skip page navigationOregon State University
OSU Home.|Calendar.|Find Someone.|Maps.|Site Index.

Faculty Senate

Faculty Senate » November 5, 1998

Faculty Senate Minutes

1998 No. 542
November 5, 1998

For All Faculty
The regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order on November 5, 1998, at 3:00 PM, in the LaSells Stewart Center by President Maggie Niess.

Meeting Summary
– Action Items: Apportionment Table; Category I Proposals: Master of Science in Applied Physics and renaming a degree program, B.S. in Interior Merchandising to B.S. in Interior Design; Post–Tenure Review Guideline Recommendations; Senate Nominations/ Elections; and Ballot Counting Committee [Motions 98–542–01 through 08]
– Discussion Item: Public Employees Bargaining Board (PEBB)
– Old Business: None
– New Business: None

Roll Call

Members Absent With Representation:
Anemaet, L. Maughan; Caspers, C. Rusk; Caughey, S. Francis; Coakley, K. Krane; Drexler, D. Herrmann; Henderson, D. Keszler; Leong, P. Bottomly; Marks, R. Rodriguez; Neumann, R. Tricker; Schowalter, D. Myrold; Sorte, K. Carpenter; Tate, D. McIntyre; Thies, P. Seimens; and Wander, M. Traber.

Members Absent Without Representation:
Bird, Biwan, Chambers, Cheeke, Cowles, DeKock, Elwood, Farnsworth, J. Field, K. Field, Foster, Gomez, Gross, Grunder, Hale, Hoogesteger, Hooker, Huyer, Jepson, Kerkvliet, Kesler, Kiem, Lajtha, Levine, Lomax, Longerbeam, Lowrie, Mallory–Smith, McCambridge, Mix, Pereira, Reed, Righetti, Sanford, Savage, and Yamada.

Faculty Senate Officers, Ex–Officios and Staff Present:
M. Niess, President; K. Williamson, President–Elect; A. Wilcox, Immediate Past President; R. Iltis, Parliamentarian; Ex–officios; R. Arnold and P. Lee; and V. Nunnemaker, Senate Administrative Assistant.

Guests of the Senate:
L. Burns, V. Douglas, S. Esbensen, A. Hashimoto, R. Landau, A. Messersmith, D.B. Nicodemus, J. Schuster, M.C. Wray, and D. Yunker


Approval of 1999 Apportionment Table
OSU Faculty FTE in the ranks of Instructor or above, including Professional Faculty, Research Associates, and all Faculty Research Assistants as of October 16, 1998, together with student credit hours apportioned to individual units, resulted in 23.71 FTE/Senator and 16,943.18 SCH/Senator. (Apportionment is based on 75% FTE and 25% SCH with a cap of 132 Senators.)

Motion 98–542–01 to approve the apportionment table passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

Category I Proposals
Bob Burton, Curriculum Council Chair, presented two Category I proposals for approval:
1) Master of Science in Applied Physics – This proposal contains no budgetary implications and is a redirection of the present program. There was no discussion. Motion 98–542–02 to approve this proposal passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
2) Renaming of a degree program: B.S. in Interior Merchandising to B.S. in Interior Design – The proposed name better reflects the program. There was no discussion. Motion 98–542–03 passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.

Task Force on Post–Tenure Review––Guideline Recommendations
Ken Krane, Task Force on Post–Tenure Review Chair, presented recommended guidelines to be included in the Faculty Handbook. A revised page 3 was distributed at the meeting. The guidelines were published in the June 1998 Senate agenda and not presented for approval until November to allow ample time for discussion by the OSU community and review by AAUP. Krane briefly outlined each proposed change to the document.

Krane noted that the local AAUP chapter reviewed and was supportive of the report, but suggested a number of changes to the guidelines. Some changes in the proposed guidelines reflect concerns expressed by both faculty and AAUP.

Senator Daley, Agricultural Sciences, felt that the system could be used to reward oneself and punish others for a zero sum gain.

Rubin Landau, representing AAUP views, stated that AAUP had not had an opportunity to review the revised guidelines and prepare detailed responses.

Senator Matzke, Science, questioned the time period concerning repeated negative reviews on page three. Krane responded that the task force deliberately left the time frame vague to give the unit latitude.

Senator Morris, Science, questioned peer reviews. Krane explained that, if approved, the guidelines would require a peer committee for the five–year review. However, it would be at the unit's discretion to determine the meaning of peer involvement at the annual review.

Senator Shor, Engineering, questioned whether a five–year review will be required for every tenured faculty member when the guidelines go into effect. Krane responded that this would be left to the individual units. Since tenured faculty are being reviewed annually in the first five years after being tenured and then evaluated every three years thereafter under the present system, the five–year cycle could try to be incorporated as closely as possible to the current system.

Senator Burton, Science, moved to postpone action on the guidelines until December to allow time for AAUP to review the revised recommendations; motion seconded.

Senator Coblentz, Agricultural Sciences, noted that the task force has been working on this for a very long time, he felt the document was excellent and was opposed to postponement since a review occurs every year.

Senator Daley did not like the document but felt that taking another month for additional review would not be harmful.

Landau noted that the national AAUP had been contacted for their input on the first draft and they would like an opportunity to do the same with the revisions. Krane responded that the AAUP recommendations were very detailed and the task force chose to adopt some of their recommendations and not others. The reason it was delayed until November was to give AAUP an opportunity to review the draft.

Senator Sayre, Liberal Arts, pointed out that, since the document states: The Faculty Senate will periodically review the effectiveness of the post–tenure review process, the Senate could approve the guidelines and revise them at any time.

Senator Manogue, Science, has a serious concern about rewording in the document regarding the mediation and grievance procedure and favored an additional review and postponement until December. Krane responded that he had conferred with the Legal Officer and the same mediation and grievance process would be in effect for reviews. Krane added that the present review of faculty outlined in the Faculty Handbook does not address the mediation and grievance process.

Several Senators spoke in support of delaying action until December; others spoke in support of not delaying with the understanding that review and changes could be made at any time.

Senator Fisk, Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences, thought that the document contained awkward wording in that some cases the dean is the unit head and felt this should be addressed. Krane noted that, for that reason, the document indicates the dean or some appropriate supervisor to allow a second level of faculty review. In the case of Fisk's unit, the Provost would be the second level of review.

Motion 98–542–05 to postpone action definitely until December on the Post–Tenure Review Guidelines passed by voice vote with some dissenting votes.

Faculty Senate Nominations/Elections
Tony Wilcox, Bylaws and Nominations Chair, presented the slate of nominees for elected positions:
* President–Elect – Robert Frank (Professor, English) and Gordon Matzke (Professor, Geosciences).
* Interinstitutional Faculty Senate – Steven Dodrill (Associate Professor, Extension & Experiment Station Communications) and Gary Tiedeman (Professor, Sociology).
* Executive Committee – Gary Beach (Professional Faculty, Academic Affairs); Robert Burton (Professor, Mathematics); Stella Coakley (Professor, Botany & Plant Pathology); Jack Drexler (Associate Professor, Management, Marketing and International Business); Sandie Franklin (Professional Faculty, Printing and Mailing Services); Pam Henderson (Professional Faculty, College of Forestry); Debbie Jimmerson (Professional Faculty, Mechanical Engineering); William Lunch (Professor, Political Science); Mark McCambridge (Professional Faculty, Business Services); Tom Plant (Associate Professor, Electrical & Computer Engineering); Bruce Sorte (Profes sional Faculty, Agricultural Sciences); and Dick Thies (Professor, Science).

There were no nominations from the floor for any position; the nominations for each position were closed by voice vote with one dissenting vote for President–Elect, motions 98–542–06 through 08.

Senator Daley was disturbed with the process of selecting the President–Elect and felt there should be more opportunity for input. Wilcox reminded Senators that the process explained last month included a call for nominations that resulted in a robust response from campus.

Election materials for President–Elect and IFS representative will be sent the week of November 9 to all eligible voters and the Executive Committee election will be determined by Senators during the December 3 Senate meeting.

Wilcox expressed appreciation from the committee to those who participated in the nomination process and to the candidates for their willingness to serve.

Ballot Counting Committee
Niess called for volunteers to count President–Elect and IFS ballots on December 2 at 11:00 AM. Those volunteering were: Barb McEwan, Molly Shor and Hans van der Mars; Tom Daniels is the alternate.


Public Employees Bargaining Board (PEBB)
Three individuals addressed the issue of changes in health benefits:

Lois Courtney, OSU Benefits Manager, explained that Blue Cross Plan 3 (affecting 300 OSU faculty), Qual Med and Regent HMO Oregon plans were eliminated beginning in 1999. In comparing Blue Cross Plans 2, 3 and the Co–pay, she noted the primary difference is that the co–pay has no deductible while Plan 3 has a $150 deductible. She mentioned a common misconception that the Corvallis Clinic is not a preferred provider, and was not under Plan 3.

In response to Senator Lunch, Liberal Arts, Courtney stated there are no pre–existing conditions during open enrollment.

Denise Yunker, OUS Benefits Manager, explained the composition of the PEBB Board and stated that she is representing OUS interests to the PEBB Board.

She noted that last fall PEBB advisory groups and discussion groups were established to gain input from each OUS campus concerning benefits. Chancellor Cox wrote a letter to PEBB in March indicating that higher education valued cash–back and opt–out options. In August Chancellor Cox and UO President Frohnmayer testified before the PEBB Board that the health plan is used for total compensation in faculty recruitment and retention.

Yunker indicated that many employees felt confused by the number of choices and that PEBB considered elimination options very carefully. PEBB determined that the benefit structure of Plan 3 was closely mimicked by two other plans. She also mentioned that cost had been increasing dramatically in Plan 3 while enrollment was decreasing.

Ken Krane, Physics, noted that the most popular plan was eliminated. He also pointed out that Plan 3 provided the most generous set of benefits for non– preferred provider coverage, which is needed when traveling outside the state. Yunker acknowledged recognition of that concern but, because of the cost, a large number of employees couldn't afford the plan. She mentioned that the elimination of Plan 3 was probably a bigger issue in higher education than any other group. With respect to the travel concern, Yunker indicated that consultant's who work with the PEBB Board didn't feel this was a problem since they can negotiate out–of–area coverage with all of the offered plans.

President–Elect Williamson, Engineering, questioned why Plan 3 subscribers weren't notified until the open enrollment period and asked if this method of notification would be repeated when other plans are canceled. Yunker stated that they found out in August that the plan changes were being made and most faculty were gone at that time. The logic was to send out notification close to the open enrollment period so subscriber's wouldn't put it aside and possibly lose it. Courtney indicated she had sent out a letter in September to those being affected at OSU.

Steve Davis, Faculty Economic Welfare and Retirement Committee Chair, explained that the benefit plan design process is moving quickly and he read a letter the committee is sending to the PEBB Board expressing their concerns about the changes.

Niess thanked the committee for their efforts and reported that she has been in contact with Kemble Yates, IFS President, who indicated that IFS is also considering providing input to the PEBB Board.


  • PEBB Materials – The agenda contained materials to help explain the changes in PEBB health plans.
  • nterinstitutional Faculty Senate – October IFS minutes were sent via e-mail.
  • AAUP Response to Post-Tenure Review Guidelines –– The OSU AAUP Chapter provided recommendations regarding the proposed guidelines on post–tenure review.


Provost Arnold reported on the following items:
1) Assessment of Teaching Task Force – Arnold has met with Niess to discuss the recommendations in the report. The first action step will be a discussion of the complete report with the Academic Deans. His responses to recommendations include:
a) The Provost will reiterate the policy of student assessment of teaching in each class every term;
b) Colleges and departments will be charged with the development of a set of survey questions, as described in the report;
c) Peer review guidelines will be designed for evaluative purposes by colleges and departments;
d) Colleges will develop a process used for evaluation of teaching that utilizes both student and peer assessment, to be submitted to the Provost for approval and consultation with the Promotion and Tenure and Advancement of Teaching Committees.
e) In response to establishing a .5 FTE coordinator position, given OSU's budget circumstance, the university is not in a position this fiscal year to do so. The Advancement of Teaching Committee will be asked to develop a position description, with a target of filling the position in the summer of 1999.
f) The Advancement of Teaching Committee is working on developing plans for a series of forums to create wider conversation about teaching excellence with the OSU community.

2) Budget Allocation Principles – A document was available outlining the new funding model, activities of the Budget Work Group and budget allocation principles developed by the group.

In response to Senator Seville, Business, questioning whether the OUS matrix was final, Arnold stated that it would never be final since it needs to be reviewed systematically.

3) Emergency Board Request Status – Materials were submitted for the November 19 and 20 Emergency Board meeting requesting funds to reflect substantial enrollment increases for OSU and OIT since both institutions exceeded their enrollment corridors. OIT's request is for $294,415 and OSU is requesting $3,271,845 for the current year. Arnold acknowledged the efforts of Associate Provost Hashimoto and Vice President Specter in compiling the information for the E–Board.


President Niess' report included the following items:

  • She has convened an Allocation Advisory Group to assist her in representing faculty perspectives on the University Internal Allocation Work Group.
  • In response to a request from the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate to endorse a specific process for nominating a faculty member to the OSBHE, Niess has asked the Bylaws and Nominations Committee to review the proposed process and provide a recommendation to the Senate. It is expected that nominations will be forwarded to IFS, via the OSU IFS representatives, by January 15, 1999. The proposed process will be presented in the form of a motion at the December meeting.
  • Niess is working with Kevin McCann to develop a resolution of support for the OUS budget as it is being presented to the legislature. The resolution will be provided to IFS for their consideration.
  • In response to many concerns with respect to the purchase of Microsoft products, Niess has appointed a Microsoft Task Force to prepare and present a position paper no later than the end of Winter term. Norm Lederman is chairing the task force.
  • As a result of the recommendations in the Information Services (IS) Task Force report, an Ad Hoc Information Services Committee has been established. The charges are to: review and provide input to IS policies and procedures, to consider the implementation of the recommendations, and to collaborate with IS, the Library and Instructional Development and Technology Committees and the Dean's Strategic Team on Computing to identify and articulate a vision for computing at OSU and to propose a comprehensive organizational and operational plan to assure a breadth of input from the OSU campus to IS long–range planning. Henry Sayre is chairing the committee.
  • She challenged all Senators to become active in moving higher education forward by becoming involved with budget discussions, sharing the PEBB information, and engaging faculty in their apportionment unit in these discussions.


There was no old business.


There was no new business.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:25 PM.

Respectfully submitted:

Vickie Nunnemaker
Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant