Draft Minutes for February 2, 2009

Fredonia University Senate
Minutes, February 2, 2009

The Fredonia University Senate was called to order by Chair Ana Maria Klein at 4:03 PM in S-104 Williams Center on Monday, February 2, 2009.

A motion to approve the draft agenda was made by Sen. Michael Szocki (Computer and Information Science) and was seconded. There was no discussion, and the agenda was approved by unanimous voice vote.

A motion to approve the draft minutes of the meeting of December 1, 2008, was made by Senator Adrienne McCormick (English) and was seconded. Sen. Szocki pointed out an error in the time the meeting came to order, which reads "4:65PM". The Faculty Secretary indicated that was a typo, and should read "4:05PM." With no further discussion, the draft minutes were accepted with that change by unanimous voice vote.

Report of the President: Dr. Dennis Hefner

President Hefner reported:

Enrollment is very strong. We knew we had about 130 incoming freshmen and about 40 more graduate students than the previous fall. So far spring looks like incoming freshmen are closer to 200 and the retention rate has improved from fall to spring this year versus last year. Graduate enrollment is up by about 50 from last spring, and up by about 10 from fall 2008. So we have close to a 250 head count increase over last year, and that will generate tuition dollars and help us to roll money into next year to assist with the budget problem.

Tom Egan, the former chair of the Board of Trustees has stepped down from the Board.

We still don't have a new Chancellor, but we are being told "any day now." It was thought there would be an announcement last week, and it is down to 2 finalists. As soon as Pres. Hefner knows, he will send out a memo announcing the appointment.

Next week the Legislature will fill this year's budget gap. Gov. Paterson wants a $1.8 billion reduction in the current year's budget, and that is scheduled to be voted on in the coming week. SUNY will be about $65 Million worth of the $1.8 Billion. That looks quite likely to pass.

He put together a committee to look at re-engineering the appointment and reappointment process. He wanted to reassure all that this is not to look at the criteria, just to look at what happens centrally to notify the departments (especially for professional staff). We've had many snags in the processing of these, and it gets very complicated. So this committee will look at the mechanics or processing these and will come back with some recommendations. This will look at such things as timing, notifications, etc.

He announced that he had taken it upon himself to sign a petition to try to keep guns off of the campuses. In Utah, they have passed a law that allows anyone to carry a gun on a campus, and it can be concealed. Such a move makes no sense to him in this day and age.

Finally, there are little sheets on the handout table with prospective names to serve on a Committee to Review the Student Affairs Division. He worked with the Senate Executive Committee, especially with the Chair of Senate, putting together this slate. It is customary for the Senate to vote on such a slate as a whole. This spring Student Affairs and its Vice President will be reviewed. No students are asked to serve on personnel review committees, although students will certainly be involved in the interviews and information gathering. This slate has representatives from the Senate, and the divisions of Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, Administration and University Advancement. (The slate can be found on the ANGEL site or on the Senate web page with the minutes of this meeting.)

At this point, the Chair asked for a motion. Sen. Chuck Stoddard (Education) moved approval and the motion received a second. In discussion, Pres. Hefner indicated that all have said they are willing to serve. The vote on the motion passed unanimously by voice.

There were no questions for Pres. Hefner.

Report of the Vice President for Academic Affairs: Dr. Virginia Horvath

VP Horvath touched on several topics, all of which can be read in more depth as an attachment to these minutes on the ANGEL site or the Senate web page:

Progress on the tenure track searches

All eleven requests for sabbaticals have been supported

New recruiting and tracking software is being used for graduate applications

There will now be a "smart" catalog online that allows print on demand. These catalogs will be annual, and that will go live on June 1, 2009.

Reported on the process taking place reviewing policies on appointment, reappointment, continuing appointment, etc.: the task force from last year identified areas of concern; the VP Council has been revising or supplying policy in draft form; these drafts will be shared with the community and with Faculty and Professional Affairs Committee; she expects there to be much comment and many changes to the draft from those who attend various forums, and they want to hear from you; this will be on the agenda for the Academic Leadership meeting on Feb. 18; hope to have a draft ready for the next Senate meeting; there will be an open forum in March, further discussion at Senate on April 6, and an open forum in April; on May 4, the hope is for further discussion and possibly a vote in Senate- at least it would be good to approve the parts that are palatable and give some clear guidelines with those.

Continuing the discussion about course evaluation policies and procedures, there have been open forums scheduled for Monday, Feb. 9, from 1-2PM in 202 McEwen and on Tuesday, Feb. 24, from 5-6PM in Fenton 105. Again, we need considerable input before we move forward.

Stating that the Senate Executive Committee had asked her to report on the adjunct budget, she indicated that due to the ongoing budget problems in the State, we expect to have some positions to be held permanently open. Academic Affairs expects a reduction of 3 faculty and 3 staff positions. The adjunct budget is in two parts: the fixed allocation and a variable allocation. The variable depends on how much we can obtain from open lines (from retirements, resignations, etc.) The adjunct budget has been about $2.9 million per year. A permanently open faculty line is normally calculated to be worth $50,000 to the variable budget. That does not mean we use $50,000 to pay a person to fill that hole. That amount is divvied up into covering personnel costs, extra service payments, stipends, and covering personnel who cannot teach due to illness, etc.

The model for next year: the Deans and the VPAA will review the list and will do a different planning process than in the past. Before, we've been in a growth mode. This year we will look at all and try to agree on which three positions will be left permanently open. The fixed budget will be increased by $24,000 for each of these three lines. This will be a permanent addition to the adjunct budget. There will be NO allocation to the variable adjunct budget for those three lines. So when you hear people say "I hear the adjunct budget is cut by 50%", that is not true. Overall a reduction of the entire adjunct budget will be about $75,000, but we are expecting that we will not likely see such a gap because people will be leaving during the year. The first priority is to cover instruction that is being offered. The Deans will be asking tough questions about do we need as many upper division electives, and will be very careful about section sizes, as well as the number of sections offered, etc.

Questions:

Sen. Parliamentarian H. Joseph Straight asked his bottom line question: should he work in summer orientation this coming summer or not? It can be very frustrating sitting there with an incoming freshman and not be able to find any classes they can be excited about taking. Dean John Kijinski (Arts and Humanities) responded that we are trying to be particularly careful about having courses that will meet the needs of freshmen. We are asking can we squeeze up the line... for example with an elective that is offered every semester; can we offer it every third semester? Dean Christine Givner (Education) then added that the deans will look at the data: freshmen and transfers, what majors they are in, etc., and will make sure you have the sections you need. Transparent communication is necessary. If you see a need, let the managers know, so we can readjust the seats available. VP Horvath echoed that flexibility is vital and we will try to be very flexible.

Sen. Jonathan Chausovsky asked are you trying to keep the sections from growing in size, or make them as large as the room will allow? Dean Kijinski responded, "Yes." Dr. Horvath then said it may be difficult. With the number of students who showed up this past Sunday, there were problems finding seats. We are willing to add small numbers to sections, but we won't double the section size. As we approach advising, it might be a good idea for us to do some brainstorming about how to accommodate this. Pass on suggestions to be looked into at Academic Leadership.

Sen. Ziya Arnavut (Computer and Information Science) spoke to the need for a faculty handbook. VP Horvath responded by saying that the current handbook is quite outdated and the section will be revised. Human Resources is trying to develop a policy register for the campus. Janet Mayer is the Academic Affairs representative to that committee.

Report of the Chair of the Senate: Dr. Ana Maria Klein

Chair Klein reported for Chris Taverna (Chair, Faculty and Professional Affairs Committee) that the committee now has two vacancies that need to be filled. These might be done on a temporary basis. Also, please remember the Spring Forum for Professionals coming up.

Chair Klein then announced that last Monday the Executive Committee was given a task of writing a letter concerning the Deficit Reduction Plan (DRP) pending before the New York State Legislature. A copy of what that Committee sent will be on the ANGEL site and the Senate web page with the minutes of this meeting. The Executive Committee drafted this very quickly, and she thanked all who participated.

The Chair then announced that we need to have nominees to replace Dr. Cheryl Drout when her term as SUNY-wide Senator expires this year, as well as for our Alternate SUNY-wide Senator. Those elections are coming in April. Please ask around for potential nominees.

Chair Klein then introduced Vice-Chair Bruce Simon to inform the group about bylaws revisions.

Vice-Chair Simon indicated that one of the things we've been considering is how to put the needed changes through. Some are fairly complex, some are fairly easy, but have to go to the entire faculty, and also there is a long and growing list of editorial changes (typos, capitalization changes, changes in department names, etc.) that will need only a vote of the Senate. We are putting together a list of proposed changes. Next meeting we will have the list of editorial changes to be voted up or down in April. Other changes will be discussed, and then voted on in the Senate, but then will have to be voted on by the full faculty.

Sen. Steve Kershnar (Philosophy) then rose to ask if we can vote on moving back to Fenton 105. Chair Klein responded that we had arranged to use this room for the rest of the year and Fenton 105 is now being used as a classroom.

OLD BUSINESS

Academic Affairs Committee: Dr. H. Joseph Straight

Dr. Straight said that he would be taking these items up in a slightly different order than what appeared on the agenda.

First, we will deal with the new minors.

At the December meeting, we presented an outline for a new minor in writing, under the English Department.

There was no new discussion. The vote was taken and the Minor in Writing passed by unanimous voice vote.

Dr. Straight then presented the new minors in Sport Management and Exercise Science, which were tracks in the old interdisciplinary program. These are in Athletic Coaching, Sports Administration and Communication, and Sport and Exercise Sciences.

There was no new discussion. The minors were approved by unanimous voice vote.

Then Dr. Straight presented the Drop/Add deadline proposal, stating that the straw vote was overwhelmingly in favor of making it somewhat earlier to add courses (early in the second week of classes) and leaving the final day to drop classes remaining at the end of the first week of classes. We are proposing that the deadline for adding classes be moved to the Tuesday of the second week of classes. For fall 2009 this would make the deadline to add be Tuesday, Sept. 1 (instead of Friday, Sept. 4), and the deadline to drop (except for first semester freshmen) Friday, Aug. 28.

Sen. Nick Dhimitri (Student Association) rose to express concern for students such as those in music or dance who may not know whether they are accepted into a course due to auditions. Under the current schedule, if a professor feels that a student has missed too much content to be allowed in, then they can refuse to sign the student into the course. However, the professor could allow them in as late as the Friday of the second week of courses. Dr. Straight asked if in music we are talking about ensembles or that sort of thing. Sen. Dhimitri said he wasn't sure. These concerns came from students in those programs. At this point, Nan Bowser, Registrar, said we've had a long-standing arrangement with the performing arts to allow section changes or course changes for the first two weeks. We would continue with that flexibility for such programs. One of the Senators from the Music Department added that all the ensembles would be informed of placement no later than the first Friday, probably by the first Thursday night.

There being no further discussion the vote was taken. The motion passed by voice vote.

Dr. Straight then informed the body that at the last meeting, we discussed a form for giving a student the grade of incomplete, because some faculty are not following the catalog in terms of reasons for assigning this grade. A lot of those who were given the grade of incomplete never fulfill the terms, and that grade is just carried on until it automatically turns into an F. So the idea was to use a form which would require that a student contact their instructor to work out what was necessary to complete an incomplete, and also to have some idea of what the grade would be if no further work were turned in. This would also provide flexibility for when the work would be completed. Some of the necessary signatures could be done electronically, with the paper copy to follow to the Registrar's Office eventually.

Sen. David Herman (VP Student Affairs) asked would this record be maintained in the Registrar's Office. Dr. Straight responded, "Yes."

Sen. Doug Jordan (Student Association) asked does this require the Registrar's approval, or is it just between the student and his/her teacher? Dr. Straight replied that the Registrar's approval was not necessary.

Sen. Kershnar asked why isn't the current system enough? Why do we need to add an additional bureaucratic level? Dr. Straight responded that he agreed a student should see the "I" on the transcript, but what we see is that a large number of incompletes never get finished, and students end up with Fs. Sen. Kershnar suggested that perhaps the student never planned on completing it.

Sen. Horvath asked could the incomplete grade be submitted online in the regular timeline so it could be handled appropriately by the Registrar's Office? Dr. Straight answered yes; the Registrar's Office has indicated they could deal with these in the normal timeline.

Sen. Arnavut added that this is a very appropriate method to help solve a problem.

Sen. Dani McKinney (At Large, Social Sciences) asked what the deadline will be for this? Registrar Nan Bowser responded if you can get the form to me or Scott by the deadline for grades due, we'll make sure the incomplete is entered before we do the grades. If you get it to us by 11:29, we'll be able to handle it.

Senator [unknown] asked if it is online, how will we interact with the student? Dr. Straight answered what we would want is to have an electronic signature on the form. You could say to the student, we have this form we have to do now, the instructor would download the form, then maybe you would email it to the student, put your name in and date it indicating the instructor has talked to the student. But we would like to eventually get the paper form back. You could mail that to the student and ask them to send it back.

Registrar Bowser said the form could be on the Registrar's web page, so the student could complete it and send it on to the faculty member, and then send it on to us. Dr. Straight responded the student could initiate, but would have to send it to the faculty member to have correct information put into the form. We'll have the form on the Registrar's web page and other places as well.

Sen. Leesa Rittelmann (At Large, Arts) then said with the amount of paperwork we have to deal with, the last thing I need or want to deal with is this form. I don't understand why it is necessary over the current system. I don't give out many incompletes. I don't see a need for this.

Sen. McKinney commented let's say we do pass this, and you get the form. What happens now? If the student never comes back? Will they get the grade we said they would earn if they did no further work? Dr. Straight replied, "Yes."

Sen. Kershnar then asked if we need this because many students are receiving F grades? Registrar Bowser answered that 50% of incomplete grades convert to Fs -- about 100 such grades when the student didn't complete the work or didn't ask for the incomplete in the first place. We've had faculty say this student earned a D grade, and I wanted to make sure they could improve their grade, but the student now has an F.

Sen. Simon then asked we are still allowed to submit a change of grade form? Registrar Bowser replied, "Yes."

Sen. Rittelmann stated that she says in her syllabus that an incomplete grade will only be given for this and this and the student has to complete the work within three weeks of the end of the course. It is on the student! If they don't want to get an F, they have to be responsible enough to do what is necessary. It is a part of the expectation. Registrar Bowser then commented but if the student didn't really earn an F, but a C or a D, you'd still want them to be given an F? Sen. Rittelmann answered if there is some portion of the work missing, and they haven't completed it, they have earned an F.

Sen. Arnavut argued that if a student missed a final, if they have a legitimate excuse, we have to give them a chance. Otherwise, it is their problem. First year and second year students, yes there is a learning curve, we need to be very open with them about our expectations.

Senator [Unknown] added I was thinking this wouldn't be too much of a burden. I average one legitimate incomplete a year. It would be an exception to have 3 or 4 a semester.

Sen. Shannon McRae (At Large, Humanities) rose to say the issue is there is a policy in our catalog, and people aren't adhering to that policy. It seems this is to force a certain kind of adherence. It is a kind of policing.

Registrar Bowser when students come and complain about why they were given an incomplete when they felt they had completed the course work, it can be very difficult to determine what needs to be determined. One case was an adjunct who had left town, in another case the faculty member had passed away. When a student says they had been excused from the final beforehand, and the faculty aren't here, and there is no form for what grade the student would have gotten had they done no further work, we can't get a grade for the student. Would you like me to contact every faculty member and ask? Sen. Horvath added this is not to encourage us to give more incompletes. If an "I" is going to be given, we need specific and certain circumstances for it. Students are sometimes surprised about what has not been turned in. This should be helpful to the student to inform her about what is needed to earn the grade, and will also help the Registrar who will have a record of what date the work was expected to be completed and what grade the student would have earned without completing those requirements.

Sen. McCormick commented that one could put an F on the form if you have a policy that students have to complete all assignments to pass the course, instead of just receiving an F by default. Why would we have to do two forms, though? Is there no integrity to the electronic form? Can't we do it once if we have the actual non-electronic form with signatures right at the beginning?

Sen. Chausovsky stated that he really does see problems coordinating with the students, for a lot of different reasons. He is really concerned about the need for a student's signature. Dr. Straight responded we can consider that, but please let us consider that down the road. If a student drops a course, they have to sign a form. If they add a course, or change their major, etc., they have to have signatures on forms. Sen. Chausovsky then argued what you are doing here is taking the Incomplete grade out of the control of the professor. Several others proclaimed generally that is the current policy!

Registrar Bowser rose to say the current policy requires the student to ask for an incomplete grade. The student should be involved.

There being no further discussion, the vote was called. Voice vote was inconclusive. Showing of hands vote passed 19 Aye, 11 No, and 0 Abstentions.

Professional Development Day

At this point, Dr. Beez Schell (Prof. Development Center) and Sen. Lisa Melohusky (Academic Affairs) were invited to conduct a discussion of the concept of adding a Professional Development Day to the calendar. Dr. Schell reminded the group that at the December meeting, Academic Affairs Committee brought forth a few ideas, but endorsed none of them. Ideas presented included a day in the fall or the idea of having a common time for meetings, workshops, etc. In preparation for today's meeting, Dr. Schell asked around among the community of Professional Developers to find out who did what. She determined that nobody had a professional development day built into their calendar. Most had a teaching/learning conference just before the semester, or just after the semester. Almost everyone had a "common hour" but there were several different models for the common hour concept. The one that seemed to work the best was M/W/F from 1-2PM and T/TH from 12:30-1:30PM.

Sen. Stoddard then moved that we approve conceptually the hour long "common hour" to begin in 2010.

Registrar Bowser immediately stated that while she supports the concept of a common hour, when we first looked at this idea we were thinking of only T/TH, which would require moving of 45 courses to earlier or later times on those days. If we add M/W/F to the mix, we'd have to move 88 courses, and given our current classrooms we couldn't deal with such a schedule.

Sen. Rittelmann offered that VANM contact hours for studio classes run on an entirely different schedule. Art has to work around that, and the idea of a common hour probably won't work for our department.

Sen. McKinney then seconded the motion.

Sen. Kate Levy then added that in the School of Music there are great concerns about this proposal for a common hour. We have ensembles that meet 2 hours a day and we are already struggling to fit our schedule plus adding the CCCs for our students. We support the concept, but we certainly couldn't do it if it were five days a week. We struggle with finding time within our own area for meetings, would the common time always be used for workshop type activities? Dr. Schell responded obviously the common time will be taken up with all kinds of activities. Some have a schedule such as the first of the month is for department meetings, the second for workshops, the third is for committees, etc. We could all communicate about this. Not every department need to meet every week.

Sen. Angela Haas (At Large, Arts) then commented our (School of Music) theory classes are all taken at the same time, so they are done M/W/F and T/TH. This would unbalance that schedule, as well.

Sen. McRae asked is there a way to legally have a day when we wouldn't have other obligations reserved in advance? Pres. Hefner responded it would be possible. We set our schedule, and we do have to meet certain state requirements for having a certain number of days per semester for instruction, but the calendar committee could find a day. Sen. McRae then asked similar to the old Option A? Pres. Hefner responded, "Yes."

Sen. Pat Astry (Biology) commented that Biology enrollments are going up, and we used to have lab time T/W/TH. Now we are expanding lab time into Friday. We are more and more congested, and this will continue to increase as our enrollments grow.

Sen. McKinney added that is one of the problems Psychology has, too. Right now we have no T/TH 8 classes, but we were running subjects. If we are not told of department meetings well enough in advance, we can't meet because of that.

Sen. Kerrie Wilkes (Library) asked for clarification of the motion. Three options were presented at the December meeting-a teaching/learning day, this common hour concept, and a third which was a combination of the two. I want to be clear on the concept we are "izing"! I don't want the need of a teaching/learning day to get lost.

Sen. Stoddart responded the motion was all of the above.

Sen. Kershnar asked if we have a PDC day, would the semester have an extra day built in? Dr. Schell answered she wasn't sure. Sen. Kershnar followed up that he would think there would be one more day of instruction. Dr. Straight then said the old Option A had enough days in the calendar to not add any days to the teaching semester.

Chair Klein commented that the motion was for 2010. We need to do further work on it.

Sen. Arnavut then said this is a good idea, but we might also need a research day (for student research). Perhaps we can put these ideas together, and come up with an effective solution, include an undergraduate research day with it, possibly a half day for professional development and a half day for undergraduate research.

Chair Klein stated if we vote on the concept and refine it later, and we bring it back for a vote once it is fleshed out... possibly we could have Senate meetings at an earlier time, helping younger faculty with daycare issues, and so forth, to become involved in Senate.

Sen. McCormick asked for a straw poll over the various plans.

Plan A: professional development day
17 favored

Plan B: FredTime (common time concept)
3 favored

Plan C: combination of both
2 favored

Plan D: not at all
6 favored

A discussion ensued over the exact nature of the motion on the floor, with the moving Senator having several different views that differed from the motion that the Secretary had recorded. The Parliamentarian then ruled the motion out of order at this time. We can consider it under New Business if it is still desired.

Sen. Wilkes then asked what does this mean for the PDC? Dr. Straight answered we are not under a time constraint. We have more time to consider this. Sen. Wilkes followed up asking whether it would come back to the Senate once the PDC has time to consider how to do this? Chair Klein responded, "Yes."

Discussion Items

Academic Affairs Committee Report: Dr. H. Joseph Straight

Please discuss the proposed Learning Assistants policy/guidelines in your departments. It is on the ANGEL Senate site and on the Senate web page. There was an ad hoc committee looking at these issues, and the VPAA put forth some recommendations, so the Academic Affairs Committee is calling this "Draft 3." Please discuss and send comments, and this will come back at the next Senate meeting.

Sen. Kershnar asked if anyone had a question, could we email you? Dr. Straight responded, "Yes." (Joseph.Straight@fredonia.edu )

Update on Roundtable on Uninvited Guests

Vice-Chair Simon reminded the body that we are trying to put together a roundtable to discuss what happened during the "Uninvited Visitor" incident in the fall semester, and policy related to such visitors. An interesting thing happened on the way to the forum, not many want to participate in an "official" forum. So instead, we will have an open discussion. Anyone interested in the topic may attend. We will send out information via Proftalk, and will make sure that those who have expressed interest can attend.

Report of SUNY-wide Senate Senator: Dr. Cheryl Drout

Sen. Drout announced the upcoming Plenary in February at Morrisville, and the SUNY Conference on the Promise of Higher Education, which is in honor of SUNY's 60th anniversary, to be held at SUNY Albany, April 3-5, 2009. She also reminded the body that there is the need for nominees for SUNY-wide Senator and Alternate Senator. She offered to provide answers to questions for anyone who was interested in running. Please think about possible self-nominations or others to nominate for these positions.

Dr. Straight asked about the Alternate Senator, do we also hold an election for that, or is that the second place finisher. Sen. Charles Davis (Governance Officer) responded we can check on that. Sen. Courtney (Faculty Secretary) indicated that in recent years, we've had only one person willing to run for the SUNY-wide Senator, so there was no runner-up and we had to go out and find someone willing to serve as the Alternate Senator.

Report of the Middle States Steering Committee: Dr. Roger Byrne and Sen. Kerrie Wilkes

The body was informed that we are still in the research phase of our self study, and the Working Groups are to submit their draft reports by March 1. The Steering Committee will then write the Self Study Report with the draft being ready by fall, when there will be chances to attend forums and send comments.

New Business

There was no new business.

The Chair asked for a motion to adjourn. Sen. Kershnar moved, and Sen. Arnavut seconded. There being no further discussion of the motion, the motion was passed by unanimous voice vote.

The meeting adjourned at 5:45 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Vincent Courtney
Faculty Secretary

ATTACHMENTS

Attendance Sheet (.pdf)

Dr. Hefner's Approvals-Disapprovals (.pdf)

Remarks for University Senate from VPAA (.doc)

Report of the Academic Affairs Committee (.pdf)

Advocacy Letter (.doc)

Incomplete Grade Application-Agreement Form (.pdf)

PDC Handout for February Events (.pdf)

The PDC in Brief Newsletter (.pdf)