Southeast Missouri State University

Minutes - March 25, 2009

XLIII, No. 12

MINUTES OF THE FACULTY SENATE MEETING

March 25, 2009

The Faculty Senate of Southeast Missouri State University met on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 in the Missouriana Room of the University Center. The following Senators were present: Mary Elizabeth Ambery (Chair), Stephanie Chamberlain (Chair-Elect), Jim McGill (Membership Chair), Rick Althaus, Julie Banks, David Briggs, Michael Cobb, Kathy Conway, Kevin Dickson, Elaine Jackson, Alan Journet, Don Jung, Daniel MacLeay, Walt Paquin, Joyce Renaud, Albie Sautter, Sophia Scott, Rick Sebby, Kathy Smith, Seidu Sofo, Raj Somarajan, Sven Svenson, Larry Underberg, Carol Veneziano, Candide Walton (Alternate), and Janice Ward. Provost Stephens and a reporter from the Capaha Arrow were also in attendance.

Absent and not represented by their alternates were Marc Fulgham, David Naugler, Willie Redmond, and Marc Strauss.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

There being no objections, the Chair declared the minutes Volume XLIII-11 approved as distributed.

REPORT FROM THE CHAIR

Chair Ambery reported that Teresa Wilke, the Director of Grant Development, sent an email asking the Senate to relocate the GRFC Guidelines. She stated that she had received some complaints from faculty about having trouble locating the Guidelines. She requested that the Faculty Senate (FS) put “GRFC” as a bullet on the main FS website with a link to the Grants and Research Funding Committee page. She asked that the Guidelines be posted on that page. There were no objections from the Senators. Chair Ambery asked Dana to proceed with the request.

Chair Ambery asked that discussion about the online contract be postponed until the Senate has a chance to review the resolution being introduced under New Business and until the meeting with Dr. Starrett and Dr. Buis. She indicated that the President refused to rescind the Form. She indicated that the President did state that if there are any abuses to the form to report them to the Provost. The Provost will be notified of courses that are reassigned. Chair Ambery indicated that she had received affirmation by everyone (the President and the Provost) to review the form after it is in place one year. Senator Journet indicated that he had knowledge of and mentioned abuses at the last Faculty Senate meeting. The Provost asked Senator Journet to send those people to her and she would address the issue(s). She reiterated that the President said to reassure faculty that if anyone has a course taken from them, they should bring that issue to the President or Provost and they will look into it. Senator Chamberlain indicated that the President did say that Drs. Buis and Starrett do not have the authority to change the form. Chair Ambery reported that all reassignments, whether an abuse to the policy or not, will be reported to the Provost. Senator Journet indicated that some faculty are being asked to sign the form whether they teach online courses or not. Provost Stephens indicated that faculty are not required to sign the form. She added that those faculty should report those instances to her and she will talk to the chair(s) of the department(s).

Chair Ambery reported that the Board of Regents will be meeting April 3rd. She invited Senators to send her an email with any items they would like her to add to her report. She asked that Senators get those items to her by Thursday afternoon.

REPORT FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE LIAISON

Provost Stephens reported that over spring break she had the pleasure of attending the Center for Strategic and International Student Conference in Washington DC. She reported that the students' presentations were very impressive. The students will present their reports on their presidential policy recommendations on climate change, conflict, energy and trans-national relations April 23rd in the University Center. She encouraged Senators to take part in the conference.

Senator Cobb indicated that he read an article in the paper about the possibility of a new science building. The Provost indicated they have requested a new science building from the one-time money coming from the stimulus package.

Senator Journet asked the Provost if there was ever an appropriate time for the results of student evaluations to be released to the dean. The Provost said that the dean should not have the results of the student evaluations and will remind deans that they are not able to request that information.

REPORT FROM THE STUDENT GOVERNMENT LIAISON

Student Government Liaison, Craig LaChance, was unable to attend.

LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE REPORTS

Professional Affairs
Senator Scott, Chair of Professional Affairs, reported that the Committee will present two items under New Business.

Academic Affairs
Senator Veneziano, Chair of Academic Affairs, reported indicated that there was nothing new to report. She confirmed Textbook Services will be attending the Faculty Senate meeting April 1.

Documents
Senator Ward, Chair of the Documents Committee, indicated that the Committee had not met.

Governance
Senator Sautter, Chair of the Governance Committee, reported that the Committee met with Jim Cook and the Grievance Committee to brainstorm ways to make submitting a grievance more user friendly. She reported that they will work on wording for a “Grievance Page” to be posted on the Faculty Senate website. Senator Conway indicated that during the equity issues training, led by Lincoln Scott, she was left with the impression that if issues arise they should be brought to the Equity and Diversity Issues Department. She said that after meeting with the Grievance Committee, she was made aware that the Equity and Diversity Issues Department represents the University and that faculty should seek their own lawyers.

Membership
Senator McGill, Chair of the Membership Committee, reported that he sent out a notice today to the nine departments who have Faculty Senate representatives whose terms are ending. Senator McGill reported that primary elections cannot occur any sooner than April 18th and the deadline for all positions to be elected is April 30th.

Compensation
Senator Naugler, Chair of Compensation, was unable to attend. Senator Banks reported that the Committee has decided on three recommendations: 1) no change in medical plan, 2) the “uncoupling” of the funding of faculty promotion increase from annual raises and 3) pay increase for AY2010.

OLD BUSINESS

Senator Journet moved that the Faculty Senate endorse the Resolution on the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment (attached). Senator Conway seconded the motion. Senator Cobb asked if there were any upfront costs. Senator Briggs also asked about costs with concern for the University's current financial crunch. Senator Journet explained that there were no upfront costs. There will be things that will cost the University money initially but then will save the University money in the long run (e.g. changing lights to be more energy efficient). Senator Althaus indicated that it might be appropriate to make these changes through the AQIP process. Senator Ambery indicated that Senator Fulgham was unable to attend and asked her to convey his position. She indicated that he asked that if the motion for the carbon footprint comes up for a vote he would like (through absentee vote) to vote “no” on the motion. He stated that he does not understand why we need to sign on with a third party. If we need to do more in the realm of recycling and it is cost-effective, then his view is to do that. If we want this third-party organization to put pressure on the University to make changes then what do we do when they try to force us to make changes we don't want or prevent us from doing something we do want to do? Senator Journet indicated that the Institution is not a third party, they do not force change, they simply provide the framework. There will not be any penalties if the University does not follow through with the Institution's suggestions, the University will just be dropped from their membership. The resolution passed with a majority vote. Senator Journet asked the Senators to pass this along to their constituents and other committees they serve on. He indicated that he and Steve Overman were available to attend meetings if requested.

NEW BUSINESS

Senator Althaus distributed a draft proposal of a revised Professional Development Policy (attached). Senator Althaus indicated that this was on the agenda of Professional Affairs last year. He indicated that the policy is not in line with current practices used among colleges. Senator Scott asked that Senators share the draft with their constituents, check on current practices used in their departments, and send feedback to sscott@semo.edu.

Senator Scott distributed a resolution titled, Resolution Concerning “Online Class Ownership Procedures” Document (attached). Senator Scott explained that the resolution is to improve and clarify procedure and not the form. Discussion was held by the Senate. Provost Stephens indicated that she believed the resolution was an un-collegial process because the Committee that created the process was made up of people chosen by the Faculty Senate and was approved by Academic Council which includes a Faculty Senate representative and at Administrative Council where Faculty Senate is represented. She stated that at no time during the committee or approval process was a concern raised. To wait until after the process is complete and then request rescission shows a disrespect for the governance process. She agreed with the President about waiting two semesters and then reviewing the form as originally agreed upon. Senator Journet indicated that he did not believe the process was collegial because Faculty Senate was not involved directly and not asked to review it. Senator Cobb agreed with Senator Journet. He added that intellectual property rights was on the agenda of Academic Affairs and then was taken away from that committee and given to a University Committee. Senator Althaus indicated that he did not view either as un-collegial and reminded the Senators that Faculty Senate submitted names to serve on the University task force. Senator Sebby requested that administration bring items that affect faculty to the Faculty Senate to allow for a more open and collegial process. If the procedures and the form had been brought to the Faculty Senate in the beginning then there wouldn't be the problem at hand.

REPORTS ON THE WORK OF OTHER SOUTHEAST COMMITTES ON WHICH WE SERVE

Chair Ambery reported on the Benefits Sub Committee. She reported that the Committee went over options with dollar amounts attached to what would be saved. There is no final report, but so far the Committee has found approximately $131,700 savings if their recommendations are approved. Chair Ambery indicated that she would send a summary of the report to the Senators via email.

Senator Chamberlain reported on Budget Review. She reported that the Committee had a long discussion about the how the Athletic Department needs to “feel some of the pain” from the budget cuts. She indicated that the Athletic Director is scheduled to attend the next Budget Review meeting. Senator Chamberlain reported that Kathy Mangels indicated that there will not be anymore budget forums because the cuts are not as substantial as once anticipated.

Senator Cobb reported that the labs in McGill are being remodeled. He reported that there are substantial costs involved in the clean up of americium and asked if student fees are being used for remodeling or if the remodeling budget is being used. Provost Stephens indicated that the State paid for the costs of cleaning up the americium spills. She indicated that student fees are paying for the remodeling of labs.

ADJOURNMENT

The motion to adjourn was recognized and approved at 5:00 p.m.

The next Faculty Senate Meeting will be April 1, 2009, in the University Center Missouriana Room at 3:00 p.m.

Approved April 15, 2009

------------

FACULTY SENATESOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION 09-01
Approved by the Faculty Senate
March 25, 2009

Proposed Resolution on the American College and University
Presidents Climate Commitment
Alan Journet ajournet@semo.edu / Ex 2366
Whereas the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1987 by the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Meteorological Union and comprising representatives from across the planet, is the most authoritative expert international panel providing analyses and summaries of the evidence regarding climate change, and
Whereas the IPCC in its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) states that:
1.the existence of global warming is unequivocal
2.the probability of anthropogenic emissions contributing to this global warming is greater than 90%
3.there is greater than 90% confidence that anthropogenic releases of greenhouse gases have caused a detectable warming of the planet since the industrial revolution in the late 1700s, and
Whereas the range of predicted consequences for Global Warming within the next century include a high end possibility of a warming of 6 degrees Centigrade, and
Whereas a global temperature increase of 6 degrees centigrade would most likely have a devastating impact on the planet's natural systems, including its agriculture, forestry and fisheries, and
Whereas the primary contributor to the problem of climate change is most probably anthropogenically released greenhouse gases, notably carbon dioxide, methane and oxides of nitrogen, and
Whereas, a major cause of these gases is burning fossil fuels in energy generation and transportation, and
Whereas, Southeast Missouri State University is a significant regional emitter of greenhouse gasses, and
Whereas, among the Priorities and Objectives in the recently approved Southeast Missouri State University Strategic Plan the institution has committed itself to:
- “promote safety and sustainability and lead the region's efforts to protect the environment and conserve natural resources (Priority V)
- “Develop, enhance and strengthen strategies to promote ecological sustainability and to protect the environment and conserve natural resources.” (Priority V, Objective IV), and
Whereas, the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment represents a commitment on the part of 614 institutions of higher education across the nation to reduce energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions, and
Whereas, among the institutions endorsing the U.S. Presidents Commitment on Climate Change are many sister institutions in Missouri (Missouri University of Science and Technology, University of Missouri – Columbia, University of Missouri – St. Louis, University of Missouri – Kansas City, University of Central Missouri, St. Louis Community College, Florissant Valley, Drury University, Park University, Webster University).
Whereas, universities should serve as leaders and role models in the area of environmental protection,
Be It Resolved that:
The Southeast Missouri State University Faculty Senate recommend(s) that President Dobbins become a signatory to the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment and encourage(s) every unit within the University to undertake considered steps to reduce energy consumption, and through the conduct of its day-to-day activities, reduce to the extent possible both its direct and indirect contribution to carbon dioxide emissions.

In order to underscore the extent of institutional support for this proposal (if it exists), it would be helpful if all units and organizations on campus were to endorse the resolution (with or without the ‘Whereas” Preamble clauses).
For further Information, visit http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/
The Commitment
1.Initiate the development of a comprehensive plan to achieve climate neutrality as soon as possible.
a.Within two months of signing this document, create institutional structures to guide the development and implementation of the plan.
b.Within one year of signing this document, complete a comprehensive inventory of all greenhouse gas emissions (including emissions from electricity, heating, commuting, and air travel) and update the inventory every other year thereafter.
c.Within two years of signing this document, develop an institutional action plan for becoming climate neutral, which will include:
i.A target date for achieving climate neutrality as soon as possible.
ii.Interim targets for goals and actions that will lead to climate neutrality.
iii.Actions to make climate neutrality and sustainability a part of the curriculum and other educational experience for all students.
iv.Actions to expand research or other efforts necessary to achieve climate neutrality.
d.Mechanisms for tracking progress on goals and actions.
2.Initiate two or more of the following tangible actions to reduce greenhouse gases while the more comprehensive plan is being developed.
a.Establish a policy that all new campus construction will be built to at least the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED Silver standard or equivalent.
b.Adopt an energy-efficient appliance purchasing policy requiring purchase of ENERGY STAR certified products in all areas for which such ratings exist.
c.Establish a policy of offsetting all greenhouse gas emissions generated by air travel paid for by our institution.
d.Encourage use of and provide access to public transportation for all faculty, staff, students and visitors at our institution.
e.Within one year of signing this document, begin purchasing or producing at least 15% of our institution's electricity consumption from renewable sources.
f.Establish a policy or a committee that supports climate and sustainability shareholder proposals at companies where our institution's endowment is invested.
g.Participate in the Waste Minimization component of the national RecycleMania competition, and adopt 3 or more associated measures to reduce waste.
3.Make the action plan, inventory, and periodic progress reports publicly available by providing them to the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) for posting and dissemination.

---------

College Level Professional Development Policy (current)

The Faculty Development Program at the college level exists to provide support and opportunity for faculty members to realize their potential and to improve the quality and effectiveness of the total educational effort of the University. To this purpose the Provost will allocate a specific sum of money to each college at or near the beginning of each fiscal year to support the professional needs of the faculty. The funds will be made available as follows:

College Level Professional Development Policy (draft proposal)

The Faculty Development Program at the college level exists to provide support and opportunity for faculty members to realize their potential and to improve the quality and effectiveness of the total educational effort of the University. To this purpose the Provost will allocate a specific sum of money to each college at or near the beginning of each fiscal year to support the professional needs of the faculty. The funds will be made available as follows:

A.Each college/school maintains a Faculty Development Committee, composed of one representative from each department within the college, such representation determined by the action of each department. The library faculty and athletic coaches exist as separate units with a committee to be selected from the faculty of each respective unit to serve as the Faculty Development Committee. The dean of each college/school will serve as an ex officio and nonvoting member of the college committee.

A.Each college, school, and Kent Library shall maintain a Faculty Development Committee, composed of one (or, at the discretion of the unit, two) representative(s) from each department within the unit, such representation determined by the action of each department.

B.The Faculty Development Committee will recommend the college/school-wide application process, membership rotation plan, criteria for funding, and establish the priorities for those criteria. The recommendations will be approved by a majority vote of the faculty of the college/school annually.

B.The Faculty Development Committee shall recommend to the faculty of the unit a membership rotation plan for the Committee, as well as a procedure to be used for allocation of the available funds.The allocation procedure may consist of:

1) an allocation of the funds on a per capita basis to each full-time faculty member in the unit,

2) a competitive application process incorporating criteria and priorities, or

3) some other procedure.

The initial membership rotation plan and allocation procedure shall be effective once approved by a majority of unit faculty voting in a unit-wide meeting, by mailed paper ballot, or by electronic ballot.Annually, the Committee shall review the unit procedures and submit to the faculty any suggested revisions, subject to the required majority approval, as above.

C.One-tenth of the total amount awarded by the college/school for the fiscal year shall be designated for use by the dean. These funds will be used at the dean's discretion for development projects for faculty currently on the staff and will be listed in the biannual reports.

C.One-tenth of the total amount allocated to the college, school, or Kent Library for the fiscal year shall be designated for use by the dean. These funds will be used at the dean's discretion to support development activities for faculty members of the unit, and shall be listed in the annual reports, as below.

D.The dean will receive applications and forward them to the College/School Faculty Development Committee. Applications will be received from department chairpersons with committee (if one in the department) and chairperson recommendations. The committee will establish internal procedures, act to fund or not to fund, determine the level of support, and submit its recommendation to the dean. The dean will consider recommendations to fund proposals in a timely fashion. If approval is granted, the dean will provide for the appropriate disbursement of the award. If approval is not granted, the dean will provide explanation to the committee. If there is substantial disagreement on the awarding of funds, the matter will be referred to the College Council for final dispensation.

D.For units that use a competitive application process, the dean shall receive applications and forward them to the Faculty Development Committee. The Committee shall evaluate the applications in accordance with the approved procedures, and shall submit its recommendation to the dean regarding the funding level. The dean will consider recommendations to fund proposals in a timely fashion. If approval is granted, the dean will provide for the appropriate disbursement of the award. If approval is not granted, the dean will provide explanation to the committee. If there is substantial disagreement on the awarding of funds, the matter will be referred to the College Council for final dispensation.

For units using a per capita allocation, the funds shall be available to faculty members in the same manner as the departmental-level faculty development funds.

E.By December 15 and April 15 of each year, the dean will publish and distribute to department chairpersons and Faculty Development Committee members a list of recipients of all development grants awarded, purposes, funds expended, and the remaining balance of all available funds.

E.Within two months of the end of each fiscal year, the dean will compile and publish or distribute (in printed or electronic form) to the faculty of the college, school, or Kent Library a list of recipients of all development grants awarded, purposes, funds expended, and the remaining balance of all available funds.

F.The list of faculty development criteria, priority for funding, funding periods and/or applications can be obtained from the dean, department chairpersons, or members of the College/School Faculty Development Committee.

F.Information concerning the unit procedures, funding periods, and/or applications shall be made available through the dean, department chairpersons, or members of the Faculty Development Committee.

Approved by Faculty Senate, Bill 87-A-02R, April 1987

Approved by Board of Regents, May 1987

G. Unit procedures and criteria that were in force at the time of the approval of this policy, and that are not in conflict with it, shall remain in force until revised according to the provisions above.

--------------------

FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION 09-XX


Approved by the Faculty Senate
XXX, 2009


RESOLUTION CONCERNING
“ONLINE CLASS OWNERSHIP PROCEDURES” DOCUMENT

WHEREAS: In the Spring of 2009, the University approved and has begun to implement a set of procedures concerning online course ownership, and

WHEREAS: Many of those procedures are a welcomed reinforcement of protection for the intellectual property rights of faculty, but

WHEREAS: There has been some uncertainty about the meaning and significance of some of the provisions in the Document outlining the procedures, and

WHEREAS: The Faculty Senate is interested in clarifying those provisions, so as to improve the Document and help bring about an appropriate balance between the intellectual property rights of faculty and the programmatic need for course availability to students, and

WHEREAS: The customary meaning of “extenuating circumstances” normally includes unforeseen and unplanned changes or departures from the status quo that present a genuine need for an unusual response,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The Faculty Senate of Southeast Missouri State University, in accordance with the intent expressed in the Document of having procedures in place for the University to make use of a faculty member's online class “under extenuating circumstances,” believes that the unavailability of the faculty member to offer the class must be sudden and unexpected, and must occur within two months of the first day of the class in order to be truly an “extenuating circumstance,” and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: The Faculty Senate of Southeast Missouri State University finds reasonable the first three circumstances listed in the “Online Class Ownership Procedures” document under which a faculty member's online class may be borrowed: “death or disability;” “being away from the campus that particular semester;” “and leaving the employment of the university,” provided that these circumstances occur suddenly and unexpectedly within two months of the first day of the class, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: The Faculty Senate finds unclear and potentially unreasonable the fourth listed circumstance: “or a work schedule in which it is impossible for the faculty member to teach the online class in question.” Because faculty teaching schedules are determined by department chairpersons, a scheduling conflict is a self-determined administrative action, unlike the three previously-listed circumstances, and is not an emergency sufficient to warrant the University exercising control over the faculty member's intellectual property, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: The Faculty Senate hereby goes on record as willing to endorse all of the Document except the fourth circumstance (twice listed in the Document), provided that the unavailability of the faculty member occurs within two months of the first day of class, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: The Faculty Senate hereby goes on record as explicitly NOT endorsing the Document if it continues to contain the fourth circumstance, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: The Faculty Senate hereby calls upon the Academic Council, and any other such bodies as the President of the University shall determine to be necessary, to revise the Document by 1) adding a two-month time frame for the faculty member's sudden and unexpected unavailability, and 2) by either striking the fourth circumstance from the Document, or by sufficiently defining that circumstance so that it refers to a truly uncontrollable and unavoidable situation worthy of a permitted encroachment on a faculty member's intellectual property.

***

APPLY VISIT DONATE