| April 1, 2009
Senators Present: Breuninger, Furlan, Vasilevska, Sereda, Yockey, Hulac, McDonald, Wolff, Nilson, Myers, Manzerra, Thomas, Goodman, Settles, Alexander, Staben
Senators Present by Proxy: Jepsen, Grayson, Yip, Yost, Smallfield
Senators Absent: Gombocz, Helenurm, Sharples, Guyette, Olson, Ikiugu, Erkine, Alberts, GradyVice-Chair Breuninger called the meeting to order at 4:02 pm.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 4 March 2009 were approved without
An update on Promotion
and tenure was added to the agenda as a topic under For the Good of the
Report from Provost
The Provost reported that there was no new information on budget cuts ready to be shared, that the proposed cuts need to be discussed at Budget Committee meeting, and that announcements would come after that. He also reported that promotion and tenure letters have been sent out to candidates. The rates for granting of promotion and tenure were similar to previous years. Matt Moen is chairing the search committee for the Diversity Officer which has been formed and is beginning the search.
For the Good of the University
Lynn Rognstad announced the winners of the Belbas-Larsen awards and thanked the committee for their work. Yockey moved that the nominees be approved. The motion carried.
Academic Integrity Associate VPAA Lynn Rognstad
Rognstad reported that students will be asked to sign a pledge at convocation. Faculty members that encounter an instance of academic dishonesty in the classroom will be encouraged to refer that to the student conduct hearing process. A repository of students that have been referred will be maintained, so faculty members are encouraged to refer the name of students. The new policy from the Board has changed the Academic appeal process, and a hearing will no longer be part of the process. The process of Academic Appeals has been firmed up and copies of the Academic Appeals by Undergraduate Students were distributed. Rognstad would appreciate feedback from Senators on the form. There will be a slightly different version for graduate students to account for the relationship between the graduate school and the departments.
External letters of reference Provost Chuck Staben
The Provost distributed copies of the SDSU Guidelines for the External Peer Review Process of Tenured and Tenure Track Faculty as an example in advance of his writing a similar document for USD. The Board is planning to move to an external review, and he wants to preempt that for USD. Letters will be from peer universities and qualified peer judgments. Letters will be included in some way in our review process. Probably a minimum of three and maximum of six letters will be required. The letters will be oriented more towards the research component than the teaching component. Guidelines will probably be written during the summer and additional information will be available then. Med and Law will probably follow similar procedures.
USD Website Senior Web Strategist Rogene Thaden
Thaden reported that the rollout of new Web site is scheduled for August. The designs for various levels were presented. She is ready to start meeting with department chairs for feedback. The site will include earch engine friendly URLs (longer) plus shorter vanity URLs. The Web site is intended for external audiences. Admissions microsite, myUportal (some special features, such as Wake-Up Call for mid-term deficiencies, customizable),
Policy on Research Centers VP (Research) Laura Jenski
Jenski discussed a proposed Policy for University Research Centers. Given USDís small departments, and small numbers of faculty, the research centers represent an opportunity to draw from various departments and possibly other campuses. The policy is intended for fy2010 implementation, and would therefore start July 1, 2009. The need for the policy was realised following a review of the current status that revealed confusing terminology and lack of definition of what a research center is. The policy will provide criteria for establishing a center. There are probably around 11 bodies on campus that would meet these criteria at this point, but many more have similar nomiclature, Center, Laboratory, Institute, etc.
Update on Promotion and Tenure Professor David Alexander on behalf of COHE
Committee ReportsConference of Senates Professor David Alexander
Professor Helenurm and Professor Alexander met the four members of the SDSU Senateís executive board for dinner in Sioux Falls. Much of the discussion was related to COHE and its representation of faculty interests, or lack of, and included discussion of what alternatives might exist and what would be required to replace COHE as the faculty bargaining agent. This idea was particularly attractive to the SDSU representatives given that COHE had attempted to take control over the Senate at SDSU within the last three years. As none of those present were familiar with the process that would be involved in de-certifying the faculty bargaining agent, it was agreed that the process should be investigated. The future of the Conference of Senates was discussed and it was generally agreed that the format of inviting legislators was not productive and should be discontinued. We agreed to recommend that in the future the Senates try to meet twice a year and that other east river Senates should be invited to attend.
AnnouncementsThe student representatives proxy announced that the technology fee proposal at the Regents level for vote tomorrow appears to be to support Mobile Computing. The student representatives were in Aberdeen to represent student opinions regarding this issue.
current executive committee will draft
an agenda for the May meeting. Professor Yockey was nominated (Hulac,
to serve as temporary Chair to run the May meeting until the new Chair
elected. The motion carried.
The next meeting of the Faculty Senate will be on 6 May 2009, Williamson Room, Arts & Sciences 216B, at 4:00 p.m.
Information to be included on the Senate Agenda should be forwarded to the Chair or Vice Chair of the Senate no later than 29 April 2009. The Executive Committee of the Senate will review and approve the final agenda.
submitted by David Alexander Text
of Telephone Message from Bill Sweeney
submitted by David Alexander
of Telephone Message from Bill Sweeney
Iím giving you an update to share with the Senate tomorrow with regards to the promotion and tenure issues. COHE never heard from the Executive Director. Our understanding was that the Executive Director had told the campus Presidents of the respective Senates that he would take up the issue of the promotion and tenure concerns with COHE. No one from the Board ever contacted COHE about that, therefore there was no invitation to reopen negotiations from the Board or anyone else with regards to that. However, COHE did approach the Board about reopening negotiatons, based upon the information that COHE had with regards to that Round Table in January and the resolution coming from USD as well as the sentiments of the other Senates, and the Board has accepted and is willing to go back to the table and renegotiate the promotion and tenure issues, and so if you could let the faculty of the Senate know that this was at COHE initiation, this was not at the Board initiation. In fact, It appears to us as if the Board was going to ignore this all together, at least the Board staff, I shouldnít say the Regents, the Board staff, was going to ignore this altogether. Now my understanding was that the Board staff was very reluctant to invite COHE because of a potential unfair labor practice that they had engaged in by discussing negotiation issues with those that were not directly involved with negotiations. That being said, I think that since this was brought to their attention by their own administrations, they have responsibility to invite the other party involved in those negotions back to the table, but that did not happen. Therefore, COHE for the good of the faculty, has made this initiation and the Board is willing to go back to the table and address the concerns related to the promotion and tenure five year and out issues. At this point in time I do not know if itís just going to be specific to the five year and out promotion and tenure issues or whether or not there are going to be other issues that are also going to be reopened with regard to negotiations.