University Faculty Senate

Executive Committee (EC) October 14, 2008 Minutes
2008- 200
9


INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Faculty Senate Executive Committee
2008-2009
October 14, 2008

EC#7
Approved October 21, 2008
October 14, 2008 Minutes

Indiana State University
Faculty Senate 2008-09


Present: V. Sheets, S.A. Anderson, J. Fine, A. Halpern, C. Hoffman, S. Lamb, S. Pontius, T. Sawyer, D. Worley
Guests: President Bradley, Provost Maynard, G. Bierly, B. Williams

I. Approval of the Minutes of October 7 with corrections (TS/SP) 8-0-1. (Lamb abstained, not present at last meeting).

 II. Administrative Report (J. Maynard)

a. The Installation ceremony for the new ISU President is planned for November 13 from 2:00-4:00 p.m. J. Maynard stated that the new president would like this event to be more an all university celebration that faculty and students could participate in. For many, it may be a once in a life time event for them to be able to participate. He queried the EC regarding cancelling classes during that time slot. After some discussion, the EC concurred that it would be appropriate. A campus announcement will be made shortly. It was also acknowledged that pre-scheduled events (e.g., guest speakers, etc) cannot in all cases be changed, and some groups of faculty/students may not be expected to attend.

b. There was discussion regarding a 4 day academic week during the summer. Maynard stated that he will discuss this subject with the deans on Thursday to get their reaction to this. He also stated that a decision needs to be made quickly before summer schedules are planned. It was recognized that at least some functions will need to continue on the 5- day calendar, e.g. Sycamore Advantage, Boy State, etc. .

III. New Business

a. CoNHHS Organizational Structure. Sheets asked if there were any comments or questions related to the structure.

     1) B. Williams stated that he is excited about the new structure.

    2) T. Sawyer mentioned that there were 8 faculty members who chose not to vote (they did not abstain; it was an electronic vote).

    3) It was mentioned that a tremendous amount of time and energy went into the planning of this structure, but it was worth it since it will provide much needed stability for the future by presenting the University with a good foundation plus an opportunity to expand programs.

A motion was passed to accept this proposal. (T. Sawyer/S. Pontius ) 7-0-2.

b. Minus Grade Implementation Questions

    1) Motion to accept grading scale (point system) as recommended by the Implementation Committee following examination of scales at other campuses. (CH/TS) 9-0-0

    2) It was determined that there was no need for change (and thus no motion) regarding GPAs necessary to maintain academic standing or for graduation with Honors.

 IV. Old Business

Honor’s Program Revision By acclamation G. Bierly was invited to the table.

a. Bierly stated that this proposal had taken a good amount of time to process, approximately a year involving various academic units working through CAAC. The revisions come partly from faculty consensus and partly through external, NCAC who advised them on NCAC guidelines.

b. Bierly stated that the previous program that was set up was a little small and scattered and did not constitute a full Honors experience. It was re- tooled to fit the size of existing classes in the catalog.

c. Discussion of courses dealing with Great Works, specific gateway for students in their sophomore year and is required so that students can be encouraged to explore classical works. A. Halpern mentioned that he believes this to be a loaded structure, an area that could be both confusing and provocative and asked if it could be defined better

d. The new Honors program provides a lot more flexibility to students adding various ways to complete enhance the program. Many courses will be double-counted within honors and the academic majors.

e. Sheets asked about how it would fit with a general education program. Bierly stated that there has been a lot of communication with the Gen Ed task force and that it would be an easier fit with the new Gen Ed program.

f. J. Fine asked if there was some committee to evaluate the Honors courses. Bierly stated that all new honors courses will be reviewed and checked. A vote for approval of the proposal with typographical edits). All in favor 8-0-1. The proposal will go to the Senate on October 23.

V. Chair Report (V. Sheets)

 a. Faculty who rent regalia for the installation will be able to keep it through graduation.

b. Sheets met with the President and D. McKee regarding post retirement benefits. The President will ask the committee to prepare a report listing the pros and cons of various decisions. It is the President’s intention to share the report and begin conversations about several choice points on this matter. We should expect to hear more in a few weeks.

c. Sheets stated that the Board agenda next week includes elimination of a two-year delay for earning money in TIAA-CREF accounts for new faculty (something recommended by the Senate several years ago)/ The revised policy will also default to a 3% employee contribution to an SRA account (but the new employee can opt out).

d. Sheets attended interviews for two Strategic Planning firms. Not a lot to discuss at the moment.

VI. 15 Minute Open Discussion a. Several members stated that they will not be available for October 28 meeting with President due to other commitments.

 VII. Committee Reports

a. AAC

 b. AEC

c. CAAC

d. FAC – met last Wed. and recommended all on-line course work be evaluated by OIT. Also discussed student role grade appeal as it related to temp faculty.

e. FEBC

f. GC

g. SAC – S. Pontius stated that Paul Hightower was elected president of of this committee.

h. URC

Meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m.

back to top/a>