Faculty Council
Minutes of the meeting of November 15, 1993
0. Meeting called to order at 4:03 p.m. by Chairperson Ted Steinberg.
1. Motion (M.Nelson/F.Krohn): to approve the published agenda. Motion passed.
2. Motion (M.Nelson/K.Bonds): to approve the minutes of the October 11, 1993 meeting. Motion passed.
3. President Donald A. MacPhee reported having had a marvelous time in England where he spoke to people in London, York, Exmouth and Swansea, Wales where the college has programs. He hoped that to expand these existing models into other disciplines, and to foster reciprocal projects with some of them. He said he had spent October at Cambridge, commuting by bicycle, researching 17th century history, and getting acquainted with the possibilities of e-mail. MacPhee said the 94-95 budget process was beginning, with SUNY proposing an increase of $81 million to meet inflation and salary needs, plus some significant program improvements. These improvements would include about $33 million to restore some upper division sections, equipment, and instructional technology. He said he hoped to invite Gov. Cuomo to campus in connection with the college's and SUNY's campaign for budget support. The president said fundraising activities were continuing their momentum, and the Foundation board moving ahead with a feasibility study on the possibility of a major campaign. He said priorities include improving student scholarships, faculty program and library support. MacPhee announced a capitol construction project in response to SUNY's appeals to renovate campuses. He said the college has a commitment of approximately $20 million over three to five years, including about $12 million to renovate Mason Hall (ventilation, heating, air conditioning, equipment and program needs). He said ventilation problems in Houghton and Jewett would be addressed as well as some safety issues. He pointed out that these projects would be very good for the local economy, too. He cautioned that there may be some mess for some time as these projects unfold. The president concluded by announcing that Blue Devils hockey team had tied Plattsburgh, a significant victory on their home ice. P.Courts expressed concern that the English department's open search for chair would need not less than $60K for salary. He asked whether this money might not be used instead to hire two junior faculty who might add some 14 sections instead of the 4 expected of a senior faculty/administrator. He said if affirma- tive action gains were made in this way, they would be much more tangible to the students. MacPhee responded that this is an opportunity to add a senior person from an under-represented class and that we presently have no department chairs who are female, a very serious issue. Courts said that since the depart- ment was unified to elect a female chair from present faculty, that argument looses impact. MacPhee replied that the college has been relatively successful in recruiting affirmative action candidates at the junior level, but not the senior level. M.Nel- son asked whether, when another such opportunity occurs, we would be similarly committed. MacPhee answered that it would depend on circumstances and on available lines and dollars.
4. Chairperson Theodore Steinberg made no report.
5. Faculty Senator H. Joseph Straight made no report.
6. FC received Governance Committee's report of the Annual Faculty Census, copies of which were distributed to FC. [Copies appended to Archive Minutes.]
Motion (Governance Committee): to amend Bylaws, Articles IV and V, per recommendations of Governance Committee as described in D. Jelski's memo to Faculty Council dated November 8th, 1993, and published with the FC meeting announcement. [If adopted by FC, the amendments would require ratification by the faculty.]
Governance Committee chair Daniel Jelski reported that purpose of the published proposed Bylaw changes concerning FC officers is two-fold: to remedy problems with electing chairs/- vice chairs, and allow us to keep a competent chair for a longer time. He said the change in voting membership of Planning & Budget Committee is at the recommendation of that committee. P.Sinden commented that in 1980 the present succession plan was implemented because it was increasingly difficult to find two qualified people each year, for the two positions. He spoke against the proposal saying it doesn't make sense to go back to the older system. He advocated always trying to find new leader- ship, not absolving ourselves of that responsibility by the proposed bylaws amendments. He said FC could provide for the chair to succeed himself by another minor amendment. Jelski responded that the changes go further and reduce the Executive Committee by one, the Immediate Past Chairperson and provide increased flexibility. H.Jacobson asked what is the advantage to reducing the Executive Committee by one. Jelski answered that under the present scheme, there is a three-year commitment to serve as vice chair/chair/past chair; there is not any clear advantage in decreasing the number on the committee, but there would be an advantage in recruiting people for the positions without the three-year commitment. J.Hansen said he was inclined to defer to the expert judge- ment of our committees. He said if we are having trouble getting leadership, we ought to ask why. He said it seems to be a matter of what FC does, which is not much. He suggested FC restructure governance completely to make the leadership positions more interesting. Jelski disagreed with the notion that there is difficulty finding leadership, saying that the people on the committees and FC are quite interested and committed. He said the reason we are finding difficulty filling these positions is that we are asking for a 3-year commitment of varied responsibilities and duties, and that under the new proposal, we will have less difficulty. Sinden opined that the new method would reduce the impor- tance of the vice chair's role, saying that the present bylaws define clearly responsibilities for that office. He advocated the continuity presently provided, which would not be guaranteed under the proposal. Jelski responded that the vice chair would serve as the problem solver, available to serve in various responsibilities at the direction of the Executive Committee, and could be preparatory for service as chair. G.McNeil commented that the proposal provides flexibility for the vice chair to go on to chair, or not, and that opening up these options may get more people to serve. M.L.Lunde asked whence continuity would come if a new chair and vice chair were simultaneously elected. Jelski replied that continuity would then be the responsibility of the body who elects the officers. Steinberg commented that the October election feature would provide several months of continu- ity in any case. He said the present system is not working, and needs to be fixed. J.Straight added that FC has recently had occasion that a person would have taken the vice chair position, but was not available for the full three years.
Motion (M.Nelson/G.McNeil): to close debate. Motion passed.
Motion to adopt the Bylaws amendments passed.
Motion (J.Straight/M.Nelson): to adopt a resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED that it is the sense of the Faculty Council that the changes in Article IV do not affect consultation with the President, and therefore need only be ratified by the facul- ty. Motion passed.
7. Report of Computer Committee, Daniel O'Connell, chair, was postponed to December.
8. FC received a two-page report from College Scholarship Committee, Laura Henning, chair. [Copy filed with Archive min- utes.] Henning said the committee had spent many hours reviewing applications for scholarships, besides meeting 11 times during the year. She said 112 returning students received scholarships ranging from $100 to $1500. She said 11 were offered Empire State Minority Honors scholarships, funded half by the Foundation and half by New York State; these are $2000, renewable for a possible total of $8000; only one was accepted, giving an idea of the competition. She said the Foundation Freshman Award was offered this year for the first time to students with 92 high school average and 1150 SAT's; scholarships were $2650 full-tuition scholarship. She said 166 students were invited to apply for these, and from these, 45 were chosen and 21 accepted the schol- arships. She said these $2650 scholarships are the best we have, and they are the minimum needed to make us competitive with other schools. She encouraged faculty and staff participation in the fund drive to support these scholarships.
9. Report of Affirmative Action Committee, Ruth Antosh, chair was postponed to December.
10. FC received a one-page written report from Subcommittee on Improvement of Undergraduate Instruction, Thomas Loughlin, chair. [Copy in Archive minutes.]
11. Motion (M.Nelson/P.Sinden): to adopt Academic Affairs Committee's proposal to limit period for revision of transcripts.
H.Jacobson asked why requests to revise transcripts appear years after students leave. Committee chair MindaRae Amiran responded that often the request is from a person now applying to graduate school, who wants to get rid of poor grades. She said the problem is that registrar cannot easily verify alleged errors years later. Registrar Nancy Bowser said that even if the propos- al is adopted, former students could still appeal to VPAA for revision. T.Loughlin inquired why one year, why not three, similar to the requirement for faculty to keep grades/rosters, which would accommodate those who don't decide to go immediately to grad school. Amiran countered asking why one would not want to make one's record accurate immediately. M.Nelson clarified that three years after graduation might mean six years after the grade was given. He said, in favor of the proposal, that a 3-year period might invite students to ignore correcting their transcripts. T.Rywick said he felt the proposal would shift responsibility to the students, a desirable effect. N.Bowser said the proposal is not to protect the registrar's office, but to protect faculty who are asked to make such changes. J.Straight suggested that the committee might consider how this might affect the requirement to save final exams. Motion passed.
Motion (M.Nelson/P.Sinden): to adopt Academic Affairs Committee's proposal for policy on undergraduates as teaching assistants.
T.Rywick asked whether the committee had sought legal counsel regarding the privacy issue; he said Psychology uses TA's and the department is concerned that it might have to make changes. N.Bowser said the sense of legal counsel was that final grades should be given only by someone in the employ of the university, not a student. Rywick noted that registrar was now stressing final grades, whereas the proposal mentions grading tests and assignments. Bowser clarified that counsel had not said that would be illegal. J.Straight asked what would be counter to the intent of the law. Amiran answered that allowing students to grade would run counter. Vice President David Hess asked whether committee consider having a requirement that "faculty using undergrad teaching assistants must file a statement with depart- ment chair clarifying what activities would be engaged in by the TA, and what measures were being taken to ensure that the under- grad TA was qualified." This was accepted by Amiran as a friendly amendment. MacPhee suggested that the issue is who has final responsibility, and that it should be a faculty member of record. Rywick said that would interfere with his department which trains its TA's and they do assign grades on specific homework assign- ments; they also assign positive, negative, or neutral grades for class participation, without faculty supervision. Straight offered, and Amiran accepted, as a friendly amendment, changing part 2 to read "Faculty should not allow under- graduate students to grade tests or assignments without adequate faculty supervision," and deleting the second sentence. He said that in his department, faculty members watch students grading tests, which provides adequate supervision but may be inefficient use of faculty's time. Jacobson commented that the proposal is too confining as stated. Steinberg asked whether anyone is concerned about under- graduates grading other undergraduates, and said he has heard student complaints about this. Rywick, in defense of the prac- tice, said students should be aware of the plan to do so from the outset of the course, and in any event can appeal to faculty if they feel there is a problem. Amiran said there is a danger of over-legislating since what the TA's do is so different in each case. She said there are cases of student-graded assignments where students receiving the grades would have benefitted from faculty supervision.Jelski asked how this would affect peer review of written papers, group-graded discussion projects, etc., since there are some circumstances where faculty could not supervise closely certain types of legitimate educational activi- ties. Straight said that adding the word "adequate" would imply and require the necessary faculty judgement in such cases.
Motion (D.Jelski/F.Krohn) to refer the entire guideline policy to Academic Affairs Committee for further study and clarification of language. Motion passed.
12. FC received reports from both Student Affairs Committee, and Academic Affairs Committee concerning the registration process and recommendations for improvements. [Both reports were pub- lished to FC before the meeting.]
Motion (J.Straight/T.Loughlin): to adopt the recommendations of Student Affairs Committee, and Academic Affairs Committee con- cerning the registration process. Motion passed.
VP Hess said he would refer these recommendations to the Computer Planning and Priorities Board, the Registrar and the Director of the Computing Center. He anticipated significant early progress on this matter. Loughlin commended John Hansen for the new software he has developed to help in the advising process. He said he found this a very effective tool.
13. Follow-up report of Computing Services was postponed to December.
14. New Business
Motion (J.Straight/M.Nelson) to adopt the following: BE IT RESOLVED that it is the sense of this body that the instructor should be able to drop from a class roster those students who fail to attend class or otherwise contact the instructor before the end of the first week of the semester, and that the Academic Affairs Committee be charged to propose a method by which such a policy may be implemented.
Amiran said she had raised this issue with Registrar recently, and that the problem seems to be in enforcing the drop period. Straight replied that there is an explicit drop period, and an implicit one. Amiran said it is problematic to have one drop period for those who have shown up for class and a different drop period for those who don't show up. Straight admitted that could be a problem, K.Mantai asked whether under this proposal faculty could drop a student who has not attended. Straight said that either the student may drop, or faculty may drop if the student has not contacted the faculty member. M.Dimitri said that this proposal might help solve transcript problems. Sinden expressed concern for liabilities the college might incur when student has paid for a seat and we remove the student without his permission. Straight said dropping is becoming a greater concern now that we can no longer over-enroll as we used to. J.McVicker said we already have a shortened drop period, and if we can make registration more efficient, we will no longer have the problem.
Motion was defeated.
T.Loughlin announced that the FSA bylaws are under consideration once again, and invited comments of the faculty.
Motion (T.Rywick/T.Loughlin): to extend the meeting by 15 minutes. Motion passed.
Motion (Rose Klassen/J.McVicker): to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS the standard for teaching load at the College is traditionally the domain of each department, and
WHEREAS the legal definition of teaching load is based on past practice, and
WHEREAS most departments on campus have a 3-4 teaching load per year (3 courses one semester, 4 the other), and
WHEREAS p. II.23 of the newly revised Faculty Handbook states that "At Fredonia the standard for generating course loads in most departments is four three-hour course sections (i.e., 12 credit hours), or the equivalent, every semester," and
WHEREAS no such clause was in the previous Faculty Handbook, and
WHEREAS this change to the Faculty Handbook was made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs without due consultation of faculty, and
WHEREAS this change usurps the decision-making power of individual departments,
THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Council make a motion to delete this entry from the Faculty Handbook.
President MacPhee said that the statement had its origin in a state request for an expression of campus practice on teaching load. He said it had been discussed at great length with UUP. He said that while UUP did not "sign off" on it, it was his sense that it was acceptable. M.Nelson said UUP had discussed the statement, and that its position remains that the statement is not an accurate reflection of current practice. He said UUP thinks the statement represents a dangerous precedent, since it could later be used to expand what is current practice. He said UUP had agreed on significant changes to the original language of the statement, but disagreed that UUP finds this as an acceptable statement. MacPhee said the administration had responded in a positive way to several suggestions of UUP. He said administra- tion does not have an option to say there is no standard, and it does not seem reasonable to state that the lowest teaching load is the standard. He urged FC to consider the entire statement which recognizes contributions to teaching load made by chairs, scholarship, other assignments, and low-weighted credit hours. Nelson said the present statement does have more flexibility than the original statement, and UUP approves of that concept. Hess said earlier language "or equivalent" allowed for consideration of class size, preparations, etc. in determining load. K.Mantai said his department's load is actually 15 to 18 hours.
Motion (T.Loughlin/M.Nelson): to postpone debate on the resolu- tion to the December FC meeting. Motion passed.
15. Motion (M.Nelson/F.Krohn): to adjourn. Motion passed at 5:40 p.m.
Attendance:
Professional Staff, Management:
[x] K. Bonds (95)[1]
[E] S. Clarke (93)
[x] V. Conover (93)
[E] D. Danielson(95)[1]
[x] K. Harrington(94)[1]
[x] T. Kflu (93)[1]
[x] T. Malinoski (93)[1]
[x] G. McNeil (95)
[x] C. Niles (94)
[x] M. Pabst (94)[1]
[x] B. Servatius (93)
[3] A. Wiedenbeck (95)
Arts, Education, Humanities:
[E] J. Burke (94) [2]
[1] M. Charbonnet (93)
[2] J. Gillette (93)
[x] H. Jacobson (93)
[x] D. Kerzner (95)
[x] R. Klassen (95)
[x] T. Loughlin (93)
[1] K. Lucey (93)
[1] L. Maheady (94)
[x] J. McVicker (95)
[x] M. Nelson (93)
[x] J. Parla (95) [1]
[ ] (VACANT)
Natural and Social Sciences:
[3] G. Baird (94)
[x] J. Hansen (94)
[x] T. Janik (93)
[2] J. Kraus (95)
[x] F. Krohn (93)
[x] K. Mantai (93)
[x] A. Parai (95)
[E] J. Romal (93)
[x] T. Rywick (94)
[x] A. Sarker (95)
[x] P. Sinden (93)
[x] B.J.Stephens (95)[1]
[x] M. Vassallo (95)
Student Representatives:
[x] N. Crino
[x] S. Downey [1]
[x] M. Eglin
[x] R. Kerr
[x] N. Merkel
[x] G. Schneider [1]
Ex Officio:
[x] D. Burdette [1]
[2] J. Crowley
[x] M. Dimitri
[x] D. Hess
[x] D. Jelski
[x] M. L. Lunde
[x] D. MacPhee
[x] T. McNeil
[x] T. Steinberg
[x] J. Straight
[3] S. Warner
[x] A. Wheeler
[x] S. Zablotney
Guests:
Nancy Bowser
Lee Braude
Laura Henning
James Huffman
Minda Rae Amiran
Ronald Ambrosetti
Thomas McNeil, College Senate Secretary