Skip to Content

Dec 4, 2002 Minutes

Senators Present: Renick, Sawey, Frost, Bell-Metereau, Stone, Hindson, Brennan, Stutzman, Peeler, Blanda, James, Gillis, Gordon, Conroy

Guests: Gaye Korenek, David Easter, Kathy Fite, University Start reporter

Chair Renick called Faculty Senate to order at 4:00, noting that we had guests to report on recommendations from the Academic Computing Committee  and on the faculty handbook.

I. David Easter reported on recommendations for changes in the application process for student computing fee funds. He noted that one major change in the wording of the PPS was is suggested in order to clarify that these funds are available solely to entities funded by the university. Procedural changes proposed include having a single deadline once per year, followed by feedback from the deans, whose comments will return for the committees' consideration before final decisions are complete. Approximately the top third ranked proposals will receive funding.  Senator Stone objected to the new proposed requirement that the applicant turn in a complete departmental inventory of computer equipment and programs, stating that this would be too burdensome.  Chair Renick suggested substituting an attestation that the request would not duplicate current departmental holdings. Prof. Easter noted a change in the thinking of the VPIT's office giving emphasis for these grants to specialized equipment and programs rather than to general use labs, which are funded from a separate pot of money.

Senators asked if there is any way within this process to deal with the problem of labs taking over classroom space and whether faculty were involved in the decision to shift funding to specialized labs instead of to centralized labs. Senator Stone noted that general labs cannot close for classroom use the way specialized labs do.

Senator Gillis moved to accept the amended application form and procedures.  Senator Frost seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.  Professor Easter was asked to convey the Senate's thanks to the Academic Computing Committee for their work on this important committee.

II. The steering committee for the website is seeking a faculty representative.  Senator Sawey accepted this position.

III. Senator Frost requested action item updates for each senate objective. He will compile an outcomes document if objective group leaders deliver action items to him by the 17th of December, 2002.

IV. The senate asked if the senate has received a final printout on equity raises and salary information, as requested from Vice President Gratz.  Chair Renick will follow up on this item.

V. Guests Kathy Fite and Gaye Korenek from the VPAA's office reported that this will be the last hard copy version of the handbook to be generally distributed. Senator Bell-Metereau asked why this last one would be distributed in hard copy, suggesting that it be made available upon request rather than automatically sent to all faculty. Senator Sawey recommended that since the web-based version will be updateable, it must have the date last modified posted with all revisions and that it must be clarified who has access to make changes to it. Senator Frost recommended that all new faculty receive a hard copy of the handbook.

VI. Chair Renick announced the PAAG social on the 11th floor, December 11 from 4 5, followed by a report by Senator Blanda from the Faculty Research Committee on recommendations for this year's Research Enhancement Grants.

He also called for PAAG items for next week:
-Will President Trauth announce the policy change for faculty attendance at graduation?
-If faculty continue to serve as ushers, will ushers be allowed to leave early?
-Will CAD allow senators on College Councils, as well as budget and curriculum committees?  (Several senators noted that Councils of Colleges often deal with
 nuts and bolts issues unrelated to faculty concerns and that this would require a significant investment of time.)
-Is the university willing to revamp the process for Piper Professor selection?
-Is there a way that faculty might have input in any future performance evaluations of the Chancellor?

VII. The senate discussed the progress and problems of the Art and Physics building.

VIII. The meeting concluded with a brief discussion of the size of the faculty senate, with most senators agreeing that the relatively small senate size makes it more effective. Enhancing the role of the liaisons and increasing contact between the faculty and the senate should improve the representative nature of the senate. Chair Renick suggested that faculty should email suggestions regarding ways to enlist the liaisons in senate matters and enhance faculty senate committee participation.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:05

Submitted by Rebecca Bell-Metereau