University Faculty Senate

Executive Committee (EC) Minutes
2008- 200
9


INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Faculty Senate Executive Committee
2008-2009
March  3, 2009

EC#21
Approved  March 17,  2009
March 3, 2009 Minutes

Indiana State University
Faculty Senate 2008-09


Present:               V. Sheets,  S.A.M. Anderson, J. Fine, A. Halpern, C. Hoffman, S. Lamb, S. Pontius,

 T. Sawyer, D. Worley

 Guests:                                President D. Bradley, Provost J. Maynard, C. Klarner, D. Malooley

 .             Administration Report (President Bradley)

a.            Strategic Planning retreat March 26 and 27.   One/two groups of people will discuss focus areas such as enrollment, what we mean by an “engaged campus,” vision of the university, mission, and values statement.   Hope to have approximately 100 people present.    The retreat will end by 3:00 p.m. before Faculty Senate meeting on Thursday.    

b.            Suggested creation of a task force to review the mission statement and make recommendations.             

c.             A memorandum from D. McKee should be coming out shortly regarding 1) a proposal to establish a health benefit committee, and 2) employees donating sick leave.

 Administration Report (Provost Maynard)

a.            Formal invitation for March 26-27 retreat will be sent out this Thursday or Friday.    

b.            Various topics will be discussed at retreat.  In addition to above-mentioned, will be discussion on what is meant by “experiential learning. “

c.             Sabbatical decision letters went out March 1.  Five people were not recommended for approval.  Of 25 approved, about six had significant financial implications.   All went as contingent on budget developments.  The deans are expected to review them by June 1.

d.            S. Lamb noted that faculty in business often were asked to delay leaves for at least a year, though the next eligibility for leave starts 12 semesters after the last one approved.   The faculty have been extremely flexible.  

e.            Chairs had to move sabbatical applications forward without a budget.   After the budget has been approved, things should be able to progress more normally.   Presently, the University does not have a clear picture of what will be required.      

   II.            Chair Report (V. Sheets)

a.            Extending time for faculty to submit nomination forms for Faculty Senate elections from  February 27 to March 6.

                b.            Will send out memo re number of reps needed for each college.

c.             Sheets noted that M. Murphy contacted him re revision of CAPs manual and whether or not work can be done on this over summer 2009.     Maynard made a recommendation that CAAC and Grad Council could appoint people to work on this.   (Charge would come from EC).

                 MOTION:             Approve recommendation.   (T. Sawyer/S.A.M. Anderson) 9-0-0

                MOTION:             To approve extension o f nomination due date from February 27 to March 6.                                                         (T. Sawyer/S. Pontius) 9-0-0. 

III.           15 Minute Open – No items.

 IV.          New Business

                a.            Math Placement Test:   MAPLE-TA (Malooley)  

                                Reason for replacement

                                1)            Originally, the math department was going to generate questions for proposed

test but has decided to use the established MAPLE  data base.

                                2)            MAPLE questions can be sent directly into Banner.

3)            Good replacement to COMPASS exam.  Exam seems to be pretty standard.

4)            Maynard noted that program is web based.  Cost to the University will be $6.00 per student.    ISU will pay for one exam per student.    Students will pay for any retest.

                                5)            Math department is developing a practice test based on MAPLE (will be

 available before Sycamore Advantage).

                                6)            Comparisons of how ISU students are doing to other institutions.

                MOTION:             To accept MAPLE-TA as part of the ISU placement process.   (S.A.M. Anderson/

C. Hoffman) 9-0-0.

 b.            University Research Committee’s (URC )resolution (Klarner).

Discussion of handout:   URC findings regarding the costs and benefits of expanding the URC’s domain of responsibility.

1)            Klarner noted that this was an easy change in bylaws:  

MOTION:             In the bylaws, under “The Committee Will Not Consider Proposals For” add a

ninth bullet as follows:  “Projects submitted by faculty members who have resigned from the URC in the academic year of the grant application.”  

To accept:  (S. Lamb/S. Pontius) 9-0-0.  – (This does not require Senate action.)

                                2)            MAPLE-TA and URC resolution will go to the full Senate for information only.

                 c.             Selection of representative to the proposed retention council.  

                                a.            The president noted that the Committee will meet between 8:00-9:00 a.m. on

 Tuesdays.

b.            Some suggestions were made for appointment to this committee.  Sheets will contact those suggested.

                d.            Discussion items:

                1)            Quorum-making:   Is 2/3 or 50% + 1 necessary on standing committees?

i.              most   committees use 50% + 1.    Handbook requires 2/3 only for Senate and Executive Committee.

                                ii.             A concern expressed that a minority of members might control a

                                                committee.                        I

iii.            Sheets will review the Handbook as it relates to standing

                                                committees and report back.   

 2)            FEBC and/or separate University benefits committee.  

i.              Lamb noted that chairs of FEBC and Support Staff Council should have speaking seats on the proposed committee. 

                                ii.             Committee will aid the work of the president and D. McKee, but would

 not reduce opportunity for  FEBC to provide input. 

iii.            Two committees would not be doing the same thing.  The proposed committee will be confined to University health care issues.   Health insurance will no longer be the purview of FEBC.   Lamb stressed that  faculty should have input.   The president suggested that the charge could be written to provide a hearing process for faculty (and other) input.

iv.           Discussion:   Consideration of need to change the name of the proposed  committee to “University Health Benefits Committee” to clarify its function.    

                                                v.            No motion on this topic until EC has time to review the proposal.

                 3)            Faculty Evaluation Process - discussion deferred until after Faculty Affairs

 Committee (FAC) has forwarded its recommendation.  

                                 4)            MOTION :  To move into Executive session (T. Sawyer/S. Pontius)   9-0-0.

                                                (S.A.M. Anderson and A. Halpern recused themselves and left the meeting.)  

                                                Executive session ended and meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.

Present:               V. Sheets,  S.A.M. Anderson, J. Fine, A. Halpern, C. Hoffman, S. Lamb, S. Pontius,

 T. Sawyer, D. Worley

 Guests:                                President D. Bradley, Provost J. Maynard, C. Klarner, D. Malooley

I.             Administration Report (President Bradley)

a.            Strategic Planning retreat March 26 and 27.   One/two groups of people will discuss focus areas such as enrollment, what we mean by an “engaged campus,” vision of the university, mission, and values statement.   Hope to have approximately 100 people present.    The retreat will end by 3:00 p.m. before Faculty Senate meeting on Thursday.    

b.            Suggested creation of a task force to review the mission statement and make recommendations.             

c.             A memorandum from D. McKee should be coming out shortly regarding 1) a proposal to establish a health benefit committee, and 2) employees donating sick leave.

 Administration Report (Provost Maynard)

a.            Formal invitation for March 26-27 retreat will be sent out this Thursday or Friday.    

b.            Various topics will be discussed at retreat.  In addition to above-mentioned, will be discussion on what is meant by “experiential learning. “

c.             Sabbatical decision letters went out March 1.  Five people were not recommended for approval.  Of 25 approved, about six had significant financial implications.   All went as contingent on budget developments.  The deans are expected to review them by June 1.

d.            S. Lamb noted that faculty in business often were asked to delay leaves for at least a year, though the next eligibility for leave starts 12 semesters after the last one approved.   The faculty have been extremely flexible.  

e.            Chairs had to move sabbatical applications forward without a budget.   After the budget has been approved, things should be able to progress more normally.   Presently, the University does not have a clear picture of what will be required.      

   II.            Chair Report (V. Sheets)

a.            Extending time for faculty to submit nomination forms for Faculty Senate elections from  February 27 to March 6.

                b.            Will send out memo re number of reps needed for each college.

c.             Sheets noted that M. Murphy contacted him re revision of CAPs manual and whether or not work can be done on this over summer 2009.     Maynard made a recommendation that CAAC and Grad Council could appoint people to work on this.   (Charge would come from EC).

                 MOTION:             Approve recommendation.   (T. Sawyer/S.A.M. Anderson) 9-0-0

                MOTION:             To approve extension o f nomination due date from February 27 to March 6.                                                         (T. Sawyer/S. Pontius) 9-0-0. 

 III.           15 Minute Open – No items.

 IV.          New Business

                a.            Math Placement Test:   MAPLE-TA (Malooley)  

                                Reason for replacement

                                1)            Originally, the math department was going to generate questions for proposed

test but has decided to use the established MAPLE  data base.

                                2)            MAPLE questions can be sent directly into Banner.

3)            Good replacement to COMPASS exam.  Exam seems to be pretty standard.

4)            Maynard noted that program is web based.  Cost to the University will be $6.00 per student.    ISU will pay for one exam per student.    Students will pay for any retest.

                                5)            Math department is developing a practice test based on MAPLE (will be

 available before Sycamore Advantage).

                                6)            Comparisons of how ISU students are doing to other institutions.

                MOTION:             To accept MAPLE-TA as part of the ISU placement process.   (S.A.M. Anderson/

C. Hoffman) 9-0-0.

b.            University Research Committee’s (URC )resolution (Klarner).

Discussion of handout:   URC findings regarding the costs and benefits of expanding the URC’s domain of responsibility.

1)            Klarner noted that this was an easy change in bylaws:  

MOTION:             In the bylaws, under “The Committee Will Not Consider Proposals For” add a

ninth bullet as follows:  “Projects submitted by faculty members who have resigned from the URC in the academic year of the grant application.”  

To accept:  (S. Lamb/S. Pontius) 9-0-0.  – (This does not require Senate action.)

                                 2)            MAPLE-TA and URC resolution will go to the full Senate for information only.

                 c.             Selection of representative to the proposed retention council.  

                                a.            The president noted that the Committee will meet between 8:00-9:00 a.m. on

 Tuesdays.

b.            Some suggestions were made for appointment to this committee.  Sheets will contact those suggested.

                d.            Discussion items:

                1)            Quorum-making:   Is 2/3 or 50% + 1 necessary on standing committees?

i.              most   committees use 50% + 1.    Handbook requires 2/3 only for Senate and Executive Committee.

                                ii.             A concern expressed that a minority of members might control a

                                                committee.                        I

iii.            Sheets will review the Handbook as it relates to standing

                                                committees and report back.   

2)            FEBC and/or separate University benefits committee.  

i.              Lamb noted that chairs of FEBC and Support Staff Council should have speaking seats on the proposed committee. 

                                ii.             Committee will aid the work of the president and D. McKee, but would

 not reduce opportunity for  FEBC to provide input. 

iii.            Two committees would not be doing the same thing.  The proposed committee will be confined to University health care issues.   Health insurance will no longer be the purview of FEBC.   Lamb stressed that  faculty should have input.   The president suggested that the charge could be written to provide a hearing process for faculty (and other) input.

iv.           Discussion:   Consideration of need to change the name of the proposed  committee to “University Health Benefits Committee” to clarify its function.    

                                                v.            No motion on this topic until EC has time to review the proposal.

                 3)            Faculty Evaluation Process - discussion deferred until after Faculty Affairs

 Committee (FAC) has forwarded its recommendation.  

                                4)            MOTION :  To move into Executive session (T. Sawyer/S. Pontius)   9-0-0.

                                                (S.A.M. Anderson and A. Halpern excused themselves and left the meeting.)  

                                                 Executive session ended and meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.

 

 
back to top