismissal or suspension may not be admitted as matriculated students at any university in the University of Maine System.
Students may request permission from their associate dean or program or school director to take one or two courses as a non-degree candidate at any UMS institution while they are under suspension.
P. Petrik believes the proposed scale is somewhat dangerous for students. P. Hoff says the wording should define “probation”. D. Gelinas noted these comments and said they will be taken into consideration.
The motion was passed.
VIII. New Business:
A.) Veteran’s Day Observance
This matter was brought forward by a student, Virginia MacIntosh, and J. Horan brings it forward for discussion by the Academic Affairs Committee to be considered within the totality of the whole calendar. Seconded by K. Hermansen. The motion is the first paragraph.
To move the Academic Affairs Committee of the Faculty Senate to examine the Academic Calendar to review switching a day the university already has off, in order to have a fall day off for the celebration of the federal holiday, Veteran’s Day.
The AA Committee will make sure that all holidays during the year cover every single day of the week, not just Mondays and Fridays, in order for professors to evenly teach their classes.
Veterans are the hearts of American democracy: upholding our civil, individual and constitutional rights. Veterans are the protectors of both American citizens and our form of government.
By having a full day off for all people at the university, events held during that day would increase people’s awareness that the military only carries out the orders of the President of the United States and the Congress.
It is purely the politicians in America who hold the power to start and end wars – not the military. The military in America only does what the US politicians order them to do.
Events at the university to increase knowledge of such an important holiday would include: holding vigils, a moment of silence, and speakers holding discussions on the valor and the courage of veterans in carrying out the orders of the United States politicians and also discussing alternative ways of resolving conflict – mediation and conflict resolution.
There are over 200 student veterans here at the university, and also many faculty and administrative veterans. It is time for the university to acknowledge and celebrate, through events, the protectors of our American democracy.
Sponsor or Faculty Representative:
There was no discussion and the motion passed.
B.) Peer Committee Clarification (Homeless Faculty)
K. Hermansen made the following motion.
The collective bargaining agreement covering faculty members at the
University of Maine requires unit members to perform certain peer
functions (Art. 7.C.2). These functions include periodic evaluation
(Art. 10.C.1), reappointment (Art. 7.C.2), tenure recommendations (Art.
9.C.1), promotion recommendations (Art. 9.C.1), and post-tenure awards.
These functions are performed by peer committees. The peer committees
are composed of faculty within certain recognized academic units. The
failure of faculty to be assigned and operate within a unit having a
peer committee deprives faculty of required evaluations, along with
tenure, promotion, and post-tenure award recommendations. Not only does
this has a detrimental effect on faculty moral but in some cases
violates the collective bargaining agreement.
Furthermore, within each designated unit there are established
standards for re-appointment, promotion, and tenure. The failure of
faculty to be assigned a unit with standards, leave faculty confused
and unsure of what is expected of them.
All full-time faculties shall be members of a unit with a functioning
peer committee. The assignment and membership of a faculty to a unit
with a functioning peer committee shall be more than simply a
designation. The assignment and membership of the faculty member to a
unit with a peer committee must be such that other faculty within the
unit have a definite and firm impression the faculty member is a part
of the unit. Unit members within the unit can observe and form opinions
on the capabilities of the faculty. The faculty can and is expected
take an active part in the functioning and decision-making within that
unit appropriate to the faculty member s academic rank and tenure
Any full time faculty member not assigned to a unit with a functioning
peer committee shall be so assigned within 30 days of the effective
date of the passage of this motion.
The President of the University shall inform the faculty senate of any
faculty member not assigned a unit with a functioning peer committee
at the end of the 30 days along with the reason why the faculty member
has not been assigned to a unit with a peer committee.
R. O’connor asked if the motion is as written or as stated. M. Grillo clarified that the motion is as read aloud. It was seconded by J. Horan.
K. March asked how many faculties are affected by this. M. Grillo does not know, but this motion is intended to protect them. P. Petrik inquired about the Ethnic Studies and New Media faculty that are about to be assigned. M. Grillo replied that we’re hoping to offer stability to these faculties in the event that there are any shifts in college structure. K. March pointed out that this motion is not unmotivated. In the past people have been left in a precarious position. This is intended to strengthen new programs and offer security to potential new hires. R. Jagels suggested that we need to consider the possibility that these faculties might not find a receptive home before proceeding.
H. Kail asked if this is this an argument about the difference between a program and a department, to which M. Grillo replied that these seem to have lines appearing from nowhere and the motion is intended to return faculty oversight to hiring procedures.
B. Nicholson pointed out that in interdisciplinary research institutes, a number of research faculties hold appointments and sometimes split appointments.
P. Hoff moved that the motion be referred to the appropriate standing committee, and it was seconded by R. Jagels.
The motion was assigned to Academic Affairs.
C.) Conflicting Schedule
This motion was made by K. Hermansen and seconded by K. March.
The Faculty Senators meet twice each month during the academic year to formulate policy for the orderly administration of affairs as set forth in the Senate Constitution. Faculty senators are expected to attend each meeting. The scheduling of conflicting department, college, or
A university event during the time the Senate is meeting reduces participation at the Senate meeting or the conflicting event.
No department, college, or University event where faculty are expected to participate shall occur at the date and time scheduled for Senate meetings (full or elected members). The President of the University of Maine in conjunction with the President of the Senate may waive this policy in rare cases where both the event and Senate meeting cannot be changed.
H. Kail asked whether a number of faculty been unable to attend unit/department/college meetings. K. March replied in the affirmative, pointing out the upcoming College of Liberal Arts and Sciences meeting on 13 December that conflicts with the Faculty Senate meeting.
The motion did not pass.
Under other new business, G.Vollmers reminded senators of the Faculty Senate policy that exams cannot be given during the last week the semester.
She also brought up the issue of the college orientation classes, stating that they seem worthless. This opinion was seconded by S. Cohn. It was suggested that the format should be changed. Believing that all courses must originate with the faculty, M. Grillo asked if these courses did not, in fact, originate with the deans. D. Gelinas replied that they went through the appropriate committee, but he does not know where they originated. Some faculty has had a positive experience with this course. R. Turner wonders how students can flunk the course apparently without consequence.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Jane S. Smith, Secretary