The regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order on January 6, 2000 at 2:06 PM, in the LaSells Stewart Center by President Kenneth Williamson. Corrections to the minutes of December 1999 were made by Senator Brooks related to the discussion of final exams: he replied to the comment that semester schools have the same number of courses as OSU during finals week and therefore that point is not relevant. Brooks also replied to the comment that classrooms might be a constraint is also not relevant as the classes are offered every week during the term and students are in each class for only one-hour and fifty minutes during finals, significantly less than the class time the other nine weeks.
– Special Report: Accreditation, A. Hashimoto
– Action Items: Installation of Elected Officials and Approval of Parliamentarian
– Discussion Item: Telecommunications, C. Pederson
– New Business: Banner Concerns
Members Absent Without Representation:
Arp, Barth, Braker, Breen, Carson, Cook, deGeus, Drexler, Gardner, Gregory, Gross, Hamm, Henthorne, Jepson, Kerkvliet, Kesler, Krause, Mallory-Smith, Mix, Peters, Powelson, Raja, Samelson, Strik, Trehu, Tynon, and J. White.
Faculty Senate Officers, Ex-Officios and Staff Present:
G. Matzke, President; H. Sayre, President-Elect; K. Williamson, Immediate Past President; R. Iltis, Parliamentarian; and V. Nunnemaker, Senate Administrative Assistant.
Guests of the Senate:
G. Beach, L. Burns, I. Delson, A. Hashimoto, N. Hoffman, and T. White.
President Williamson began recapping 1999 by thanking the OSU faculty and Faculty Senate for supporting him during the past year and noting that he has truly enjoyed serving as Faculty Senate President. Significant issues brought before the Senate during his term included: 1) DPD issues and funding, and diversity issues – a DPD task force will come forward this year with recommendations regarding the direction of the program; 2) athletics funding – a task force will also present a report this year; and 3) developing a budget allocation model that would support the legislative funding model.
President Risser's goals for OSU (Compelling Learning Experience, the State is Our Campus, and Top Tier University) are now guiding the budget process and will guide OSU's future. Williamson noted that President Risser's vision for OSU includes: becoming the largest university in the state, becoming the first choice for in-state students, to be recognized as the best funded and top research programs, to be successful in athletics, and to be known as having the widest reaching outreach programs in the State of Oregon – including not only Extension, but also distance education. Williamson felt that the challenge for faculty governance is to determine how to participate in this vision since it will require significant change.
Important future faculty issues include: 1) enrollment; 2) budget allocation; 3) funding levels and selective elimination; and 4) faculty salaries.
On the issue of the best way for faculty concerns to be heard, Williamson called on faculty to ‘stop whining’! He acknowledged that there is good reason to whine but, to be heard, faculty need to speak directly and be a participator in the entire educational system.
OSU can be proud of its faculty and Faculty Senate for all that is done, particularly when accomplished under difficult situations. There is general agreement across the state that OSU has the finest Faculty Senate and finest faculty governance anywhere in the State of Oregon. OSU's faculty governance also ranks at the top in the eyes of national organizations.
Williamson thanked the Executive Committee members and Vickie Nunnemaker for their assistance and support during the past year.
Gordon Matzke was installed as the 23rd Faculty Senate President by Kenneth Williamson. Matzke presented Williamson with a Myrtlewood plaque on behalf of the Senate that read:
Pederson explained that the excess earnings were a direct result of improved fiscal management by Shay Dakin, Telecommunication Services Director, and a drop in wholesale long-distance telephone rates. About $1 million in savings came from the long-distance rates and the remainder was a result of Dakin's aggressive management, which also resulted in increased productivity. As allowed by federal guidelines, the excess money could be reinvested or refunded. The choice was to reinvest in campus-wide telecommunication voice/video/data projects.
Although the long-distance rates dropped, departments continued to be charged the original, higher rate. Information Services felt this was an opportunity to make desperately needed investments to enable them to continue to make available basic telecommunications and Internet service to the campus. Although units are not being charged the lowest rates available, they are being charged 90 percent of AT&T's prime time rate and 80 percent after 6:00 PM.
Pederson explained that both Internet bandwidth demand and central Web server activity has increased 500 percent. The university currently allocates $150,000 for central Web costs which have risen from $50,000 to more than $450,000 per year. The shortfall was requested but funding was not available from the university and is being taken from other areas in Information Services. Due to increased costs, Information Services cannot meet their debt payment or 2 percent hold-back. Since Information Services is a self-funded account, they are required by the university to put money into a depreciation reserve. Pederson noted that the State Emergency Board may offer some relief.
Information Services is currently undergoing a telecommunications rate study to determine appropriate rates. The short term policy is to maintain current rates and invest the excess, but noted that a long-term policy would address equitable funding of all Internet and Network Services expenses. Pederson welcomes input on the long-term policy discussion.
Pederson also requested university input on the following Telecommunications/Network Services joint projects totaling $1,118,500:
1. Digital Satellite Up-link and Facilities Remodel, $155,000: November 1999 through YTBD – Includes remodeling of the former Entomology Machine Shop to house digital and analog control equipment.
2. Modem Pool Relocation, Upgrade and Monthly Service Cost, $165,000: September 1999 through February 2000 (with monthly service cost through June 2000) – Interim solution to relocate, reconfigure, and upgrade modem pool from 28.8 to 56 KB.
3. Core Network Backbone Equipment and Services, $275,500: July 1999 through June 2000 – Upgrade capacity and capability of campus network backbone; upgrade systems supporting e-mail, news, ftp, listserv, etc.; and provide funding for increased bandwidth.
4. Network Environment and Security Improvements, $50,000: Nov. 1999 through February 2000 – Improvements to upgrade central network/computer room.
5. Acquire Network Test Equipment, $25,000: Purchased November 1999 – New test equipment to work with new broadband circuits.
6. Campus Network Inventory, $72,000: January 2000 through February 2000 – Audit of campus cable infrastructure to determine quality and condition which will assist in establishing a priority list of campus rewiring projects.
7. Residence Hall Rewire, $259,000: July 1999 through June 2000 – Wire each dorm room with one voice jack, two data jacks, and one cable TV jack; equip each of the Intermediate Distribution Facilities with new 3rd generation hubs and a switch with 100-Mb fiber uplink to the OSU Network.
8. Implement Inventory Program, $17,000: December 1999 through March 2000 – Enables Telecommunications and the Residence Hall Computer Network to better track and manage their inventory.
9. Rewire Kerr Administration Building, $100,000 – Start and Completion TBD – The main distribution cable must be replaced to eliminate required frequent repairs.
In closing, Pederson acknowledged the efforts of Shay Dakin and Jim Corbett.
Andy Hashimoto, Associate Provost for Academic Affairs, outlined the accreditation effort for the University, which is required every ten years. The accreditation visit by the Commission on Colleges will be April 18-20, 2001. Hashimoto will be providing leadership and oversight of the total process.
The purposes of accreditation are:
A. To provide an opportunity for self-assessment on a periodic basis.
B. To assess the extent to which the institution meets established standards.
C. To foster improvement.
D. To publicly identify institutions that are achieving their Mission and associated goals.
The steps in the accreditation process include:
1. The institution describes and studies itself in a self-study process.
2. An evaluation committee of peers visits the institution to: a) validate the self-study report; and b) prepare a report to the institution and the Commission on Colleges.
3. The institution responds formally to the evaluation committee report with acceptance or corrections of errors of fact.
4. The Commission reviews the self-study, the committee report, and the recommendation of the committee and decides on appropriate action.
The Standards that OSU will be evaluated on are:
1. Institutional Mission and Goals
2. Educational Programs
5. Library and Information Resources
6. Governance and Administration
8. Physical Resources
9. Institutional Integrity
1. Analyze the resources and effectiveness of the institution in fulfilling its mission.
2. Demonstrate that the performance, competence, and the achievements of students who complete programs are commensurate with the certificates, diplomas, and degrees awarded by the institution.
3. Appraise and analyze the relationship of all the institution's activities to its purpose.
4. Indicate clearly the institution's strengths and weaknesses in a candid and forthright manner.
5. Provide a sound basis for institutional planning and improvement.
The accreditation process provides an opportunity to look candidly at the institution and determine whether or not goals are being achieved.
The purpose of the accreditation team visit is to determine if what was articulated in the self-study is actually validated on campus by talking with faculty and students. They will then prepare a report of their findings that is sent to the institution and the Commission on Colleges. OSU will have an opportunity to respond to the report to correct errors. A final report is then sent to the Commission who then takes one of the following actions:
A. Reaffirm Accreditation with No Conditions
B. Request a Progress Report
C. Request a Focused Interim Evaluation Report and Visit
D. Issue a Warning
E. Place on Probation
F. Declare Show-Cause
G. Terminate Accreditation
Members of the OSU Accreditation Steering Committee are: Robert Burton (Chair), Ron Adams, Leslie Burns, Karyle Butcher, Irma Delson, Thayne Dutson, Andy Hashimoto, Toby Hayes, Mark McCambridge, Maggie Niess, Mike Quinn, Larry Roper, Henry Sayre, Rob Specter, Meg Swan, Victor Tremblay, and one each ASOSU Representative and Graduate Student. This group will respond to the nine Standards and will begin very soon.
Additional accreditation information is available on the web at: http://osu.orst.edu/aa/accreditation/
There was no discussion.
– Reception for Provost Arnold – The Faculty Senate is hosting a reception for Provost and Executive Vice President Roy Arnold on January 13 from 3:00-4:30 in the MU Lounge. All faculty are invited.
– Martin Luther King Holiday Teach-in – This year's theme is "Celebrate The Vision" and will take place between January 10 and 21.
– Faculty Senate Handbook Update – Faculty Senate materials have been updated and can be found on the Senate web site at: http://osu.orst.edu/dept/senate/index.htm
Since experience has shown that the majority of Senators do not use the updated materials sent to be included in the Faculty Senate Handbook, and since the web site is frequently updated, hard copies of the Handbook are no longer being sent. The web site contains information about Senators, committees, agendas, minutes, etc.
– Senators Discussion Listserv – A motion was approved at the December Faculty Senate meeting to create a Senators discussion listserv to provide a method for Senators to discuss issues between Senate meetings. All Senators have been subscribed to the listserv. The listserv can be accessed by addressing a message to: firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe yourself, send a message to: email@example.com and type the following in the body of the message: signoff fsdiscussion
NOTE: You must unsubscribe yourself from your own computer since it will unsubscribe whatever individual is assigned to the e-mail address you are sending the message from. If someone else tries to unsubscribe you, they will either unsubscribe themselves or receive an error message.
– Interinstitutional Faculty Senate – OSU Interinstitutional Faculty Senate Senator Gary Tiedeman (Sociology) was elected IFS President for the year 2000 at their December meeting.
– John V. Byrne Lecture Series – As part of the John V. Byrne Lecture Series, Governor Kitzhaber spoke at OSU on January 6. His talk was titled, 'From Science to Public Action: The Oregon Approach to Natural Resource Management.'
Dr. Arnold congratulated Associate Provost Hashimoto for appointing an outstanding accreditation team. He also noted that OSU has no choice but to be accredited if OSU students are to remain eligible for federal financial aid.
Arnold also congratulated the newly elected Senators, Executive Committee and IFS Senator, President-Elect, new Senate President, and Gary Tiedeman for his election as the IFS President. He thanked the outgoing Senators, Executive Committee members, IFS Senator, and Ken Williamson whom Arnold felt did an outstanding job in his role as President. He also thanked Senators for their willingness to serve in faculty governance.
Dr. Arnold noted he had served in the position of Provost for eight years, two months and six days and introduced Tim White who will become Interim Provost on January 17.
Arnold noted he has attended 65-70 Faculty Senate meetings, over 200 Executive Committee meetings, and worked with 10 Faculty Senate Presidents. He provided some retrospective comments of events during the past eight years including listing significant changes in Baccalaureate, graduate and professional level academic programs, reorganization and restructuring of programs, and participating in 29 administrative appointments. He was actively involved in the process of granting promotions and tenure and oversaw the selection of 17 new Distinguished Professors. Items that stand out involving the Faculty Senate are: the revised Promotion and Tenure Guidelines, Post-Tenure Review, the administrative restructuring process, performance indicators, distance education, and ROTC apportionment. He felt that the Senate has made enormous progress in certain areas, including the use of discussion prior to formal action. He also mentioned the changing and dynamic nature of OSU and OUS and groups within those organizations. OSU is well poised to capitalize due to new and innovative programs, increased marketing, and successful student recruiting and retention. He views the budget process as a challenge, and is disappointed that the budget circumstances are not better, and noted a continuing need to communicate better internally.
Dr. Arnold thanked all for the opportunity to have served in the role as Provost and Executive Vice President and felt that it has been a very pleasant experience, most of the time, and it has been a very positive experience.
President Matzke noted that Dr. Arnold has steered the university very well through many challenging transitions, some of which could be considered crises. Matzke appreciated that Arnold reported regularly and forthrightly to the Senate and kept the lines of communication open between faculty and administration. Matzke then presented him with a Myrtlewood plaque on behalf of the Senate which read:
President Matzke's report included three issues:
1) Provost Search Committee - He encouraged faculty to provide input on criteria for the new Provost.
2) Faculty Senate Redefinition - He noted that several years ago the Senate redefined who would be included in apportionment. The membership was expanded to include all Professional Faculty and Research Assistants. Matzke was not particularly in favor of this action as an academic, in part, because of curriculum related issues and the fear that the new group would expand the Senate's agenda. He admitted that his fear was misplaced since the committee structure was changed to specify where teaching faculty were needed and that, although the new group did expand the agenda, he now feels that was a positive move. He acknowledged that those in the new group bring a set of skills not available among academic faculty, particularly in the area of fiscal expertise. He felt that it was a very good choice to expand the university's definition of faculty in the Faculty Senate.
3) Y2K Problem - The newest Y2K problem is related to enrollment with projections of 1,000 to 1,500 more students next fall. Matzke asked for Senators to express their concerns about increased enrollment and to share possible solutions.
Senator Shor, Engineering, felt there will be a real strain due to a lack of classrooms.
Senator Thies, Science, was concerned more about straining departmental budgets when additional faculty have to be hired to accommodate the increased enrollment. He noted that there will be more money following the students, but it will be spent to expand sections.
Senator Oriard, Liberal Arts, felt that Baccalaureate Core classes are woefully understaffed.
Senator Tolar Burton, Liberal Arts, noted that courses other than those in the Baccalaureate Core will also be bursting. There is a need to look ahead and not just solve immediate problems for incoming freshmen.
Senator Lee, Liberal Arts, suggested that academic programs may need to be reprioritized and rebudgeted.
Senator Daniels, Associated, felt it was important that we assure that the cost of affordable housing not be impacted by the additional students.
Senator Landau, Science, felt that not enough has been invested in the infrastructure to handle additional students.
Senator Doescher, Agricultural Sciences, thought that a discussion on perceptions and incentives directed toward faculty was needed since it will be the faculty and advisors dealing with new students. There needs to be an esprit de corps put into place to get faculty enthusiastically behind the students.
Senator Westall, Science, felt it was extremely important that the money actually follows the students, as has been promised.
Senator Obermiller, Agricultural Sciences, expressed the feeling that this is a wonderful opportunity to have the university plan for growth rather than for decline and it must be approached positively.
President Matzke stated that the university has made a commitment to take the additional students which provides an opportunity for success. He urged faculty to communicate to the Senate leadership what they feel the Executive Committee could be doing to assist the process.
Senator Plant, Engineering, noted that scheduling is a nightmare due to being unable to access Banner for two days. He wondered if this was due to recent upgrades and suggested that OSU quit upgrading Banner and live with what works, as the University of Oregon apparently did about three years ago.
Curt Pederson responded that an upgrade consisting of two redundant servers, which resulted in a $42,000 deficit, will be installed very soon to remedy the situation.
Senator Thies noted that the phone system still works for students who need to make class changes.
Meeting was adjourned at 3:52 PM.
Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant