Faculty Senate

Memorandum to the President from Provost Paquette:

Purpose:

We received the attached memo from the Faculty Senate entitled, “Motions Approved at the University of April Open Senate Meeting.” There were three motions approved by the Faculty Senate at the April 15, 2026, meeting, received for action on April 21, 2026. The purpose of this memo is to provide my feedback and recommendations for your actions on SM 2610 and SM 261 land SM 2612. A response is due to the Faculty Senate by May 21, 2026.

Background/Context and Recommendation:

SM 2610: Motion to Amend SM 25007

This motion is based on the General Education Stewardship Committee’s detection of minor errors and infelicities of style in the original General Education motion passed in AY25-26 and the GESC’s recognition that slight adjustments to the motion will facilitate successful implementation. It is my recommendation that you accept the motion, which will enable the errors to be corrected and therefore advance the implementation of the General Education

SM 2611: Motion Recommending Adoption of Optional Syllabus Statements Regarding Recording in the Classroom and Course Content Accessibility

I recommend that we do not respond at this time to SM 2611, though we will of course do so prior to the May 21 deadline. The reason for this delay is due to the fact that the Faculty Senate is currently amending this motion based on feedback from the Office of General Counsel and Academic Affairs. The unexpected delay in the Title II compliance deadline also will require slight revision of the motion. Once the Faculty Senate has submitted the final revision, we can respond officially.

SM 2612: Resolution Regarding Continued Technology Access for Faculty Emeriti

This resolution seeks to ensure that emeriti faculty retain access not only to their e-mail accounts, but also to other forms of technology to which they had access prior to retirement. On the one hand, the nature of research and the reliance on technology has changed quickly and it is likely that our emeriti policy has not kept pace with these developments. On the other hand, this is a decision that UMS IT will have to make. I recommend that you accept the spirit of the motion (i.e., emeriti are important members of our community and commonly are research active), but pledge only to share the motion with UMS IT with your support. There may be security and costs, for example, about which we would be unaware. I would add that this motion is probably best addressed in the Faculty Governance Council, which meets regularly with Vice-Chancellor St. John, since it is relevant to all emeriti across UMS. The Faculty Senate may wish to consider that route as well.

Timeliness:

A response is due back to the Faculty Senate by May 21, 2026, but I ask that you consider my recommendation and respond as soon as possible.