For All Faculty
The regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order on
January 10, 2002, at 3:03 PM, in the LaSells Stewart Center by President
- Action Items: Installation of elected Officials and Senators; Approval
of Parliamentarian; and a Resolution on Terrorism [Motion 02-573- 01 through
- Discussion Items: Student Evaluation of Teaching Instrument; Service or
Business Centers; and Modem Pool Elimination
- New Business: None
Members Absent With Representation:
Bowman, C. Raab; Bruce, Eklund; Franklin, J. Wilson; Jennings, J. Arrington;
Middleton, P. McMillen; Rogers, T. Skubinna; and S. Shaw, M. Carson.
Members Absent Without Representation:
Baggott, Balz, Bontrager, Braker, Breen, Cloughesy, Collier, Costello, Daugherty,
Davis-White Eyes, DeCarolis, Douglas, Ellinwood, Floyd, Haggart, Hamm, Jones,
Lomax, Moulton, Mundt, Oriard, Pegau, Raja, Stang, Strik, Unsworth, and
Faculty Senate Officers, Ex-Officios and Staff Present:
N. Rosenberger, President; Bruce Sorte, President-Elect; Ex-officios - T.
White, J. Geddes; R. Iltis, Parliamentarian; and V. Nunnemaker, Senate Staff.
Guests of the Senate:
D. Arnett, T. Barr, K. Calvery, J. Corbett, J. Dolan, S. Francis, J, Hagemeister,
R. Hill, E. Holsberry, M. Keppinger, M. Merickel, C. Pederson, I. Pfund,
L. Risser, D. Simpson, J. Smith, J. Sorte, S. Spears, K. Steele, and R.
Installation of Elected Officials
President Rosenberger installed President-Elect Bruce Sorte; Executive Committee:
Dianne Erickson, Angelo Gomez and Janet Nishihara; and Interinstitutional
Faculty Senator Dan Edge. Newly elected Senators were asked to stand and
were declared installed: Agricultural Sciences: Dan Arp, Bill Boggess,
Patrick Breen, Anita Brown, Bruce Coblentz, Paul Doescher, Bernadine Strik,
Elizabeth Webb; Associated: Jackie Balzer, Lois deGeus, Angelo Gomez,
Phyllis Lee, Joe Majeski; Business: Ilene Kleinsorge, Jonathan Moulton;
Engineering: Mark Costello, Nick Wannamacher, Solomon Yim; Extension:
Marvin Butler, Bill Rogers; Forestry: Rakesh Gupta, Kathy Howell,
Mark Reed; Home Economics & Education: Liz Gray; Information
Services: Larry Landis; Liberal Arts: Tracy Daugherty, Paul Farber,
Jim Foster, John Maul, Maria Olaya, Becky Warner; Oceanic and Atmospheric
Sciences: Joseph Jennings, Niklas Pisias, Michael Unsworth; Pharmacy:
Bill Boyce; Science: Kevin Ahern, Stella Coakley, Rubin Landau, Terri
Lomax, Barbara Taylor, John Westall; and Student Affairs: Rich Shintaku.
Rosenberger thanked those who were newly installed for their willingness
to take on additional duties.
Approval of the Parliamentarian
Motion 02-573-01 to approve Robert Iltis as Faculty Senate Parliamentarian
passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
Resolution on Terrorism
President Rosenberger explained that the following resolution was the result
of a visit by College of Forestry faculty with the Executive Committee.
They were concerned about acts of terrorism that had occurred in both Oregon
and Washington in relation to biotechnology and forestry.
Resolution on Terrorism
Whereas, Oregon State University, and its faculty, have been openly and
vigorously encouraging the public debate about the applications of biotechnology
in agricultural and forestry systems, and will continue to do so; and
Whereas, Oregon State University, and its faculty, have also been conducting
research to develop improved production methods, and to study and minimize
undesired effects of biotechnology; and
Whereas, Acts of terrorism only polarize, distort, and risk discrediting
legitimate ethical and technological concerns; and
Whereas, There is no legitimate rationale for acts of terrorism that destroy
university property, harm longterm research projects, and risk lives; and
Whereas, Recent acts of terrorism have caused extensive damage to field
sites and university buildings; therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Faculty Senate of Oregon State University declares
that these acts of terrorism violate the fundamental freedoms of inquiry
and discourse upon which universities in free societies are based.
Resolved, That the Faculty Senate instead encourages those with strong
concerns to use the University to make their cases public, and to debate
their strengths and merits in an open forum.
Senator Reyes, Engineering, questioned the use of the word 'terrorism' since
there different forms of terrorism. Greg Meilan, College of Forestry, stated
that terrorism includes more than just acts against lives and felt that
the term was correct.
Senator Pisias, Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences, questioned why the resolution
was limited to Forestry. It was suggested that it may be appropriate to
use the term 'biological research.' Another suggested using the term 'about
applications of biotechnology.'
Steve Strauss, College of Forestry, urged restricting the resolution to
biotechnology since it is a discreet area of activity and terrorism in recent
Senator Clinton, Liberal Arts, moved to amend the resolution by striking
the word 'biotechnology and agricultural and forestry systems' in the first
Whereas and replacing it with 'scientific research' and making the same
substitution for 'biotechnology' in the second Whereas; the motion was seconded.
There was no discussion. Motion 02-573-03 to amend the resolution passed
by voice vote with one dissenting vote.
Senator Brayman-Hackel, Liberal Arts, moved to amend the resolution to add
'against scientific research' following each time the word 'terrorism' is
used; the motion was seconded. Motion 02-573-04 to amend the resolution
passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes.
Motion 02-573-02 to approve the resolution as amended passed by voice vote
with one dissenting vote.
Student Evaluation of Teaching Instrument
Ray William, Advancement of Teaching (AOT) Chair, provided a brief background
of the rationale of their proposal to change the Student Evaluation of Teaching
(SET) Instrument. William explained that the AOT was originally asked to
add a diversity question to the SET and discovered that it is an extremely
complex topic that may require multiple questions. He reported that Nana
Lowell from the University of Washington will be visiting OSU on March 6
and 7 and will participate in a faculty forum and workshops to discuss the
issue of adding a diversity question. He noted that the Committee has received
input from about 400 faculty since this project began.
He explained that the OSU Survey Research Center feels that the current
SET form could be improved since some questions actually ask more than one
question and others are not always clear. The University of Washington has
given permission to use the first and second general questions, which have
The responses from these two questions would be used for promotion and tenure
purposes, merit increases, and for awards at OSU.
- Your performance in this course was?
- Your assessment of completing readings and homework was:
- Inspire critical thinking?
- Too much/not enough?
The AOT chose to recommend 12 standard questions since they could find no
models using less than a total of 12. The intent is to develop a form that
has a scannable reverse side that would allow individual faculty to select
which additional questions to be used, thereby allowing faculty to tailor
the form to their particular course. This tailoring would satisfy ABET requirements
in the College of Engineering.
The Committee has also been attempting to integrate the teaching, Extension,
and Distance Education requirements in the SET. Another consideration is
promotion and tenure and awards, with the major criteria being to improve
The estimated cost of the proposed forms would be about $6,500 to the university
with an additional departmental cost of 2.5 cents for each reverse side
of the SET copied.
The AOT plans to bring forward two motions in February:
1) It is moved that OSU adopt the modified student assessment form as proposed
(Wording of questions may be improved with betatesting winter quarter).
2) It is moved that OSU develop a policy regarding distribution of assessment
results such that the first two questions be used for P&T, merit, and
awards; all twelve (12) questions (front side of form) be reported to faculty
and supervisors to improve teaching within departments; and results from
personalized assessment questions (back side of form) be reported to faculty
William requested that Senators review the proposal on the web with their
colleagues and be prepared to vote in February.
Senator Ciufetti, Agricultural Sciences, expressed concern about questions
one and two since many of the large science courses are team-taught which
the proposed form does not address. William responded that the AOT found
no instruments at any university that addressed team-taught courses and
acknowledged it was an area that needs work.
Senator Brooks, Business, questioned the validation as it pertains to awards.
He was unsure if the validation was appropriate for awards and noted it
may also not be appropriate for merit raises. Brooks suggested that the
recommendation state that this was to be considered a measure to be used
but was not considered to be 'the' measure.
Senator Coakley, Science, felt it would be more appropriate to change questions
11 and 12 to numbers 1 and 2. She also questioned the change in the rating
scale and asked Senators to study this carefully prior to the vote.
William encouraged comments and questions be directed to the Advancement
of Teaching Committee.
Service or Business Centers
President Rosenberger briefly outlined that the concept of the service or
business centers, which has been a topic of discussion by the Redesign Team,
would be to centralize services such as travel, grant administration, personnel,
budget planning, human resources, purchasing, advising, graduation audits,
etc. These centers would be intermediary between central administration
and college/departmental administration. Conceivably, each center would
serve several colleges. Rosenberger felt it was timely for faculty to enter
this discussion since several administrators will be attending an intensive
training in January to discuss service centers, among other issues.
Bruce Sorte, Senate President-Elect, presented a proposed service center
model. He has spent six years thinking about these centers and talking with
others about their concerns. He felt that the goal of the centers must be
more than just saving money and eliminating positions. Perhaps more realistic
goals would be to 1) save administrative time and resources that could be
devoted to programmatic time and initiatives, and 2) increase timeliness
and effectiveness of administrative decisions and bring the decisions closer
to those who are impacted by those decisions.
Sorte felt that landscape or overview documents were essential to the planning
process. From his research, he has found very few examples of large scale
administrative service centers that haven't significantly reduced the services
that faculty are used to receiving. He also felt that centralizing administrative
functions, without local support, will cause departmental units to become
more creative in how they work around those centralized functions.
The basic building blocks regarding service centers include:
Sorte suggested a pilot test to build confidence in the concept. Spend the
money to monitor, adjust, and report on what happens during the test. The
College of Agricultural Sciences is willing to contribute up to .4 FTE to
assist in accomplishing the test. The pilot test should last at least six
months and the University should be willing to abandon, or markedly change,
the concept if it is not successful. He anticipates that there may be a
30% savings in administrative costs in affected areas, but there may also
be a significant decrease in the amount of time, and paperwork, it takes
to accomplish tasks.
- Bringing authority back closer to those doing the work. Concern has
been expressed that, without local control, institutional knowledge
or understanding of a particular discipline will be lost. He felt that
a reasonable geographic proximity between faculty and administrative
functions is a few hundred yards.
- Handling policy level decisions differently - perhaps rotating responsibility
amongst department heads.
- Recognizing that service centers will most likely be more expensive
during the first few years.
Sorte's presentation will be posted to the Faculty Senate website.
Senator Raab, Home Economics & Education (proxy), questioned what impact
a centralized approach would have on federal funding.
Vice President Mark McCambridge, Finance & Administration, emphasized
that faculty need to understand that there is no predisposed plan and he
welcomed comments from the faculty. He acknowledged that there may be functions
that are appropriate at the unit level and some that are appropriate at
the central levels.
Senator King, Business, was concerned about hidden costs that will not show
up as a cost associated with the service center, i.e, money will be spent
in the form of time on the part of chairs and faculty tracking down information
that formerly resided locally. He did like the thought of committing to
some form of experimentation and be willing to change if the proposal doesn't
Another individual expressed concern about successfully obtaining outside
funding and noted the rejection of a particular funding opportunity specifically
due to lack of local administrative staff. He also felt that a personal
history with a particular staff person, developed over a long period of
time, is important when coordinating a seminar series requiring travel arrangements,
etc., that are necessary for the series to be successful.
Senator Ahern, Science, expressed concern about functions that may appear
to have shared commonalities and noted that even human resources has differences
and felt that local expertise makes more sense. He was also very concerned
about centralizing advising. He suggested that service centers concentrate
on only the most common functions and not assume that accounting or purchasing
are the same across campus.
Senator Li, Agricultural Sciences, reiterated the importance of local familiarity
with various processes that affects the success rate of obtaining grants
and funding. She felt it was important to identify skills needed at the
Senator Coblentz, Agricultural Sciences, questioned why, in light of recent
events pertaining to differing budget figures, any sane person would want
to see accounting functions centralized at OSU.
Senator Smythe, Science, expressed difficulty in understanding how moving
functions out of local control is more effective. Sorte responded that,
by combining resources, it may be possible to walk into one office and accomplish
multiple tasks that formerly required processing and approval from various
Senator Boggess, Science, felt it was necessary to have some authority delegated
down from central administration rather than everything going up. Sorte
noted that his proposal is a transitional process so that no jobs would
be lost and skill sets would be changed in the process.
Senator Pisias, Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences, feels that we need to
tell administration services need to be accomplished in a service center.
He was concerned about the amount of time that may be spent waiting to talk
with the appropriate person in the centralized system if others are vying
for their attention at the same time.
Senator Erickson, Science, asked for case studies of successful centers
elsewhere or studies of attempts that have failed.
Senator King expressed the need to include processes in the discussion rather
than just structure.
Senator Boyce, Pharmacy, questioned whether the service centers would be
free of charge or if departments/colleges would be charged for their use.
Senator Taylor, Science, noted that there are issues of accountability in
terms of responsibility.
IFS Senator Edge observed that one size fits all probably won't work and
variations will probably be necessary.
Modem Pool Elimination
President Rosenberger explained that there is a proposal to eliminate the
current modem pool. In a message read by Rosenberger from Provost White,
he noted that, although a decision was made, administration continues to
hear strong arguments on both sides of the issue and seeks input from the
Faculty Senate. He emphasized, however that, if the modem pool is not eliminated,
savings would have to be made in other areas.
Curt Pederson, Vice Provost for Information Services, Jon Dolan, Virtual
Academic Lab Administrator - Network Engineering, and Jim Corbett, Director
of Administrative Services, each explained various aspects of the proposed
Pederson apologized for a memo distributed with an incorrect elimination
date of January 15. The memo also did not indicate that he would be working
with Robert Hood on a communications strategy. Pederson has heard from about
300 individuals since the message went out, with most of the responses being
against elimination. He is interested to learn how much faculty now value
internet access compared to 1997/98.
Pederson explained that, since there is still a deficit of under $1 million
on the general fund side that is being paid back by Information Services
(IS), other cuts will need to be made. He also noted he had been told by
Clara Pratt that the OSU Budget Reconciliation Group proposed elimination
of the modem pool as one of their top recommendations to save money in 2002-03.
Current financial pressures have made it necessary to move more quickly
to cut costs.
Pederson commended Jon Dolan, Greg Edmaiston, and Tom Easley for providing
coverage during Shay Dakin's absence while she is fighting bone cancer.
Jim Corbett provided financial background information. In FY '01 Telecommunications
accounted for 23.3% of the IS budget while the Library accounted for 76%,
and the remainder was split between the other IS units (Communication Media
Center, Web Services, Network Engineering, Central Computing, and Administration).
Telecommunications, which includes the modem pool, saw a net loss of $58,909
in FY '01. There are currently resources in the fund to cover the loss,
but they cannot continue to lose money nor to take money out of other funds
since a service department is not allowed to carry a negative amount and
deficits must be covered from the Education and General funds.
Reasons for immediate resource issues:
Corbett explained that many cost recovery options have been discussed over
the last 5-6 years, including:
- reduction in revenue due to decrease in long-distance usage
- increases in operating costs include salary increases (must be self-covered
in a service department) and vacation liability (approximately $73,000),
- GASB 34/35 (general accounting changes that affect equipment reserves)
- the impact is still unknown with the dollar amount between $133,000
and $1.1million for this year depending on whether it is spread out
over one year or five years
Jon Dolan discussed modem pool usage and cost issues.
- charge individual users a monthly fee (ISP model) - not allowed by
Oregon law since OSU would be in competition with commercial vendors
- assess the department/unit based on a percentage of users (active/retired)
- general fund allocation - if the allocation was adequate, there would
be no discussion of options
- general fund reallocation within IS - becomes a matter of what services
are eliminated and what remains
Costs (monthly operational charges to keep the phone lines active and modems
- about 4,000 use the modem pool monthly, which is down from 5,000 in
- 5% of the customers use 25% of the available time during peak availability
- of the 4,000 users, 25% are non-students (faculty, staff, emeritus,
affiliates, and others); the 25% has remained consistent from the beginning
in both users and hours
- 284 modem lines are served by 12 T1 phone circuits (each T1 circuit
supports 24 56k lines)
- each T1 circuit costs $1,000 per month (the total of all lines is
$144,000/ year) in circuit costs alone - this figure does not include
replacement, maintenance or staffing costs
Curt Pederson presented information regarding the impact of the modem pool
- elimination of 6 of the 12 circuits would save $72,000
- restrict access to students only
- adjust time restrictions downward for students
- seek alternative funding for the remaining service for the next fiscal
year to move the modem pool service out of Telecommunications
Pederson noted that students will also be impacted since there will be fewer
- personal financial impact - users would be required to pay for their
own ISP service which creates a hardship for lower paid employees
- without an ISP, users will lose remote communications with students
- there is a disruption while changing service providers
- users don't want to change the way the OSU network is accessed
Senator Ahern, Science, questioned whether there was any way of having legitimate
phone numbers to do legitimate OSU-related work. He noted that users cannot
access the OSU modem if they have cable vs. dial-up access. Dolan responded
that they are looking at ATT access for faculty and, if the modem pool is
left in place, there is still a funding issue. Pederson responded that it
is difficult to restrict usage to those with legitimate needs.
Senator Landau, Science, expressed the feeling that it seems that the proposed
elimination is backwards. It should be the students who are losing access
since the faculty need access to do their jobs. He felt this was one more
case where money was being spent on student services and being taken away
from the support of faculty, i.e., research and teaching. Pederson responded
that ASOSU President Justin Geddes felt that this will likely no longer
remain a free student service beyond the next round of Technology Resource
Fee funding. The students need to present a proposal to maintain the modem
pool with the fees they already pay or IS will recommend that the service
Senator Niess, Science, expressed concern that the decision was made without
input from faculty indicating which services they needed to perform their
job. Pederson noted this was a short-term financial solution.
Senator Busse, Agricultural Sciences, stated that her department has six
faculty off-campus who must use the dial-in. Pederson responded that there
is an option of paying $13 per month for a commercial ISP.
Senator Pisias, Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences, asked if there was a
list of services that would have to be cut if the modem pool was not eliminated.
Pederson responded that the self-support services include: voice communications,
voice mail and the modem pool.
Senator Dollar, Liberal Arts, felt it was unfair to eliminate student access
to the modem pool since there are web-based courses that require usage of
IFS Senator Edge suggested reducing the number of modems so people are forced
to use other methods. Pederson noted that suggestion was considered and
rejected because it didn't seem ethical.
Senator Selker, Agricultural Sciences, suggested billing departments for
the service provided. Dolan noted that additional costs would be incurred
if a billing component was added, which may reduce the cost-effectiveness
of the service.
Pederson closed with the comment that ISP's complain about OSU's service
when they phone people to sell their ISP service and OSU employees/students
state that their family uses OSU's free service. ISP's feel that OSU's service
does take away revenue from them and the community.
Faculty Senate Calendar
Faculty Senate meetings for 2002 have been scheduled from 3:00-5:00 PM on
the following dates: February 7, 2002; March 7, 2002; April 4, 2002; May
2, 2002; June 6, 2002; October 3, 2002; November 7, 2002; and December 5,
2002. Senators are advised to check the monthly agenda to determine the
Library Committee Decision on June 2001 Referred Item
At the June 2001 Faculty Senate meeting, Senator Wrolstad requested that
the Valley Library's policy of handling recalls of books be revised. The
request was forwarded to the Library Committee who reviewed the issue and
recommends that current policy be maintained, although they encourage the
Circulation staff make more widely known the informal practice of directly
contacting holders of recalled books when a particular book is urgently
needed. The entire Library Committee memo can be viewed on the web at:
Faculty Senate Handbook Update
Faculty Senate Handbook materials have been updated and can be found on
the Senate web site at:
Senators Electronic Discussion List
At the request of several faculty, an electronic discussion list has been
created to facilitate discussion among faculty about issues of interest
regarding Oregon State University. All subscribers will receive copies of
each message posted.
To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com
and in the body of the message type:
To unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
and in the body of the message type:
NOTE: You must subscribe and unsubscribe yourself from your own computer
since it will either unsubscribe or subscribe whatever individual is assigned
to the e-mail address the message is being sent from.
REPORT FROM & DIALOG WITH THE PROVOST
Provost White's report focused on Education issues. He reported that a December
17 discussion between President Risser, Provost White and Education faculty
reaffirmed that the unit will continue as a School of Education which reflects
the value to OSU and the State of Oregon. The focus of the School of Education
will be in three integrated areas:
The unit has been established for excellence in teacher education and related
research fields that support that excellence, and to help produce the best
teachers and alleviate the great teacher need the confronts Oregon and the
- primary and secondary teacher and counselor education;
- leadership and health education; and
- 4-H and Youth Development (whose faculty indicated a preference to
be affiliated with the Education unit).
There is currently an internal search for new leadership in the form of
a Dean, and faculty have been asked to submit nominations. A Dean of Education
should be in place by the end of January.
Provost White noted that the School of Education will participate fully
in the redesign process.
Senator Thies questioned whether there would be a return to a four-year
education degree. White responded that Education has been asked to develop,
within the existing degrees, undergraduate pathways to initial licensure.
He noted this was not a directive to discontinue the MAT program, but to
develop content areas that make sense to develop an undergraduate pathway.
REPORT FROM & DIALOG WITH THE FACULTY SENATE PRESIDENT
President Rosenberger mentioned several issues the Executive Committee (EC)
will be bringing forward to the Senate: a proposed Distance Education Committee,
the formation of a joint task force with Academic Affairs regarding University
Assessment, and revised Diversity Council Standing Rules.
She also reported that the EC had met with President Risser and a result
of that meeting was to hold small group conversations with President Risser
and interested faculty, facilitated by a member of the EC. These sessions
will begin in January and are scheduled to continue through May. Invitations
will be issued to all faculty.
Rosenberger noted that President Risser and Provost White will begin meeting
with the EC on a quarterly basis in an effort to improve communication.
She noted that it was earlier proposed that the academic redesign be decoupled,
to the extent possible, from the administrative redesign, and it appears
as though that is occurring. The Executive Committee is working on the academic
redesign process and related issues to be addressed.
One of the ways Rosenberger would like the Senate to be more proactive,
particularly in light of redesign, is to have Senate apportionment units
caucus to discuss issues.
There was no new business.
Meeting was adjourned at 4:55 PM. A reception to welcome new Senators was
held in the Myrtle Tree Alcove following the meeting.
Faculty Senate Staff