Skip Navigation

2013-2014 - January 29, 2014

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
January 29, 2014

Present: Steve Barkan, Richard Borgman, Emmanuel Boss, Ian Bricknell, Dick Brucher, Stephen Coghlan, Scott Dunning, Janet Fairman, Michael Grillo, Gordon Hamilton, Dennis King, Mary Ellin Logue, James McClymer, Robert Milardo, Michael Montgomery, Martha Novy-Broderick, Harlan Onsrud, Michael Peterson, Andrew Reeve, Brian Robinson, Jonathan Rubin, Thomas Sandford, Michael Scott, Howard Segal, Kathryn Slott, David Townsend, Gail Werrbach, Clayton Wheeler, David Yarborough, Bob Rice, Paul W. Ferguson, Janet Waldron, Ivan Manev for William Dee Nichols, Lindsay Nutter (Stud. Gov), Peter C. Altmann (CEAC), Abigail Jones (Grad Stud Gov)

Absent: John Allen, Jason Bolton, William Congleton, Mauricio da Cunha, Benildo de los Reyes, Charlsye Diaz, Marcia Douglas, Dylan Dryer, Thane Fremouw, Robert Gundersen, Ramesh Gupta, Steven Kimball, Dorothy Klimis-Zacas, Judy Kuhns-Hastings, Paul Myer, Ray Pelletier, Jay Rasaiah, Mark Wells, Susan Wheaton, Jeff Hecker, Carol Kim, Melvin Johnson, Charles Rote,.

The meeting was called to order at 3:20 pm

I.          Welcome and Announcements:

Howard Segal read the following about Helen Young, former Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant, followed by a moment of silence.

“-ORONO – Helen Young, born Aug. 25, 1917, died Jan. 6, 2014, in Orono. She was the widow of long-time Professor of Forestry Harold Young.

Helen began working at the University of Maine part time in the Forestry department when the children were young. In 1970 she resumed full time work as the administrative assistant at the Faculty Senate, where she also provided extra assistance to the elected president of that group. Each year she worked for a different president of the Senate. Some of the Senate presidents later told the family that it seemed more that they were working for Helen! Helen quickly became the institutional memory of the Faculty Senate. She truly loved her job and she especially liked that she was helping the University. She continued to work for the Faculty Senate until she was 81 years old. “

See more at: http://obituaries.bangordailynews.com/obituaries/bdnmaine/obituary.aspx?n=helen-young&pid=169197469#sthash.tZUSzbM2.dpuf

A few upcoming meetings/forums:

Academic Affairs Faculty Forum: Retention and Graduation, Mon Feb 3, 3:00 pm
Invited Speaker: Chancellor James Page for April 2 full Senate Meeting
Invited Guest: Vice President Janet Waldron for March 19 Elected Members Meeting

II.        Approval of November 13, 2013 Minutes
Vote: Motion approved with one correction: David Yarborough listed twice as attending

III.       Committee Reports

BOT Rep – Robert Rice 
The Board of Trustees met on January 27, 2014 and the BOT Reps met with the Chancellor a week prior. Members of the Board of Visitors were in attendance with UMaine BOV Rep Christopher Emmons advocating for UMaine. The Morse family donated about $800,000 for a high definition screen for instant replay, required by the NCAA, and a tribute was read for former trustee Charles O’Leary.

A discussion of post tenure increases with the Chancellor where he stated that post tenure increases are given to approximately 90% of applicants and he was concerned with that. The Vice Chair stated that there is a discrepancy between the board policy and the contract. Emmanuel Boss addressed the BOT regarding the travel policy and the complexity of the issue. The information was received well by the BOT. The subject of structural gap came up. The Chancellor told the BOT that the structural gap is severe. The gap is too large for individual campuses and the goals of the System can’t be achieved without significant structural changes.

The Vice Chancellor Wyke estimated the gap increases and the potential problems between FY 14 – 19 will be $69 million, currently at $39 million. UMaine runs financial ratios, by running those this campus has done pretty well, the data suggests UMaine is financially healthy.

Vice Chancellor Susan Hunter is looking at the potential for joint appointments across the system. She’s looking at programs to accomplish this.

Q.
Is the BOT really alarmed over post tenure and are they really surprised that over 90% do satisfactory work?
A.
When it was discussed they stated that Post Tenure was set up by the System with a low bar.

Q.
What is the structural gap and how do employees contribute so much?
A.
Janet Waldron said if you take current operations and forecast forward with certain assumptions on revenue and expenses you see what you have for a gap between those. Approximately 70% of the expenditure is benefits and compensation packages.

Q.
Why cut employees instead of technology or other things, how can you run a University without employees?

Discussion:
How come Faculty aren’t seen as generating income based on FTE’s instead of what we cost?

Jim McClymer stated, the revenue needs to be pointed out and not raising tuition wasn’t responsible, not advocating for more money from the state, etc. All areas need to be worked on instead of saying you need to do more with less.

Q.
Has it been stated that UMaine will need to bailout campuses that don’t make numbers work?
A.
No idea

Discussion:
President Ferguson said the solution is not to cut 16% of faculty. It’s how you project over the next five or so years, a new business model that works and addresses the revenue lost. The tuition decision will need to be looked at.

Q.
Vice Chancellor mentioned that the System had too much infrastructure and employees. How does that apply to UMaine?
A.
The President stated, there might be campuses that have too big a footprint for the operation but that doesn’t necessarily apply to UMaine. There is a lower density with Cooperative Ext and the Experiment Station. It comes back to the question of where UMaine sits. If there’s a system wide statement you need to see where UMaine fits in and keep it in perspective.

Academic Affairs –Richard Borgman & Judy Kuhns-Hastings
The committee met today and working on; Policy re faculty authored material, Faculty Handbook, Grade Change Policy and Mon/Wed classes. Expect to have these finished by the end of the semester.

Constitution & Bylaws – Mick Peterson
A Resolution coming up under New Business.

Research & Scholarship – Emmanuel Boss & Mauricio de Cunha

Working on the Research portion of the Faculty Handbook, trying to set up a meeting for finances to discuss  ++++++, and busy with travel policy.

Finance & Institutional Planning – James McClymer & Tom Sandford
Next meeting is set for February 5, the topic is academic revenue sharing. The committee hopes to have a draft in two weeks.

University Environment –Mike Scott & OPEN
There’s a meeting in a couple weeks. Working on an update of classroom improvements and development of a survey for faculty satisfaction on campus.

Library Advisory – Robert Rice & Howard Segal
The Digital Commons has over 9,000 downloads and the first floor rooms are being well received.

Service & Outreach – Martha Broderick & David Yarborough
Moving along on the Carnegie application and working on a full report for Faculty Senate.

Committee on Committees – OPEN
The current setup is working fine and getting things out as they come up.

Program Creation & Reorganization Review – Brian Robinson & Mick Peterson
Working on program eliminations, meeting set for Monday, February 3, to discuss the elimination of a BA in German and a BA in Latin.

Q.
How many hearings are there?
A.
Six after the BA in German and Latin, there are no new programs being discussed.

General Education  — Harlan Onsrud
The focus is on the UMaine System enhancing transfer credits. There’s a meeting tomorrow and several items to discuss. There will be a meeting with other campus assembly Presidents coming up.

Ad Hoc IT – Michael Scott & OPEN
There will be a report at the next meeting. One issue recently is not notifying faculty when there will be issues or there are issues with IT. There were issues today and no notification to faculty. If word was sent out it would eliminate wasting valuable class time figuring things out when there are known issues.

Committee of the Administration
No report.

IV.       Open Comments from the Administration

Q.
What is the number of suspended faculty searches campus-wide and, if available, system-wide? Some of the suspended positions were belatedly approved a few months ago LONG after discussions with various departments and with faculty who would otherwise likely not have retired. The delays in approval precluded getting started on searches till recently–only to have them suspended and to infuriate faculty (and staff and students), both faculty who signed off on retirements and their remaining colleagues.
A.
There are no active searches suspended. There are 16 active faculty searches, 7 requests to fill that are on hold until March 1, three faculty positions given approval but it has been communicated that those cannot go forward at this time.

Discussion:
Would you clarify that when a faculty member was assured if they retired the position would be filled, if seven searches are suspended was this a miscommunication? Some faculty wouldn’t have agreed to retire knowing positions would not be filled.

Jeff St. John stated that the way it stands, active searches are moving forward but other searches that were on Dean’s lists are being held due to budget issues right now.  Because they hadn’t gotten of the ground they weren’t moved to active status.

Q.
Why is March 1 an important date.
A.
All positions and the retirement incentive are all in play for balancing the budget. There are a number of positions to be filled and a number of retirements. March 1 is the first date the retirements roll out. Janet Waldron stated that this is where the structural gap comes in to play. You need all the information together to meet financial and institutional needs i.e., retirement incentives and contract that was ratified.

Discussion:
The conversation is difficult considering people who have taken retirement leaves nobody to teach the students. We have a new scoreboard at the cost of $800,000 for the NCAA, and a raise to the Athletic Director over what the last one made. That raise would have paid for an instructor. You can’t add students and reduce faculty.

President Ferguson said the scoreboard was made possible by a private donor.

How are you going to hire someone in March, searches take place in October and November?

Janet Waldron stated that it’s a difficult situation because the information is still being gathers. Decisions are being made as best they can with the limited information. The issues are very real and we’re trying to figure it out to resolve the largest structural gap since she came to UMaine.

Letting a lot of students show up in the fall and not get in to classes isn’t going to do much for retention.

Jim McClymer said the Board stated the gift was $750,000 and the additional $50,000 could come from gifts or E&G.

Have you figured out, for retirement, what the pay back period is, are there any internal calculations being done? The Board made clear that they’d like to see as many retirements as possible, is that the UMaine position as well?

President Ferguson stated it’s not the UMaine position, it’s more what the retirement incentive was as approved by the System and was part of the contract negotiations. UMaine doesn’t want a lot to retire but trying to manage those that take the incentive. That’s what we are trying to figure out.

Janet Waldron clarified the scoreboard issue, it is expected that it will all be gift money. There is always a line put in with E&G for unexpected issues that may come up but the full amount is expected to be from donation.

Discussion:
Mechanical Engineering has had enrollment growth over the years. Technical writing was split over three years by taking one credit each year; this strengthened the much needed communication component for students when they graduated. Because of enrollment increases this can no longer be done and math is also an issue with students not getting the class they need. An increase in an Athletic Directors salary is the salary of an instructor, “…that’s a big deal.”

Q.
Some say positions are going to the System. How do we prepare for that, how will this work with Signature Programs, Emerging and Foundational programs. This may mean a loss of decision-making.
A.
President Ferguson doesn’t see a move to centralize and has not been told or agreed to that. There is a move to better coordinate positions but not centralization.

Q.
How can departments move forward if positions are not filled?
A.
Fair to ask because it’s blurry. The BOT and System are trying to figure that out but there’s no clear path.

Q.
What is the Carrying Capacity of UMaine based on the number of students? If the university keeps growing, given infrastructure, how can there continue to be growth without additional resources?

Janet said, hoping UMaine would be in a position where revenue covers expenditures but it’s not. Not prepared for the compensation packages. There’s approx. $10-11 million in retro raises due and retirement incentives, which are significant. Enrollment Management, hard work being put in to increase enrollment, we anticipate no gap here with continued growth. Need to get through FY15 and then start to put in the kinds of positions needed.

That doesn’t answer the question, what is the optimal carrying capacity?

The Blue Sky Plan shot for 15,000. That’s not to say there is capacity or faculty to cover the 15,000. With some investments it would be possible.

Q.
What is the status of searches by the System such as IT personnel and other administrative staff? Are these suspended as well? If not, why?
A.
The System completely reorganized IT; there have been title changes after Administrative Reviews so searches were conducted for the new position titles. Several were existing staff with new titles, but really can’t speak to all that.

Q.
Regarding Coordinated Chair positions across the system, Michael Grillo asked if it’s required that his position be shared with other campuses, it will take away from research. At what point will faculty be in charge of curriculum? “It’s frightful”
A.
There is no plan on the table being discussed, don’t see faculty being distributed arbitrarily.

Q.
It’s concerning that positions with lack of capacity and other campuses that are fine. The flagship campus is short of lecturers in English or first two semesters of Calculus. So, we have first year students on their laptop watching a lecture from Fort Kent? They don’t come to this campus to sit in front of a laptop for their classes.
A.
The President said this is a threat but there is nothing currently on the table.

Discussion:
The Bridge Program, English is heavily involved but never invited to any meetings. Faculty is supposed to have control over curriculum but classes need to be eliminated because there’s no one to teach them.

Q.
Scott Dunning thanked the President and Janet, hoped they heard the concerns of the faculty as they see expenses and constraints on the faculty.
A.
President Ferguson thanked Scott for the statement and appreciated Scott knowing the position he and Janet are in. The state of the higher education system is in trouble and trying to work as a team to help that. We need to work together to define the path and lead the state to a better higher education system and resist the tension and threat to the high quality of what UMaine is and should be. FY 15 is a huge crisis to figure out right now.

Q.
Mike Scott asked about an email received regarding a new type of classroom but stating that a faculty member could only use the room once and then priority will be given to someone else. If faculty have to develop new material for the classroom environment but can only use it once, that’s discouraging. Is there faculty at the table to discuss these things?
A.
Jeff St. John said he believed the email stated that due to possible high interest in scheduling that classroom we’d like to see as many schedule it as possible. It was stated that it is preferred that one department doesn’t book the room semester after semester so others have an opportunity to use it.

Mike stated, things like this could be flushed out if there was a Classroom Committee working on it.

V.        Old Business

VI.       New Business

Resolution concerning Process for Updating the Faculty Handbook

Background

The Faculty Senate on April 16, 2003 by a vote of 48 for and 1 abstention adopted the handbook which has been available since that time on the senate web site.  This is the latest version of the faculty handbook, which was adopted by the senate and thus serves as the faculty handbook for the University of Maine.

The senate will use this version of the handbook as the basis for incremental updates.  The senate is further resolved that the handbook is in an electronic age a document which must serve as a master resource for policies on the University of Maine campus.  Therefore ongoing revisions will be tracked in a revision history and the senate will remain the controlling repository for supporting documents.

Resolution

The Senate approves the process by which the handbook dated April 2003 will be updated with sections approved as revisions become available.

Motion Approved

Motion to Number the Sections of the Faculty Handbook

Background

The Faculty Senate on April 16, 2003 by a vote of 48 for and 1 abstention adopted the handbook which has been available since that time on the senate web site.  The handbook states, “It is our intent that this will be an electronic document and that it will be updated once per semester by the CABC. “

In order to facilitate updates the handbook sections should be numbered with each section of substance in the chapters containing a subsection number.

Motion

To renumber the chapter now listed as a second chapter 4 as chapter 5 and to adopt the numbering system for the Faculty Handbook as follows:

Chapter 1: An Introduction to the University of Maine and the University of Maine System

1.1 The Roles of the University of Maine

1.2 Governance on Campus

1.3 The University of Maine Faculty Senate

1.4 Faculty Senate – Motion on Shared Governance – 1/29/2003

1.5 Appointment, Retention, Promotion, and Tenure

Chapter 2: Faculty Privileges, Professional Ethics, and Responsibilities

2.1 Academic Freedom

2.2 Free Speech and Assembly

2.3 Professional Ethics and Plagiarism

2.4 Research

2.5 Student Evaluation of the Faculty

2.6 Faculty Review of Administrators

Chapter 3: Course Instruction Procedure and Guidelines

3.1 Course/Instruction Procedures and Guidelines

3.1.1 Course Modifications and New Courses

3.1.2 Faculty Office Hours

3.1.3 Advising Students

3.1.4 Course Syllabi

3.1.5 Distribution of the Syllabus

3.2 Class Periods

3.2.1 Class List

3.2.2 Class Attendance

3.3 Disruptive Behavior

3.4 Cheating, Plagiarism, and Academic Integrity

3.5 Tests and Examinations

3.5.1 Types of Examinations

3.5.2 Examination Scheduling

3.5.3 Absence from Final Examinations

3.5.4 Machine Scoring of Examinations

3.5.5 Examination File

3.6 Grades and Grading

3.6.1 Approved Grading Symbols and Definitions

3.6.2 Grading Policies

3.6.3 Transfer Grades

3.7 Academic Achievement Awards

3.8 Textbooks and Academic Supplies

Chapter 4: Policies, Guidelines, and Procedures

4.1 Travel Policies

4.2 Cancellation of Classes Because of Weather

4.3 Alcohol and Drug Policies; Smoking Policy

4.4 Nondiscrimination Policy

4.5 Affirmative Action Policy

4.6 Harassment Policies

4.7 Hazing Policy.

4.8 Complaint Procedure..

4.9 Weapons Policy

4.10 Violence in the Workplace Policy

4.11 Whistleblower Protection Act

4.12 AIDS Policy

4.13 Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

4.14 Media Communications Policy

4.15 Pet Policy

Chapter 5: Helpful Information and Resources

5.1 Maine Card

5.2 Parking on Campus

5.3 Campus Mail

5.4 Telephone System

5.5 Faculty Pay Schedule

5.6 Childcare Facilities on Campus

5.7 University Housing

5.8  Auditoriums and Performance Spaces

5.8.1 Maine Center for the Arts/Hutchins Concert Hall

5.8.2 Other Auditoriums and Theaters

5.8.3 Minsky Music Recital Hall

5.8.4 Hauck Auditorium

5.8.5 Al Cyrus Pavilion Theater

5.9 Museum of Art

5.10 Recreational Facilities and Athletics

5.11 Grants, Contracts, and Extramural Funding

5.12 University IT

5.12.1 University of Maine Network for Education and Technology (UNET)

5.12.2 Department of Information Technologies (IT)

5.12.3 Networking Services

5.12.4 First Class

5.12.5 Computer Connection

5.12.6 Help Center

5.12.7 Faculty Development Center

5.12.8 Computer Repair Center

5.12.9 Other Information Technologies Services

5.13 Fogler Library

5.13.1 URSUS

5.13.2 Mariner

5.13.3 Library Checkout Privileges

5.13.4 Interlibrary Loan

5.14 Recycling

5.15 Presidential Achievement Awards

5.15.1 Presidential Research and Creative Achievement Award

5.15.2 Presidential Outstanding Teaching Award

5.15.3 Presidential Public Service Achievement Award

5.16 Center for Teaching Excellence

Motion Approved

 

Motion to Create a Chapter of the Faculty Handbook Devoted to Research and Scholarly Activity

Background

One of the defining characteristics of the University of Maine as the only research-intensive institution in Maine is the role of research in the life of the university. The current faculty handbook fails to separate research in a substantive manner in the document.

Motion

To modify the current organization of the handbook adding in a chapter 5 which considers issues related to research and scholarship by moving section 2.4 and 5.11 to become the new sections 5.1 and 5.2. The current chapter 5 will be renumbered as chapter 6. Existing sections 2.4 and 5.11 will be reserved for additional future content in those chapters of the handbook.

Motion Approved

Adjourned at 4:55 pm

Respectfully submitted

Kathryn Slott

 


Back to 2013-2014

Faculty Senate
Kimberly Junkins, Faculty Senate Office
205 East Annex, Orono, Maine 04469
Phone: (207) 581-1167 | Fax: (207) 581-2640
E-mail: kimberly.junkins@umit.maine.edu
The University of Maine
Orono, Maine 04469
207.581.1865