Faculty Senate

February 2, 2022

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
February 9, 2022  

Present: Henri Akono, Elizabeth Armstrong, David Barrett, David Batuski, Carla Billitteri, Amy Booth, Debbie Bouchard, Tim Bowden, Alice Bruce, Kristina Cammen, Ana Chatenever, Mauricio da Cunha, Paula Drewniany, Phil Dunn, Nuri Emanetoglu, Allison Gardner, Michael Grillo, Heather Hamlin, Andre Khalil, Amanda Klemmer, Eric Landis, Sara Lello, Sarah Lindahl, Margo Lukens (sabbatical), Ivan Manev, Derek Michaud, William Nichols, Deborah Rogers, Deborah Rooks-Ellis, Amber Roth, Michael Scott, Kathryn Slott, Rosemary Smith, Sean Smith, David Townsend, Peter Van Walsum, Matthew Wallhead, Tim Waring, Todd Zoroya, President Joan Ferrini-Mundy, John Volin Provost, Robert Dana, Emily Haddad, Jen Bonnet (PEAC) 

Absent: Donald Beith, Susan Bennett-Armistead, Catharine Biddle, Stephanie Burnett, Mark Haggerty, Emily Haigh, Sam Hanes, Anil Raj Kizha (class conflict), Natalie Machamer, Dmitri Markovitch, Renae Moran, Harlan Onsrud, Elizabeth Payne (sabbatical), Robert Rice, Deborah Saber, Mary “MJ” Sedlock, Mohsen Shahinpoor, VP Research Kody Varahramyan, Joanne Yestramski, Peter Altmann (CEAC), Hannah Holbrook (Grad Rep), Jacob Chaplin (Undergrad Rep) 

I would like to open our meeting today, by acknowledging our presence on Marsh Island, which is the traditional homeland of the Penobscot Nation, where issues of water and territorial rights, and encroachment upon sacred sites, are ongoing. This Penobscot homeland is connected to the other Wabanaki Tribal Nations—the Passamaquoddy, Maliseet, and Micmac—through kinship, alliances, and diplomacy, and the University of Maine recognizes that the Penobscot Nation and the other Wabanaki Tribal Nations are distinct, sovereign, legal and political entities with their own powers of self-governance and self-determination. As we conduct our business this afternoon, I invite us all to consider how we live and work on this land, and to attend carefully to the roles we play as elected faculty senators in shaping future relationships with the land and among people. 

I.  Welcome, Announcements and Comments
Kathryn Slott stated that the minutes can sometimes be difficult to compile, so she requested that people get back to her or Kim as soon as possible whenever clarification is requested. 

II.  Approval of Minutes
December 15, 2021
Approved  

III.  Announcements and Updates from the Administration 
President Ferrini-Mundy announced that UMaine has achieved an R1 Carnegie rating. 

Provost Volin said Joanne Yestramski could not attend the meeting today due to budget preparation for the BOT. There were budget hearings in January with over 20 hours spent on those hearings. Twenty-one meetings have been held with one more left. He said it was nice to meet with deans and major units to go through different scenarios and discuss how things are going with FY22 and thoughts on FY 23.  

There was a half-day Research Learning Experience (RLE) workshop for the entire UMaine System, co-hosted with UMaine Farmington. One hundred people from across the UMaine System attended the workshop with 50 from UMaine. 

There was a kickoff recently with faculty and staff from the College of Engineering and School of Computing and Information Science along with faculty in Physics and Astronomy, since they offer an Engineering Physics degree.  At the kickoff they discussed the search process for the new Dean of Engineering and Computing Information Sciences. Send Anna Hershel an email with names you may like to nominate or nominate yourself by Monday. They will be working with Storbeck (an external search firm) to help with the process. 

Q.  Do nominations get sent to Heather Hamlin?
A.  No, the names will be sent to the Provost’s Office and they will work Heather after that.

Q.  Can you clarify: normally when you request faculty names for committees, the request goes to Faculty Senate and then names are passed on. Is there a breakdown of representation to the committee?
A.  There will be representation with over 20 on the search committee to include tenure-track, tenure, salary, hourly, undergraduate, and graduate student representatives. We are making sure there is a diverse search committee that is open and transparent. The on-campus interviews will take place over two days for each finalist and will be as open as possible.
Q. Is Storbeck’s role to help facilitate the description of the position and solicitation of candidates?
A.  Using an external firm is to get the word out. They can help with a position description, but it is the committee that develops it. Similar to the search for the Graduate School of Business, the committee reached out to individuals across the US, and they did not rely only on a search firm. 

Q.  Is there already a description for the position or will the committee be developing it?
A.  The committee will be developing it. 

Q.  Is this a position for a new dean in addition to the current dean?
A.  Dean Humphrey is retiring so they will be hiring a new Dean of the Maine College of Engineering and Computing and Information Science (MCECIS).

Q.  Does that mean the new dean of MCECIS will replace the current dean and have additional duties to what the dean of the College of Engineering has now?
A.  Yes. 

Regarding the Organization Chart, President Ferrini-Mundy said she would like to give a little context. In 2017, or 2016, the BOT designated UMaine Machias as a Regional Campus of UMaine due to concern with enrollment numbers and wanting to keep the campus viable. Many did work back then to determine what it meant to have a Regional Campus. That work continued with student life, enrollment management and recruitment, and financials. It was not determined, at that point, what it meant on the academic side. There were still questions, so last spring Dean Haddad agreed to chair the committee which was a Regional Campus Taskforce. To be determined: will UMaine Machias become Black Bears or remain Clippers as they have been and how to deal with programs that are similar on each campus. There is chart revision that the Taskforce has produced. The next step will be to present that chart to the BOT. President Ferrini-Mundy said they first wanted the UMaine Faculty Senate to look at it and give thoughts, ask questions or give advice on the chart. 

Provost Volin said as people look at the chart, it is a “classic” Regional Campus type of organizational chart. The head of campus will be a Dean and Campus Director. That individual will sit on the President’s Cabinet and still represent UMaine Machias at the Chief Academic Officer Council (CAOC) at the UMaine System level. 

Q.  Is this chart revised from the one seen in September?
A.  Yes, slightly. 

Q.  Asking Emily Haddad, what are the changes?
A.  Mostly the “addition of dotted lines” to communicate expectations for coordination that were not direct report lines.

Comment: UMaine Machias was initially included in the UMaine Faculty Senate but they asked to be removed. Would they continue their own Faculty Assembly and keep their BOT Rep, or would they become part of the UMaine Faculty Senate structure? The chart approved by the taskforce has nothing about that; units still report to the dean in a conventional way. Determining how faculty organize themselves was not discussed.  

Q.  What plan is there on merging units or adding similar units?
A.  The taskforce was needed because of the academic pieces and faculty pieces. Both were subgroups within the taskforce. There are ad hoc groups currently looking program by program: sorting out overlapping programs, distinct programs or the same programs.

Comment: One group was working only on academic programs and that work continues even after the taskforce ended. A second group with two members from UMaine and two from UMaine Machias attempted to address the extent of distinction between programs or how programs could work together or not. There will be a set of recommendations in the spring. Program groups are only looking at programs – majors, minors, certificates – they are not looking at faculty. 

Comment: The concern is to make sure that faculty governance of units remains in place for faculty. 

Q.  There was supposed to be a comprehensive report, has it been distributed?
A.  Yes, the link was posted publicly. Emily Haddad will be sending a link to Dee. 

Q.  Is there any movement on creating Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) leadership? Several groups are trying to “find their own way” so knowing what is coming would be helpful. Mike Scott said he is on the council, but it would be helpful knowing what is coming.
A. The Council is the President’s group which is meant to keep an eye on that campus wide. The President’s DEI Council has set up four more meetings and has forty-five recommendations sent to different units across campus. They are now being put together from the most to the least urgent. The President’s Senior Advisor for Special Initiatives is doing the final organizing. The final recommendation will be to have a central function for DEI on campus followed by developing the campus vision.

IV.  Questions of the Administration 

Q.  To President Ferrini-Mundy, there was an email update you sent recently that praised Facilities Management (FM) on clearing sidewalks and parking lots. It has been treacherous. So maybe they are cleared around Alumni Hall, but where I park it is treacherous. Students are also having issues and complaining, not just older people. What is going on with Facilities Management?
A.  President Ferrini-Mundy said she feels people do their best, but the weather has made it difficult. She agreed, some areas are not good, but FM is doing the best they can with a short staff and with all the ice and snow. FM started using sand recently because salt was not working on the ice. This is a large campus so letting them know can help them hit areas missed. Dr. Dana said they are on campus 24 hours a day. They are working with a small staff; many are out due to Covid as well as vacant positions. On the recent snow day several FM staff were out moving snow working 15-hour days. He said he would share the concerns with FM. They do focus on high traffic areas like residence halls and the Union.

Comment: Every building has a five-gallon bucket to self-treat areas around buildings.  

Q.  Is it true there are over 130 open positions currently: is this true and has it ever been this high?
A.  Chris Lindstrom said it is probably more than that and across the board: FM, research, auxiliary, etc. 

Q.  Has it ever been that high?
A.  In 2020 700 positions were filled, regular and temporary. In 2021 400 were filled. Several open positions are temporary research positions from new growth. Dr. Dana said this is happening everywhere; there are 2,700 positions open at Maine Health, so they are in the same position.

V.  New Business
University of Maine Faculty Senate
Motion to Change the Bylaws for Article IV STANDING COMMITTEES; Section 3: UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
February 9, 2022  

Preamble: On August 3, 2021, elected members of the senate were sent a letter from the Faculty Senate President that included the task of comparing the Bylaws and Constitution revisions to our current Constitution and Bylaws posted on our Faculty Senate website. The Constitution and Bylaws Committee diligently worked over the past two academic years on needed revisions to our Constitution and Bylaws. The University Environment Committee recognized the need for revisions to the committee Bylaws, particularly pertaining to simplification of the committee name and clarification of what the committee’s function encompasses.  

The current Bylaws for Article IV STANDING COMMITTEES; Section 3: UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE are: 

A.  Function. The Committee on the University Environment reviews and makes recommendations to the Senate in matters relating to the academic and physical environments of the University including cultural programs, energy and resource conservation, sustainability, free speech and assembly, athletics, public relations, residential life, safety, facilities, and conduct.
B.  Membership. The members of the Committee on the University Environment are the Vice President for Student affairs and, as much as possible, one Faculty Senator from each college and Cooperative Extension, and an Undergraduate and Graduate Student Senator. 

Motion: The University Environment Committee motions to make the following changes to the Bylaws for Article VII STANDING COMMITTEES; Section 6: ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE. 

Section 6. ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 

A. Function. The Environment Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Senate in matters relating to the learning, workplace, and physical environments of the University. Issues may include but are not limited to: infrastructure; campus social climate and well-being, programs and services; and the environmental sustainability of University operations.
B. Membership. The members of the Environment Committee are represented as much as possible by at least one faculty senator from each college and Cooperative Extension. Although any University of Maine faculty member may serve on the committee, a majority of the voting members must be duly elected Faculty Senators. Ex-officio members of the committee include the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Vice President for Student Life, one undergraduate student government representative, and one graduate student government representative.

Comment: The reason University was in the title originally was to eliminate confusion from other environmental issues. If University is not there it can be viewed as the environment in general because environment means so many different things.
This was discussed several times and people felt that University is part of all the committees, but it is not in the name.

Vote: Approved
 

Faculty Senate
Motion to Endorse the University of Maine to Become a Member of the Age-Friendly University (AFU) Global Network
February 9, 2022  

As the flagship campus of the University of Maine System, The University of Maine explicitly acknowledges its responsibility to serve the state and larger community. UMaine’s curricula and associated resources should recognize the value of making its learning opportunities and programming available for the potential benefit of individuals across the life span in the larger community. This goal aligns with the Age-Friendly University’s (AFU) initiative. Older adult engagement and a philosophy of age inclusivity at UMaine will strengthen cross generational connections between younger students and older adults, a strategy that has additional value in combatting the all too common presence of ageism and age discrimination in our society. 

The University of Maine pursues a multitude of strategies to improve and expand one’s education and engagement in the academic environment, and the AFU designation serves to encourage that such an effort include extension to the older adult population. We recognize that for such an effort to be successful, it needs to be a collaborative process engaging faculty, staff, administration, students, community organizations, and Maine residents. It should be noted that becoming an AFU is congruent with the explicit goal of the state of Maine to be age inclusive (Maine became a designated age-friendly state in 2019). The Faculty Senate at the University of Maine recognizes the 10 principles of the Age-Friendly University Initiative and supports our inclusion in this global network of universities. The 10 principles are as follows: 

• Principle One: To encourage the participation of older adults in all the core activities of the university, including educational and research programs. 
• Principle Two: To promote personal and career development in the second half of life and to support those who wish to pursue second careers.
• Principle Three: To recognize the range of educational needs of older adults. 
• Principle Four: To promote intergenerational learning to facilitate the reciprocal sharing of expertise between learners of all ages. 
• Principle Five: To widen access to online educational opportunities for older adults to ensure a diversity of routes to participation. 
• Principle Six: To ensure that the university’s research agenda is informed by the needs of an aging society and to promote public discourse on how higher education can better respond to the varied interests and needs of older adults. Principle Seven: To increase the understanding of students of the longevity dividend and the increasing complexity and richness that aging brings to our society. 
• Principle Eight: To enhance access for older adults to the university’s range of health and wellness programs and its arts and cultural activities. 
• Principle Nine: To engage actively with the university’s own retired community. 
• Principle Ten: To ensure regular dialogue with organizations representing the interests of the aging population. 

Future Steps and Implications
Age-Friendly Universities can play a crucial role in reflecting how we view our rapidly expanding older adult population. Becoming an AFU signals the University of Maine’s commitment to recognizing the capacities, resources, assets, and productive aging needs of older Mainers at the same time that it supports the national movement aimed at reframing aging in a more positive light. A standard of collaboration and engagement across generations can increasingly be reflected at UMaine through innovative and age-inclusive programming. 

The next steps to take at UMaine in efforts to advance age-based diversity and inclusion include continuing to encourage increased older adult visibility and engagement in campus life and supporting expansion of educational and career development opportunities across the life span as well as aging-related research that aims to maximize health, well-being, and quality of life in the later years.  

Motion:
The University of Maine Faculty Senate endorses the proposal to become a member of the Age-Friendly Global Network.  

Q.  In the document, what does “productive aging” mean?
A.  Dee said he did not know because it was in the proposal from the committee.

Q.  Which committee did this come from?
A.  It came from an external group. 

Comments: Jessica Miller said this came from the Gerontological Association of America and it is endorsed by their academy. She said she views that statement to mean helping people in that age group be as productive as they want and grow as they want, being a supportive community for them. There are 100 universities involved. Mike Scott said he believed this came from the UMaine Center on Aging.  

Vote: Approved 

Faculty Senate
February 9, 2022
Motions to Change Bylaws 

Motion 1. To Change Bylaws (William Dee Nichols)
Preamble
On August 3, 2021, elected members of the senate were sent a letter from the Faculty Senate President that included the task of comparing the Bylaws and Constitution revisions to our current Constitution and Bylaws posted on our Faculty Senate web site. As previously noted in the welcoming letter, the Constitution and Bylaws Committee diligently worked over the past two academic years on needed revisions to our Constitution and Bylaws. After multiple meetings, including face to face, survey data, special meetings and multiple executive committee meetings, the Constitution and Bylaws committee completed their task and submitted revisions and edits to the President of the Faculty Senate. The August third letter included the revised attachments to the constitution and bylaws. Senators were requested to read all of the attached documents and then go to the Faculty Senate Webpage https://umaine.edu/facultysenate/ and compare.  

The first motion to the Faculty Senate Bylaws section is included below and was tabled at the 09-22-2021 Full Senate Meeting until the revisions to the Constitution were passed and approved by the Chancellor.  

Proposed Amendment to Bylaws of the Faculty Senate
Article I: The revised section was previously mentioned under the heading of Article II Committee Membership. The Constitution and Bylaws Committee felt that it should be moved to the front of the Bylaws as a new first Article. The justification was to provide a better flow and context to the Bylaws. It was also added to provide a consistent definition of an elected Faculty Senate Member to match Article IV of the Constitution on Membership. 

Other than relocating the description of membership the only other changes were to add the term Full time to section (e) lecturers and Instructors. The committee also added (g) to acknowledge College Bylaws and those definitions of full-time faculty.  

Article II: was also added for consistency with the Constitution, to reflect current practices, and to improve the overall flow of the Bylaws. 

Article III: was previously Article I. The committee recommended moving the representative to the Board of Trustees to a separate section. In addition, we clarified the election process and made consistent with other portions of the Constitution and Bylaws as well as current practices. The Committee added the following: 

In a process overseen by members of the Committee on Committees in conjunction with the Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant. The rest remains the same. 

Article IV: The committee pulled out the BOT section from Election of Officers and gave it a new article of its own. The wording is consistent with previous document. 

Article V: is also new and will be voted on at a later time upon ratification of the council. While the Faculty Governance Council has yet to be ratified by the Faculty Senate, it is a newly elected Senate position once the charge of the council has been ratified it will need to be added. The wording is consistent with the BOT election as described in Article IV. 

Article VI: was previously Article II and has been renumbered. The committee deleted the word new from the first sentence as that was confusing. The committee also added the words of Faculty Senate to the third sentence to clarify that it was not the president of the university. The committee also added the part in consultation with the chairperson of the Committee on Committees. The committee did this for consistency with our documents. The committee also rearranged parliamentarian so that the committee membership and chair of the committees would be together. The committee also added the following: Except as otherwise noted, the chair and the majority of members of each committee must be elected members of the Faculty Senate. Committees may have co-chairs who may or may not be Senators. Co-chairs serve at the discretion of the Senate President and on the advice of the committee. Senators may serve on multiple committees. 

Therefore, the Constitution and Bylaws Committee makes the motion to the University of Maine Faculty Senate to make the following changes to Article I- Article VI of our Bylaws to read as follows:  

ARTICLE I: DEFINITION OF AN ELECTED FACULTY SENATE MEMBER (See Constitution, Article IV Membership):
Preamble: voting/non-voting 

For the purposes of the Faculty Senate as referenced in the Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws, a faculty member shall be defined as any of the following: 

1. Tenured or tenure track faculty member who have been on the faculty for at least two years.
2. Research faculty member with an academic appointment.
3. Cooperative Extension faculty member, continuing contract or continuing contract track.
4. Full time faculty members at any rank.
5. Full time Lecturers and Instructors.
6. Directors and Department Chairs who are also full-time faculty members and meet all of these criteria: 1. Program offers a degree, major or concentration, 2. Program has full time faculty members, other than the director, and the director is engaged in teaching, scholarship, and service., 3. Faculty members in the program engage in shared governance. In essence, an eligible director should be accountable to the faculty, and treated as a chair by the University.
7. Definitions of what constitutes a full-time faculty member may be found in College Bylaws as well.

ARTICLE II: FACULTY SENATE NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS (See Constitution, Article IV Membership):
The number of full-time members of each college shall be determined by the dean of that college in consultation with the sitting president of the Faculty Senate. Each college is then notified in late February, or early March, of the number of seats they currently have in Faculty Senate and the number of terms expiring. The college solicits nominations from their faculty, holds an election and notifies Faculty Senate the names of those that have been elected. 

ARTICLE III: ELECTION OF SENATE OFFICERS
At the March meeting of the Faculty Senate, the Committee on Committees shall present preferably at least two candidates for President, Vice President, and Secretary. The agenda for the April meeting shall include the names of those nominated. There shall be an opportunity for nominations from the floor at the time of the election in April. In a process overseen by members of the Committee on Committees in conjunction with the Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant, each office shall be voted on separately by secret ballot, where there is a contest, and a majority of the votes cast shall be necessary for election. In the event that no candidate receives a majority, a second vote shall be taken between the two candidates receiving the most votes in the initial balloting. 

In the event that the President’s office becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the term, the Vice-President shall become President. In the event the Vice President’s office becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the term, the Senate shall hold a special election. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Senate, the President shall inform the members of the vacancy, ask the Committee on Committees to secure nominations, and set the time for the election at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the full Senate. At the time of election, the procedure shall be as outlined at the beginning of this paragraph section. In the event the Secretary’s office becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the term, the President shall, in consultation with the Executive Committee, appoint a replacement to serve the remainder of the term. 

ARTICLE IV: ELECTION OF FACULTY REPRESENTATIVE TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
The Faculty Representative to the Board of Trustees shall hold a position as a voting member of the Faculty Senate. The term of office shall be two years and the elected member can serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. Any full-time tenure-track or continuing appointment faculty member, who has been on the University of Maine faculty for at least two years, is eligible for election to this position. The newly elected representative shall begin their duties on July 1 following their election. 

At the March meeting of the Faculty Senate prior to the expiration of the representative’s term, the Committee on Committees shall present preferably at least two candidates for the Board of Trustees Representative. The agenda for the April meeting shall include the names of those nominated. There shall be an opportunity for nominations from the floor at the time of the election in April. Voting, overseen by members of the Committee on Committees in conjunction with the Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant, shall be by secret ballot, where there is a contest, and a majority of the votes cast shall be necessary for election. In the event that no candidate receives a majority, a second vote shall be taken between the two highest candidates. 

In the event that the position of the Board of Trustees Representative becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the term, the Senate shall hold a special election. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Senate, the President shall inform the members of the vacancy, ask the Committee on Committees to secure nominations, and set the time for the election at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the full Senate. At the time of election, the procedure shall be as outlined at the beginning of this section. 

ARTICLE V: ELECTION OF FACULTY REPRESENTATIVE TO SYSTEM LEVEL FACULTY GOVERANCE COUNCIL 

The Faculty Representative to the Faculty Governance Council shall hold a position as a voting member of the Faculty Senate. The term of office shall be three years and the elected member can serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. Any full-time tenure-track or continuing appointment faculty member, who has been on the University of Maine faculty for at least two years, is eligible for election to this position. The newly elected representative shall begin their duties on July 1 following their election. At the March meeting of the Faculty Senate prior to the expiration of the representative’s term, the Committee on Committees shall present preferably at least two candidates for the Faculty Governance Council Representative. The agenda for the April meeting shall include the names of those nominated. There shall be an opportunity for nominations from the floor at the time of the election in April. Voting, overseen by 

members of the Committee on Committees in conjunction with the Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant, shall be by secret ballot, where there is a contest, and a majority of the votes cast shall be necessary for election. If no candidate receives a majority, a second vote shall be taken between the two highest candidates. 

In the event that the position of the Faculty Governance Council Representative becomes vacant prior to the expiration of the term, the Senate shall hold a special election. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Senate, the President shall inform the members of the vacancy, ask the Committee on Committees to secure nominations, and set the time for the election at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the full Senate. At the time of election, the procedure shall be as outlined at the beginning of this section. 

ARTICLE VI: COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The President of the Senate shall designate the Chairperson of the Committee on Committees. The Committee on Committees, except as otherwise noted, shall make recommendations to the President of the Senate for all faculty members of each standing committee. The President of Faculty Senate, in consultation with the chairperson of the Committee on Committees shall appoint the parliamentarian, the members of each standing committee, and the chair of each committee, who serves at the pleasure of the Faculty Senate President. Except as otherwise noted, the chair and the majority of members of each committee must be elected members of the Faculty Senate. Committees may have co-chairs who may or may not be Senators. Co-chairs serve at the discretion of the Senate President and on the advice of the committee. Senators may serve on multiple committees. Ex officio members, where specified in the composition of a committee, shall have all rights of membership. The President shall be an ex officio member of each standing committee. To ensure that each College is represented on the Executive Committee, the President may appoint members to serve “at large” on the Executive Committee. 

Vote: Approved 

VI.  Committee Reports
BOT – Mike Scott
The last BOT meeting was on January 24. They discussed the decline in college eligible students in the next 10-20 years. It was also announced that President Ferrini-Mundy was granted tenure in math. North Stevens Hall was renamed the “Karen L. Boudreau, Esq. Hall” (formal designated name) and “Boudreau Hall” (common name). President Ferrini-Mundy said she is an alumna and an accomplished attorney that made a generous donation. 

There is a new policy, 315, regarding approval to name programs. There had been a policy for permission regarding buildings but not academic units. 

Comments: There were conversations at the Executive Committee meeting about it being a new proposal for naming. There is an attachment, so please read it since it is on the FGC agenda for Tuesday. Forward comments to Mike, Dee, Ivan or David.  

Ivan said when he looked at the language he thought “consultation with appropriate campus community” should be more explicit. He had some wording changes to suggest. 

Q.  It seems like programs can be named after a benefactor. Does that apply to any renaming that has to go to the BOT and not campus?
A.  President Ferrini-Mundy said she did not know for sure but thought so. She said some may be just information items for the BOT.

Comments: Years ago, to be a School, you needed BOT approval. There may need to be clarification. Provost Volin thought if you want to change to a School, it already needs to go to BOT. He took it that this policy is for naming. You could honor someone by naming a degree or program without a donation; most donations do not name a program. 

Comment: Dee said if anyone has input to let him know.  

Academic Affairs – Michael Grillo
There was a meeting on the 19th of January and the committee continues to look at student success and their majors. They are looking at Gen Eds in departments with higher turnover. Is the turnover from students that came late or those that leave a program. They have agreed to do a survey which is in the process. 

Another topic is faculty use of textbooks they produce themselves. There is already a policy that states there is a review process, using a peer review. It was written before online publication came out. They may want to add something about instructional materials that are used by others in the field and have been through a peer review process. There was also a conversation regarding faculty representation on software committees: there seem to be several IT councils. Michael had a discussion with Todd Zoroya and he said there is not great communication when changes are made. 

The committee may bring bylaws changes to include a graduate student. 

Q.  Dee asked the provost if the Tophat issue of faculty using their own text for profit was on their radar?
A.  He said he was aware of it.

Gen Ed – Subcommittee of Academic Affairs – Sam Hanes 
Forums took place and they are compiling information to share with Faculty Senate in March. The committee would like to have 30 minutes at an elected members meeting and at a full Senate meeting to share Phase I. 

Constitution & Bylaws – Amanda Klemmer & Kathryn Slott
No report.  

Research & Scholarship – Sean Smith    
The committee met last week with seven topics discussed.   

1) R1 Classification: The committee discussed interest in finding out about the relation between R1 Classification and operations/accomplishments at the UMaine System level, now and in the future. The committee would also like to learn more about the future expectations for sustainability of the R1 classification and related productivity and funding requirements that will be necessary. Expansion of funding for technical support staff, research staff, and post docs that we have been informed are part of the R1 Classification considerations are of particular interest, as well as support for facilities, shared facilities, and safety in those facilities with plans for more undergraduate research experiences. A key question is “How will targeting of research support be prioritized relative to the R1 Classification goal?” 

2) Shared Services: The committee is continuing dialogue about shared services with interest in receiving updates from the administration. Topics of particular interest include plans for shared facilities (e.g., labs), centralization of IT services, ORA obligations to other campuses, relation of R1 Classification to the UMaine System, and overall implications of shared services to research and administration costs and funding.  

3) Temporary Hires:  The committee discussed following up with the administration on the procedures in place for hiring temporary positions to find out the status of administrative processes being used this summer and any streamlining efforts that have been initiated. 

4) Budget Conditions: The committee is interested in finding out about how the upcoming budget shortfall might affect research activities and targeting of support for maintenance of the R1 classification. Two things that came up were details of funding and the faculty survey that listed productivity issues. The committee is interested in a breakdown – only a trend was give – and how that breakdown relates to the progress for productivity for individual faculty.  

5) Post doc Costs: Constraints in hiring post docs were brought up in the meeting with relation to the indirect charges that make the cost prohibitively high. Some estimates indicate that post docs now cost from $100,000 to $125,000, above the amount offered by some funding sources. There is interest in finding solutions to this problem, particularly given the consideration of post doc positions in the R1 Classification reviews.
6) Pandemic Survey: Analysis of pandemic survey responses have led to an educational journal article and will be presented at a conference this spring. Asli Sezen-Barrie will attend a Faculty Senate meeting on Feb. 23 to discuss survey outcomes. 

7) Other items: a) The committee is exploring the idea of a new survey for research capacity, including facilities, funding support, and technical staff. b) Concerns over outages affecting lab facilities were also discussed and the possibilities for backup power sources is a topic of interest. c) The possibility of a “Senior RLE” was introduced in response to the Faculty Senate Agenda item regarding Age Friendly University commitments at UMaine.  

Q.  President Ferrini-Mundy said she appreciated the issues and wondered if they could set up a meeting. One item missing is research compliance and maybe put that on the list.
A.  Yes

Finance & Institutional Planning – Mauricio da Cunha & Mike Scott
The committee will meet with the administration next week. There was a meeting with the Provost and CFO a couple of weeks ago. Provost Volin said there is a draft report from the survey. They also discussed the possibly of changing the dates of budget hearings allowing FIPCE to look at some of the items that go into the budget.  

University Environment – Amanda Klemmer
The report from the Zero Carbon Subcommittee is moving ahead. 

There is a website planned and they are still looking for input on the white paper. The next stage, this week, is to send it to academic units for input. 

Q.  It was mentioned in the white paper that some motions were passed before, where can I find those?
A.  There is a long commitment of the university, multiple administrations and presidents.

Comment: Someone said they thought there were motions passed before. It was stated that the motions should be on the Faculty Senate webpage under Motions.  

Service & Outreach – Debbie Saber
In December 2021 the committee found that ongoing, comprehensive reporting was not being conducted across all colleges, schools, and departments. In January 2022, the committee met with Jessica Miller and learned that the University of Maine is working to create a service and outreach “dashboard” which will include statistical data and information about electronic digital badging. However, a comprehensive list with a schedule of service and outreach programs may not be provided.

We are preparing a motion to request a comprehensive repository with Outreach Programs be developed and maintained to showcase all of our university efforts. The repository should be easily accessible to faculty, staff, students, and the community through our UMaine website.  

Committee on Committees – Heather Hamlin
The only thing currently, nominations for Faculty Senate Officers are needed for the upcoming elections. It is not necessary for someone to be a senator.  

Q.  When is the election?
A.  At the April full senate meeting. 

Program Creation & Reorganization Review – David Townsend
The MCECIS Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), David said he did not bring it forward because it is not under this committee’s jurisdiction. It sounds like this could be a busy committee if there are adjustments to programs with UMaine Machias.  

Q.  Should we expect proposals with changes?
A.  Emily Haddad responded that it was unlikely that it would happen this spring. 

Dee asked that if senators are asked to participate in PCRRC, they do. It can be busy but for a short amount of time.  

It appears these need to go to the FGC first and then sent to the appropriate campuses for review. So, a proposal for MCECIS cannot be reviewed by this PCRRC. Dee said those two things happen at the same time. The Intent to Plan goes to the Chief Academic Officers; the MOU was not an Intent to Plan. The PCRRC can have conversations knowing that it is coming, same with FGC. David said it seems like the first step is coordinating between campuses, then it would go to committees. 

Provost Volin said the idea of the MOU was for Faculty Senate to review it. It will end up at the BOT.  

Intent to Plan needs to come to Faculty Senate, and none have come in this year. Mike Scott said there have been several of them, but they have not been forwarded to Senate. Provost Volin said he gets them and then moves them forward, there is no action at that point. It was stated that they should go to the Faculty Senate president from the administration as a heads up. The provost said he would do that from now on but there seems to be some confusion. Also, multi-campus proposals should go to the FGC and not be reviewed until the campuses review it. Provost Volin said the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee with Sam Hanes as co-chair, that that is where it was sent? Mike Scott said the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee is not part of the Faculty Senate. Provost Volin thought that was a committee of Faculty Senate so said from now on he would forward them to Senate.  

David said the process for creating a cross-campus degree program is not clear. Dee said they would discuss that at the FGC meeting next week.  

Library Committee – Deborah Rogers & Robert Rice 
No report. 

Faculty Information Technology Committee – Todd Zoroya
A task group is currently assigned with developing processes and procedures for research computing purchases. I asked for a faculty member to be added to that group. I heard back and they did add a faculty member. 

Elected Members Committee – Ad Hoc System Shared Governance – Ivan Manev
The Faculty Governance Council (FGC) meeting is next week so more to report at the next meeting. 

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion – M.J. Sedlock
To Dee from MJ:
The committee is working on pronouns to be added to directory information on MaineStreet. She would like to connect with Todd Zoroya and the Technology committee as a starting point, perhaps.

They are creating pathways and incentives for DEI professional development amongst faculty and staff. She said she got busy heading into winter break and failed to follow up on setting meetings about this with Robert Dana and Jessica Miller but will be recommitting to work on this topic next week. 

Reports of Faculty Members on Committees of the Administration – Heather Hamlin
Amanda Klemmer said she has been meeting as part of a subcommittee for partner accommodations and part of the Women in STEM group. They have made progress on the main goal of outlining partner accommodation and what the need is.  

Dee said he is on the commencement committee and marshals are still needed. Please let Heather Hamlin know if you can help. 

Q.  Is commencement outdoors or what will it look like?
A.  Jessica Miller said there will be a traditional in-person commencement. Sunday, of that weekend, the classes from 2020 and 2021 will be invited back for a traditional commencement. All ceremonies will be indoors.

Friday is the Graduate ceremony.  

VII.  Old Business
None. 

Adjourned 4:50 pm  

Respectfully submitted,
Kathryn Slott  

Prepared by Kim Junkins