2004-2005 - December 15, 2004
Faculty Senate Minutes
December 15, 2004
Present: Dean Astumian, Eisso Atzema, Richard Borgman, Mary Brakey, Sandy Caron, John Daigle, Michael Eckardt, Mahmoud El-Begearmi, Amy Fried, Douglas Gelinas, James Gilbert, Michael Greenwood, Nancy Hall, William Halteman, Marie Hayes, James Horan, Dana Humphrey, Susan Hunter, Dan Innis, John Jemison, Mel Johnson, Scott Johnson, Leonard Kass, Robert Kennedy, Dennis King, David Lambert, John Maddaus, Deirdre Mageean, John Mahon, Kathleen March, Stephen Marks, Kathleen Mcintyre, Jessica Miller, Harlan Onsrud, Howard Patterson, Paul Rawson, Alan Rosenwasser, Linda Rottman, Doug Ruthven, Tom Sandford, Ann Shonberger, Michael Scott, Kathryn Slott, Roy Turner, Janet Waldron, Gregory White.
Absent: Jim Acheson, Peggy Agouris, Robert Bayer, Carla Billitteri, Rodney Bushway, Nellie Cyr, Raphael DiLuzio, Marcia Douglas, Todd Gabe, Stephen Gilson, Alexander Grab, Robert Gundersen, Ludlow Hallman, Dianne Hoff, David Kotecki, Michael Peterson, Liam Riordan, Denise Skonberg, Touradj Solouki, Stellos Tavantzis, Mario Teisl, Michael Vayda, Bob Whelan.
Welcome and Signing In
Minutes from November 17 meeting were approved.
Announcements: President Patterson said that Michael Peterson had agreed to chair the Academic Affairs Committee.
Questions to Administrators: Howard asked President Kennedy for an update on how the UM is interacting with the legislature, including funding and other issues.
Kennedy stated that it is still early in the process. We are trying to educate legislators about the university. He has been in contact with many of them. Our priorities have been submitted to the Chancellor’s office. Our top priority are high technology classrooms, we are hoping this request will be forwarded by the Chancellor’s office to the legislature. VP for Administration & Finace Janet Waldron said that we had presented a comprehensive package to the UMS office, which included renovations to Aubert Hall and renovations to the Library. Kennedy thought that legislators were very favorable toward UM. The general tone of the spirit on campus is good and is being recognized. Howard said that we will have input information from Janet Waldron and Todd Gabe regarding the budget.
There was a question regarding the two new graduate programs. President Kennedy responded that a new Bio-Medical Science graduate program and a GK – 20 graduate program are in the works. This GK program is supported by the State and federal government.
March asked for news on the Director of the Library search. President Kennedy responded that the position has been offered to Joyce Rumery, who had not given her final decision.
There was a question about whether the programmatic changes sent to the Chancellor’s office only included the two grad programs previously mentioned, or if there were others. President Kennedy said he was only aware of the two programs. He also stated that the Bio-Medical program would be on this campus only, the GK-20 would be perhaps state-wide.
There was a question about the new position for Mary Cathcart. She is a senior fellow at the Margaret Chase Smith Center, 60% time, will be working with Jonathan Rubin, and will be the liaison with Augusta.
Doug Ruthven, Research & Public Service
Ruthven gave an update on the MAPI funds and proposals. They have received 37 proposals from very diverse areas. The core committee reviewing the proposals are; Dan Sandweiss, Susan McKay, Jessica Miller, Carol Wood and Doug Ruthven. The committee can allocate up to $200,000 this year.
Scott Johnson, University Environment
There are two items the committee is discussing. First, a broad coalition of faculty senators to work on a report about Graduate Education at UM. Ruthven and Gabe have agreed to participate on this committee. It will collaborate with the Graduate Board and the Association of Graduate Students. There is no agenda for this committee other than to fairly and thoroughly evaluate conditions that exist on campus for graduate students who make up 20% of the student population. The AGS is surveying its own members regarding stipends, living conditions, and other issues.
John Jemison has initiated a project to make the campus more environmentally friendly. There are a number of issues to address, including hybrid vehicles, waste, etc. He has already been in contact with Janet Waldron’s office.
Mick Peterson, Academic Affairs
Dr. Peterson had a final exam. No report.
Marie Hayes, Constitution & Bylaws
They have been reviewing the Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws. There are some points in the constitution that they will be reviewing, such as the rule of the 7 day in advance distribution of the agenda. With electronic communication, perhaps this could be changed. Attendance by non-members, veto recommendations, and other issues are under study. Another meeting IS scheduled for January.
Kathleen March, Interdisciplinary Studies Committee
The IDS committee are planning a Monday lunch series on interdisciplinary programs. They are starting with David Smith, Professor of History, who will give a talk on the history of the various departments on campus. For instance, there was once a department of Chemistry and German. Other topics will include Latin American Studies, Women’s Studies, Maine Studies, New Media, and Marine Sciences. They have discussed holding a workshop on interdisciplinary program funding and have been in contact with Michael Eckardt and Janet Waldron’s office.
Dianne Hoff, Library Advisory Committee
Dr. Hoff was not able to attend. No report.
Tom Sandford, Workload Committee
They are working on the implications of the target and workload criteria in the Strategic Plan. They are working with Institutional Studies.
Dana Humphrey, BOT Rep
The BOT Reps met with Vice Chancellor Elsa Núñez on December 6, who had distributed a draft of the implementation dates of the Strategic Plan. Each of the 9 items will have a committee. All of the representatives emphasized that each committee needs faculty representation. special committees will have faculty members. The number has yet to be decided, but they will try to have faculty representation from each campus. The BOT Reps will meet with the Chancellor on Friday, December 18. They have sent a proposal to him regarding shared governance and are hoping he will have a response for them at that meeting.
Todd Gabe, Finance & Institutional Planning
The committee met with a representative from housing and discussed graduate student housing. They should have a report by the beginning of next year.
Update on the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee, Dr. Susan Hunter
The committee was formed last summer in response to issues that arose from last year’s P&T process. The committee is co-chaired by Doug Gelinas and Hunter. Other members are: James Acheson, Kate Beard-Tisdale, Richard Brucher, Laurie Hicks, Jan Kristo, Ann Leffler, Robert Rice, Bruce Sidell, and Evelyn Silver. The committee has met several times. It has agreed upon three items and submitted these to the Provost. The items include the composition of the advisory committee and administrative feedback on extensions of the probationary period.
The committee recommended that the Provost’s Committee on Promotion & Tenure consist of the Vice President for Research, the Dean of the Graduate School, the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs who are all ex-officio members, and three senior faculty members of the University of Maine. This committee is advisory only; its recommendations do not constitute an official, grievable step in the promotion and tenure process. The second item is feedback to the peer committees. This also grew out of the Faculty Senate resolution from the February 2004 meeting. In a few instances last year the Provost’s negative recommendation was in conflict with the positive recommendation of peer committees. The resolution recommended that the advisory committee meet with the peer committee and faculty members in the affected cases. The ad hoc committee’s recommendation is whenever a department chair, a school, a research unit director, a dean, a provost or a president feels unable to recommend the peer committee’s decision regarding P&T, that administrator shall consult with the peer committee prior to drafting his/her recommendation. The policy pertains to every level through the president. The administrator’s discussion with the peer committee will be based upon each candidate’s fulfillment of the unit’s approved promotion and tenure criteria. Meetings with the peer committee pursuant to this policy shall be carried out within the time table established in the agreement between AFUM and The University of Maine.
There was a long discussion about various points of Dr. Hunter’s report, during which she stated that the committee was not finished with its recommendations to the Provost.
Old Business: There was no old business.
New Business: The Ad Hoc Committee had four motions to present.
Kathleen March opened by thanking the members of the Ad Hoc Committee for their work and amount of time involved.
Transparency Motion, presented by Kathleen March, Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee
The strategic planning efforts initiated by the University of Maine System offer the opportunity to strengthen and enhance our position as the leading comprehensive University in Maine and the potential for becoming one of the top public institutions of higher learning in New England. To effect change within the University community requires that its members willingly engage in and understand the implications of the planning efforts. The motion outlined below requests that specific actions be taken that will ensure that the community can participate fully in the planning efforts.
To actively engage the University community requires that transparency exist at all levels and that discussions that alter the implementation of strategic initiatives remain possible. As such, the following steps should be in effect prior to proceeding with the initiation of a strategic planning effort at the University of Maine
• That the development of teams, committees or other entities charged with developing tactics, plans or objectives related to strategic planning efforts be done in consultation with the faculty senate.
• That the membership of teams, committees or other entities charged with developing tactics, plans or objectives related to strategic planning efforts be done in consultation with the faculty senate.
• That open meetings with detailed discussions of objectives and implementation strategy be held prior to initiating actions that may affect the mission and functioning of the University.
• That members of the University community be kept fully apprised of the possible implications of actions, tactics and objectives related to the strategic planning efforts. In addition, the faculty senate should be given detailed updates on plans, tactics and goals by strategic planning committee chairs prior to the implementation of any major initiatives related to strategic planning.
There was no discussion.
A vote was called for. 29 in favor, none opposed, 4 abstensions. Motion approved.
President and Scholar Motion
An institution of Higher Education has a unique structure and needs. As such, it is best served by a chief executive officer who comprehends those needs and can advocate for the institution successfully in all venues.
The President of The University of Maine should have a sufficiently strong scholarly background as to (1) understand the complexities of an institution of higher education and (2) warrant tenure in a department of the University.
Kathleen explained that the motion doesn’t mean that the President should be tenured in the position. It states that the person chosen as President should warrant tenure.
President Kennedy said that in this case the motion should be sent to the Chancellor’s Office, not the President’s Office. It was noted from the floor that the letter that is normally sent to the President’s Office should then be forwarded to the Chancellor’s Office.
A vote was called. 26 in favor, 5 opposed, 4 abstentions. Motion approved.
The President of The University of Maine should not function without a contract.
There was some discussion whether this was the purview of the Faculty Senate and not the administration. Marie Hayes quoted the Faculty Senate Constitution, which states that it is under the auspices of the senate to endorse such a motion.
A vote was called. 30 in favor, none opposed, 3 abstensions. Motion approved.
Motion on the Evaluation of the President
It is of utmost importance for The University of Maine to be represented by a strong President who can candidly put forward to the system the views of The University of Maine campus community. To enhance the credibility of the President and to improve presidential transitions, we support the following principles for evaluating the President.
The President of the University of Maine shall be evaluated on a regular basis by the faculty, following a process similar to that established for other UMaine administrators by the Faculty Senate in May 2002.
The Senate Executive Committee shall forward their evaluation of the President to the Chancellor and the Chair of the Board of Trustees.
The Chancellor and the Board of Trustees shall include this information in their evaluation of the President.
The Chancellor and Board of Trustees shall inform the Faculty Senate of The University of Maine regarding the basis of its evaluation.
A vote was called. 27 in favor, none opposed, 4 abstensions. Motion approved.
Howard Patterson then thanked Kathleen for all of her work on the committee. Kathleen then gave the names of the committee members who worked on the Ad Hoc Committee: Jim Acheson, Habib Dagher, Dean Astumian, George Jacobson, Jim Horan, Mary Ellen Symanski, Jim McClymer, Mike Greenwood, Bob Rice, Mario Teisl, Marie Hayes, Tony Brinkley and Stellos Tavantzis.
The meeting adjourned at 5:00.
Secretary, Faculty Senate