http://www.scsu.ctstateu.edu/organizations/facultysenate

The fourth meeting of the 2001-2002 year was called to order at 12:15 PM.

Members Present:

Brownell (Art), Lavin (Art), Puerschner (Chemistry), Coburn-Enquist (Communication), Jirsa (ComDisorder/MFT), DaPonte (Computer Science), Lawler (Counseling), Fullmer (Earth Science), Thorson (Econ/Finance), Corbett (Education), Petrie (English), Hood (English), Johnson (English), Mee (Exercise Science), Rinehardt (Exercise Science), Verplaetse (Foreign Language), Sakalowsky (Geography), Judd (History), Petto (History), Dunklee (Jounalism), Bielefield (Library Science), Prince (Marketing), Bennett (Math), Brin (Math), Wallace (Nursing), Prince (Part-time faculty), Young (Part-time faculty), Volkman (Philosophy), Broadbridge (Physics), Paulson (Political Science), Sherman (Psychology), Kahlbaugh (Psychology), Bulmer (Public Health), Grants (Recreation/Leisure), Cusato (Science Ed/Env Stud), Dripchak (Social Work), Skoczen (Soc & Anthro), Brucker (Special Ed/Reading), Major (Special Ed/Reading), Watts (Theatre)

Visitors:

Tait

Members Absent:

(Accounting), Maloney (Athletics), Martinelli (Biology), Ullian (Communication), Nwachuku (Couns/SchPsych), (Education), Cairns (Ed Leadership), Hernandez (Foreign Language), Schofield-Bodt (Library Science), Wu (Library), Nodoushani (Management), Moss (Music), (Part-time faculty), (Part-time faculty), Haymes (Social Work)

The minutes of October 10 were approved.

Vice-President for Academic Affairs, J.P. Smith

Vice-President for Finance, J. Blake

After reviewing President Adanti’s letter of 10-24-01 (attached), the speakers answered questions about the budget.

• Does the hiring freeze apply to those paid for with grant money? J. Blake: The hiring freeze will only apply to state-funded positions, not to those funded from grant money.
• Has the University budget recovered from previous cuts, or are we being asked to make cuts on top of cuts from the past? J. Blake: State appropriation has increased, but it has not kept up with the rate of inflation. Resources are scarce.
• How can one expect to BOTH cut sections and increase enrollment? Aren’t these mutually exclusive policies? J.P. Smith: Obviously, we cannot do this all the time, but it has worked in the past. The point is to encourage students to take courses with higher enrollments, so we teach more nearly at capacity. Of course, if we often cut the upper-level courses students need and want, then they will go elsewhere. But we can manage to do this every once in awhile.
• Wouldn’t it save money to replace the thermostats in Engleman Hall, so the windows would not have to be open in the winter? J. Blake: Because of the renovations that are currently taking place, we have not replaced those thermostats yet.
• What is the expected impact of these cuts on academic programs? J.P. Smith: There will be no significant impact on faculty hires, since the vast majority would not take effect until the Fall of ’02. There will be a significant cut in funds for University Assistants, and programs will have to decide how to handle the work formerly done by UAs. Also, some low-enrollment upper-level courses may need to be cut. It is not intended that a "meat axe" be taken to these budgets, or to the budget for adjuncts. Deans have been asked to look at the offerings in their schools, and we will see what needs to be done.
• Could we save a lot of money by all using Energy-Star compliant computers? J. Blake: I’m not sure how far that would go.
• If the cuts we’ve heard about are for non-teaching staff, will there be any impact on teaching positions for January? J.P. Smith: The hiring freeze in effect does not generally impact the hiring of faculty, since the vast majority of such hiring takes place in the Fall. However, any hiring that was to be done in January may need to be deferred until the Fall.
• Will any cuts be announced in advance? J.P. Smith: There was no earlier announcement than today. So far, we have only asked the Deans to take a look into possible cuts. We have not yet made any actual cuts. Some Deans may have taken it upon themselves to go beyond what we asked, as is their prerogative, but this was not directed by us.

L. Prince moved that the agenda be changed so that the first item of New Business, "Support of

Campus Equity Week," would be the first item of business, since this resolution is time-sensitive. The motion passed.

President Paulson announced that copies of the NEASC self-study were available from R. Gerber’s office. He also called specific attention to language in a recent BOT brief before the Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations that threatens the principles of shared governance. The brief speaks of management’s "right to determine academic policy."

R. Volkman: The Fourth Interdisciplinary, University-wide Conference at SCSU will be Saturday, October 27. The topic will be: "What are poets for in a destitute time…?"

R. Jirsa: Free hearing tests are available in Davis Hall to SCSU staff. For more information, call 392-5955.

S. Judd: Phi Alpha Theta History Honor Society is sponsoring the lecture "Islam and Christianity: Jihad vs. Crusade?" on Monday, October 29 at 1:10 in EN 115.

J. Tait reported that the UCF debate on the future of the Writing Program has been postponed two weeks. The debate will now be held on November 14 in the AVP room at 9:35am.

Standing Committee Reports:

1. Rules: There is a resolution under Old Business.
2. Personnel Policy:
• Regarding the current contract impasse, two faculty members have written a letter that was used by the CCSU Faculty Senate to formulate a resolution. Before proceeding in a similar manner, the Personnel Policy Committee felt three empirical assertions in the document needed to be investigated:
1. The letter asserts that the number of full-time faculty has gone down while student enrollment increased. This is not true. In fact, the ratio of full-time faculty to students has stayed right around 21-23:1 over the years.
2. The letter makes assertions about the ratio of full-time to adjunct faculty that cannot be verified. We just do not know what that ratio is.
3. The letter suggests that teaching loads at CSU are too high, but we discovered that the average teaching load at SCSU is 10.237 credit hours. Furthermore, faculty have an average of 1.763 hours release time, and carry an average overload of about 6 credits.

In light of these facts, the committee was unable to endorse the letter at this time.

• The committee’s next job will be to respond to the BOT brief mentioned in President Paulson’s report.
• A revised resolution concerning the Hardship DEC document will be on the agenda for our next meeting.
3. Student Policy: No report.
4. Technology:
• Banner registration may be tried in the Graduate School, but faculty should not worry–paper registration will always exist.
• M.S. Exchange will be implemented as the standard email client for PC users. This is of special significance for those still using the VAX, which will be phased out.
• New letters regarding upgrades to faculty computers will be sent in November.
• With respect to support from IT, software packages can be categorized as follows:
1. Standard–what is automatically installed and supported on all computers,
2. Supported–specific programs that are paid for and supported, but that are not installed automatically,
3. Non-Supported–programs that may be installed by IT, but are funded and supported by individual departments.
5. Academic Policy:
• The committee continues to explore procedures for canceling of a program.
• The committee discussed the wisdom of cutting sections during conditions of high enrollment.
• The committee has a late course withdrawal resolution on the agenda under Old Business.
6. Elections:
• The elections mentioned at the last meeting are coming up.
7. Finance:
• P. Brucker, Chair, pointed out that she meets regularly with Vice-President J. Blake. If anyone has more questions about the ongoing budget concerns, contact her and she will try to get the answers.

New Business:

1. L. Prince moved the resolution in Support of Campus Equity Week attached to the agenda of 10-24-01. The motion passed unanimously.

Old Business:

1. Academic Policy : Course Withdrawal Resolution #3 (attached to 9-26 agenda)

R.Volkman moved to amend the resolution to read as follows:

Whereas any significant change in the late withdrawal policy will have profound effects on the policies of departments, Honors and awards committees, thesis advisement, and others throughout the University,

Whereas such a change ought not to be imposed on these bodies without deliberate dialogue of the potential impacts,

Therefore be it resolved that:

The Academic Policy Committee shall oversee a detailed study and dialogue regarding the effects of the following late withdrawal policy:

"that any student may withdraw from a course, for any reason, following the Add/Drop period up to the last day of classes and before the final exam in that course. The student will receive a grade of "W" on his/her transcript. The student withdraws by submitting a completed form to the Records/Registrar’s Office which contains the signatures of the instructor and the student’s academic advisor, attesting that the student has been informed of the consequences of the withdrawal."

This study shall include:

• Soliciting statements of impact from each department, Honors and awards committees, Deans, and others throughout the University
• Examining the effects of such a policy as implemented at other Universities
• An open forum for all faculty to express their concerns and wishes
• Putting the proposed policy on the agenda for discussion at meetings of the various schools
• Any other actions as deemed necessary by the committee for the careful building of a consensus around either implementing the new policy, or leaving the old policy in place.

The results of this study shall be made publicly available at least a week before final action is taken on changing the policy.

Because the proposed amendment would substantially change the original resolution, it was treated as a substitute resolution.

W. Sherman moved to amend the phrase, "This study shall include," to read, "This study may include." The amendment was accepted without objection.

The motion passed as amended.

2. Rules: Accountability of Senators (attached to 10-10 agenda)

Several Senators expressed their support of the present rule on accountability. They noted the need of Senators to take their responsibilities seriously, and to the responsibility of the Senate to inform voting units in the event that their representative is not attending the Senate for whatever reason. Since the suggested change would not guarantee a timely reporting of a Senator’s absence, they preferred the present wording.

Those in favor of the suggested change cited its overly punitive nature and the difficulties of administering the present policy.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 PM

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

Richard Volkman

Secretary of the Senate

 

Resolutions Passed:

F-01-05 Support of Campus Equity Week