Faculty Senate Minutes
The regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order by President
Lynda Ciuffetti on May 8, 2008 in Peavy Auditorium.
Resolution of Sympathy
- Action Items: Resolution of Sympathy for Warren Suzuki; Category I Proposal - Initiation of a New Instructional Program Leading to the Religion and Culture Certificate in Philosophy; Standing Rules Revisions: Computing Resources Committee, Graduate Council, Research Council; Faculty Panels for Hearing Committees; and a Salary Resolution [Motion 08-631-01 through 07]
- Committee Report: Guidelines for the Student Evaluation Letter for Inclusion in the Promotion and Tenure Dossier
- Discussion Item: Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET)
President Ciuffetti presented the following Resolution of Sympathy; Senator Thompson, Agricultural Sciences moved approval of the resolution; motion 08-631-01 was seconded and approved by voice vote.
The Oregon State University Faculty Senate expresses its deepest sympathies to the family of Warren N. Suzuki upon his death on February 9, 2008. Warren joined the faculty in the College of Education in 1974. He distinguished himself in his field and was instrumental in the formation of the OSU Association of Faculty for the Advancement of People of Color.
Warren enthusiastically embraced both the challenges and pleasures in life. He enriched Oregon and Oregon State University during his 26 year tenure, and he truly will be missed.
Category I Proposals
John Lee, Curriculum Council Chair, presented a Category I proposal for Initiation of a New Instructional Program Leading to the Religion and Culture Certificate in Philosophy. The proposal has been approved by the Curriculum Council and Budgets and Fiscal Planning Committee; the Library holdings were also deemed to be adequate. Motion 08-631-02 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
Voting on the Category I proposal to Reorganize Administrative Units in the College of Business was postponed to the June Faculty Senate meeting.
Standing Rules Revisions
Mark Meyers, Committee on Committees chair, presented for approval proposed Standing Rules revisions to the following Faculty Senate Committees:
Faculty Panels for Hearing Committees
Computing Resources Committee - the proposed revisions deleted reference to a committee that no longer exists and formalized current practices by adding a reference to representation on the University Information Technology Committee. Motion 08-631-03 to approve the proposed revisions passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes or discussion.
- Graduate Council - the proposed revisions formalized current practices by indicating review and selection of award recipients and review of funding for graduate training and education programs. Motion 08-631-04 to approve the proposed revisions passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
- Research Council - the proposed revisions formalized current practices by deleting references to grant funding and alternate members; add references to Centers, Institutes and Programs and a conflict of interest policy; and increase membership to 15 members. Motion 08-631-05 to approve the proposed revisions passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
Every even-numbered year the Faculty Senate votes to elect members to the Faculty Panels for Hearing Committee which is only used when a faculty member is dismissed for cause and is not related to the faculty grievance process. Information about the panels and those who previously agreed to have their name placed on the ballot were linked to the agenda.
Nominations were accepted from the floor; those nominated and accepting nomination were: Deb Pence and Tony Wilcox; President Ciuffetti closed the nominations. Voting on the panels will occur at the June 12 Faculty Senate meeting.
President Ciuffetti presented background and requested approval of the below resolution urging the release of funds for the State Salary Package in June 2008:
Whereas, The 2007 Legislature established a State Salary Pool to enable state agencies to cover salary increases over the 2007-09 biennium; and
Whereas, legislative budget leaders decided in February to delay releasing the salary pool until after the June 2008 revenue forecast is available; and
Whereas not releasing the funds in June will reverse progress to increase funding for Oregon's public universities accomplished by the governor and legislature during the last legislative session; and
Whereas, OSU stands to lose nearly $12 million in state general funds if the funds are not released; and
Whereas OSU will be forced to begin making cuts in July 2008 in order meet these budget reductions; and
Whereas the last time the legislature imposed a budget reduction in the middle of the biennium, OSU was forced to eliminate classes and raise tuition; therefore be it
Resolved, That the Faculty Senate urges Governor Kulongoski and the Oregon Legislative Assembly to take the necessary steps to release the entire $125 million State Salary Package when the Legislative Emergency Board meets in June, 2008.
President Ciuffetti noted that if the funds are not released salaries will not be affected and cuts will be made to programs to self-fund the salaries.
Amendments to the last paragraph:
- Senator Pence, Engineering, suggested inserting "regardless of the June 2008 revenue forecast" between "State Salary Package" and "when."
- Senator Roberts, Liberal Arts, suggested adding "OSU" prior to "Faculty Senate."
Senator Thompson, Liberal Arts, moved to approve the two proposed amendments; motion seconded. Motion 08-631-07 to approve the two proposed amendments passed by voice vote.
Motion 08-631-06 to approve the amended resolution passed by voice vote. President Ciuffetti explained that a letter containing the resolution will be sent from her, and the ASOSU and possibly SEIU presidents urging the governor to release the funds for salaries.
Guidelines for the Student Evaluation Letter for Inclusion in the Promotion and Tenure Dossier
Roger Nielsen, Promotion and Tenure Committee Chair, presented the Guidelines for the Student Evaluation Letter for Inclusion in the Promotion and Tenure Dossier. Also linked is a PowerPoint presentation that provided background and context for the guidelines.
Senator Roberts questioned if the intent is that the letter from the P&T Committee includes a reference to the letters from the students. Nielsen responded that the P&T Committee should see the summary letter and that the tone of the letter will be communicated to the candidate. This will be part of the dossier construction guidelines but will not specifically be part of this document. Provost Randhawa noted that the letters written by the departmental committee and chair refer to the student input; it's important that the chair makes the case for teaching.
- Senator Gillies, Associated Faculty, questioned if the expectation is that student letters be vetted through legal. Nielsen responded that anything not signed is excluded; he will talk with Becky Johnson regarding the recommendation to chairs to vet letters through legal.
- Senator Valentine, Veterinary Medicine, questioned if the student input would be filtered through both the student committee and P&T Committee. Senator Gillies felt there was a risk of having a strong personality drive the process; Nielson responded that was the purpose of having a two-stage process. Senator Gillies requested adding something regarding strong personalities and teaching of different cultural values that may cause problems for some students.
- Straw vote - letters from recent but former students is a bad idea - no one opposed. About one-third of the Senators present were not comfortable with the proposed revisions. Students feel strongly that the letters are confidential.
- Senator Valls, Liberal Arts, suggested letting the candidate and committee have access to the summary letter.
- Senator Lee, Science, questioned what information the faculty actually receives regarding the content of the student letter. He felt it was important, in terms of external and student letters, what the candidate actually sees; it's important to spell it out.
- Tony Wilcox, Executive Committee, questioned both what access is given to the letters collected and the validity of representation of the letters. He also felt that the individual student comments would be lost with a summary letter. Nielsen responded that legal counsel can provide legalities.
- Next steps: Nielsen will consult with legal counsel for their perspective regarding the extent of the waiver. Vice Provost Becky Johnson noted that faculty have the option of not signing the waiver. There will be further discussion at the June Faculty Senate meeting; Senators were asked to send comments to Nielsen prior to June.
Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET)
President Ciuffetti lead a discussion regarding the responses received by Senators from constituents to two questions regarding the SET tool: 1) Would you favor the revision or replacement of the current SET? and 2) Since the OAR requires evaluation, would you favor shifting the evaluation of teaching to an assessment of learning?
The following responses to Question 1 were provided by Senators:
- Senator Pence - by a margin of 3 to 1, faculty would like to see the SET revamped
- Senator Semprini, Engineering - in regard to NSF grants and collaborative teaching, faculty felt that it is necessary to revise
- Carol Mallory-Smith, Executive Committee - by a margin of 3 to 1, faculty favored some modification or changes in the SET; concerns about what the alternate might be
- Senator Roberts noted that the form was originally revised to include a diversity question, which never happened. Ciuffetti hoped that the diversity question would be considered if the SET was again revised
- Senator Bailey, Forestry - by a margin of 3 to 1, faculty felt it's not worth the effort to revise the form which may result in something equally 'hateable'; they felt there are bigger things to work on
- Senator Trujillo, Liberal Arts - faculty were in favor of revisions
- Senator Roberts - Philosophy faculty agreed with Senator Bailey, but would also like to include to the mean
- College of Business faculty felt the form is not great, but there is no pressure to change
- Senator Stevens, Pharmacy - faculty were in favor of the current version, but would consider another proposal
- Stan Gregory, Agricultural Sciences - Fisheries and Wildlife faculty are interested in shifting toward outcome assessments
- Senator Chappell, Liberal Arts - most History faculty were disappointed with the current form and called it a disservice; she felt that the University Honors College evaluation form is better
- Senator Cardinal, Health and Human Sciences - 13 faculty felt that question one should be kept; others felt it should be revised
Responses to Question 2 included:
- Senator Roberts - Philosophy faculty were opposed to shifting to an assessment of learning
- Senator Mallory-Smith, Agricultural Sciences - faculty were adamantly opposed
- Senator Trujillo - faculty were in favor of shifting to an assessment of learning
- Senator Pyles, Forestry - Forest Engineering has been doing learning objectives since assessment began
- Senator Helle, Liberal Arts - English does some assessment of learning outcomes in an exit survey; fearful of legislature attaching funding to outcomes
- Senator Pence - faculty were split 50/50
- Senator Alexander, Student Affairs - learning environment is important to assess
- Senator Bailey - no strong call for change
- Senator Chappell - strong feelings to separate the two
- Senator Peters, Associated Faculty - new faculty would like some place to talk about attempts at learning outcomes
- Senator Cardinal - by a margin of 2 to 1, faculty were in favor of changing to an assessment of learning
President Ciuffetti asked Senators to send a summary of responses, including the number of respondents, to the Faculty Senate Office. The Executive Committee will review and discuss the responses and determine the next steps.
REPORT FROM AND DIALOG WITH THE PROVOST
Provost Sabah Randhawa's report included the following:
- The OUS Vice President for Strategic Planning is now the co-chair, with him, of the OUS Provost's Council. Randhawa proceeded to outline the duties of the Provost's Council.
- Regarding the April IFS conversation with the Chancellor:
- The OSBHE has not discussed the 2009-11 legislative session; the highest priority is the core teaching package, i.e., increased funding for programs and faculty salaries.
- The OSBHE considers requests for policy level packages; OSU's priorities are: 1) state-wide public services and 2) E-tech money.
- The OSBHE is focused on improving the educational base for the Portland area in terms of educational access and research opportunities. Beyond access, the emphasis is on life and health sciences in the Portland area. OSU is interested in moving the Pharmacy program to Portland.
- Facilities Services - there is still a backlog related to maintenance issues, but not due to a lack of effort - a memo dated March 21 indicated 2400 work orders; the priorities are for health and safety issues. Classroom renovations are also a priority. They recognize that needs on campus are immense and they are working on further improving communication with campus.
DIALOG WITH THE FACULTY SENATE PRESIDENT
President Ciuffetti's report included the following:
- Update from fall: A joint Faculty Senate and Academic Affairs ad hoc committee was appointed to review and suggest revisions to Post Tenure Review; recommendations for policy changes will be presented for approval at the June Senate meeting. The changes will be distributed to Senators to gather input from their constituents prior to the June meeting.
Senator Bell, Engineering, appealed for marshals for commencement; send him an email if interested. Volunteers for ushers are also needed.
Agricultural Sciences: Arp, Curtis, Dreher, Field, B. Jeter for Hartley, Mallory-Smith, Pereira, Sears, Thompson
Associated Faculty: deGeus, Dempsey, Fernandez, Gaines, Gillies, Greydanus, Halischak, T. Withrow-Robinson for Healey, Hemmer, Hoff, Leslie, Martorello, Nishihara, Pribyl
Business: Banyi, Caplan, Marshall, Neubam, Raja
Education: O'Malley, Ward
Engineering: Bell, Bose, Higginbotham, Hunter-Zaworski, Jovanovic, Pence, Plant, Porter, Semprini
Extension: None present
Forestry: Bailey, Freitag, Leavengood, Pyles, Vandetta, Zahler
Health & Human Sciences: Braverman, Cardinal, Friedman, Gunter, Porter
Liberal Arts: Chappell, S. Rom for Chavarria, Clough, Edwards, Gross, Helle, Lunch, Plaza, Roberts, Steel, Trujillo, Valls, Warner
Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences: Lerczak, Skyllingstad, A. White for Spitz, Ungerer
Pharmacy: Cui, Indira, Stevens
ROTC: None present
Science: Blair, Bogley, Escher, Fowler, Gable, Gitelman, Lee, Lesser, McIntyre, Parks, Thomann
Student Affairs: Alexander, Davis-White Eyes, D. Desilet for Etherton, P. Robinson for Larson, Vina, Yamamoto
Veterinary Medicine: Bird, Estill, Valentine
Agricultural Sciences: Anderson, Azarenko, Bolte, Gamroth, Goddik, Herring, Jepson, Ketchum, Parke, Rao, Selker
Associated Faculty: Averill, Bruce, Dorbolo, Gomez, Oldfield, Ross
Business: None absent
Education: None absent
Engineering: Huber, Momsen
Extension: Angima, Galloway, Godwin, McGrath, Tuck
Health & Human Sciences: Acock, Hofer, Hooker, McAlexander
Liberal Arts: Bernell, Daugherty, Henderson, Orosco
Library: None absent
Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences: Allan
Pharmacy: None absent
Science: Bruslind, Edwards, Haggerty, Lajtha, Mason, Rajagopal
Student Affairs: Thomas
Veterinary Medicine: None absent
S. Francis, R. Gupta, B. Johnson, K. Kuo, M. McCambridge, M. Meyers, P. Saunders
Faculty Senate Officers, Ex-officios and Staff Present:
Officers: L. Ciuffetti, president; P. Doescher, president-elect; J. Hale, past president
Ex-officio Voting Members: S. Gregory, S. Randhawa, E. Ray, T. Wilcox
Staff: V. Nunnemaker
The meeting was adjourned at 5:08 PM.
Respectfully submitted by:
Faculty Senate Staff