University Faculty Senate
Faculty Senate 2007- 2008 Minutes
INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Faculty Senate Minutes
October 18, 2007
October 18, 2007 Minutes
Indiana State University
Faculty Senate 2007-08
Time: 3:15 p.m.
Place: HMSU, Dede III
Officers: Chair V. Sheets, Vice Chair A. Halpern, Secretary Sr. A. Anderson
Parliamentarian: T. Sawyer
Senators: S. Allen, E. Bermudez, K. Bolinger, S. Brake, M. Brennan, E. Brown, J. Buffington, H. Chait, D. Collins, B. Corcoran, S. Davis, J. Fine, S. Ghosh, E. Hampton, P. Hightower, J. Hughes, P. Jones, M. McLean, M. Miller, G. Minty, C. Nelson, S. Phillips, S. Pontius, R. Schneirov, T. Steiger, C. Stemmans, G. Stuart, D. Worley, D. Yaw, G. Zhang
Absent: T. Allen, N. Corey, K. Evans, K. Wilkinson, J. Wilson, T. Zaher
Ex-Officio: Provost Maynard
Visitors: M. Murphy, K. Frederick
- Revisions to agenda (Pontius/Hightower) 27-0-0
- Administrative Report
- Information regarding NCA accreditation can be found on its new website.
- ISU has been charged to revise its mission statement. A mission committee has been appointed
and has begun that work. A memo giving a web address will be sent out. Everyone is encouraged
to offer what they do and don’t like about the mission statement draft. The goal is to generate
a revised mission statement by early winter. A meeting will be held every two weeks with that
goal in mind.
- It is Homecoming Weekend. Everyone is encouraged to participate. The Distinguished Alumni
Banquet should have over 300 people in attendance. Fifty years of awardees will be recognized.
- The Trustees are meeting next Thursday and Friday. There will be a seminar on Thursday and
the regular meeting on Friday. The agenda is modest.
- The Presidential Search Committee met this morning. There will be a website up that will
have all of the documents that were distributed and the timeline they will operate under.
- Chair’s Report
As noted by Provost Maynard, preparations for NCA have begun. I want to specifically remind all members
of the Senate as well as others present of the recent “Call for Service” sent to all faculty. Accreditation
is a campus-wide event, and we need about 20 faculty volunteers to serve on various NCA criterion committees.
I again ask that you each consider your potential to contribute to these groups, and send the “Call for
Service” form back to Karen in the Faculty Senate office. We would like to begin identifying setting up
these critical committees in the next couple of weeks.
As noted [in the cyberwire this afternoon] the Presidential Search Committee held its organizational
meeting this morning. While I am pleased with the overall membership, I am especially glad to see Mayor
Burke’s inclusion in the group. I hope this signals a continued strengthening of our ties with the Terre
Haute community. ISU can only benefit from a strong partnership with the city as we work together to promote
growth and development that enhances the quality of life for all, including ISU faculty, staff and students.
I am also very pleased at the committee’s recognition that the search for a new President should engage
the whole campus. I look forward to campus-wide discussions about the qualities sought in the next President.
I also commend the committee on their intention to be as open as possible about the status of the process.
I want to express my continued thanks to all members of the Standing Committees for the initial work on
the many charges sent from exec, along with their “recurrent” responsibilities to review curricular and
research proposals, staff various committees, etc. They work hard to evaluate and formulate proposals
responsive to faculty and institutional concerns with as much consensus as possible, and I assure all that
their work is both appreciated and respected.
Finally, it is homecoming this weekend, and I want to extend best wishes for success for the football
team and good-health for our students.
- SGA Report
- Excitement was expressed over Homecoming.
- The NCA accreditation meeting was found to be the most informative meeting in the SGA president’s
years on campus.
- The Bus Initiative numbers are uplifting. The route is being revised to suit student needs.
- The SGA website has been reconstructed by the new tech director.
- The SGA is working on a grade data base. Is has been patterned after Missouri State. The site will
be password protected. Posting grades will allow inflation to be looked at and prepares students for
- AJ Patton will be the student voice on the Presidential Search Committee. He is excited to serve.
- Informational Presentation – M. Murphy
A presentation was made by the faculty representative for the ISU United Way Committee. He requested that
faculty and leaders of the community endorse and foster the United Way among colleagues. Provost Maynard
added words of support.
- 15 Minute Open Discussions
- Questions were raised regarding replacement of interim appointments with permanent placed individuals.
Interest was expressed over the timing and process of filling positions that have campus-wide responsibilities,
specifically Affirmative Action & Diversity and the Dean of the Graduate Studies. A reminder was offered
to search internally as well as nationally.
- Discussion was held on grade distribution.
- Clarification was made that aggregated grades can be viewed by students by instructor.
- Provost Maynard offered that it was deemed by ISU’s legal council that class grades are public
- The SGA is prepared to make grades available on a website. Grades will be posted for classes with
5 or more students. The site will be password protected.
- Concern was expressed over how this might affect professors in how they evaluate students - not wanting
to grade too high or too low.
- A suggestion was made to share grades only from classes of 10 or more students to give more privacy.
- V. Sheets shared information from the Registrar’s office. The Registrar is considering moving the
mark up to 10 students per class. That is endorsed by the Grad Council. Grades will be posted only at the
end of a semester. Incompletes will remain incompletes in the database. They will not be updated. A through
F grades, Drop Pass, and Drop Fail will be posted.
- Does the SGA plan to obtain data for a sufficient amount of time to make a credible evaluation about
grade inflation? Are the resources and data available?
- SAC investigated grade inflation last year. Registration and Records is unable to give data previous to
1999 due to a software switch over.
- Statement read by K. Frederick.
Chairperson Sheets, the Executive Committee, President Benjamin, Provost Maynard, esteemed senators
and colleagues, I want to thank you today for allowing me to speak as the college of Arts and Sciences
Faculty Council Chair, the governance body that is would be affected by a potential change regarding
the issue of student voting on college committees. On March 26, 1998 the previous senate endorsed
revisions to the CAS constitution by a vote of 22-1-3. The senate had no discussion of the students’
right to vote but rather only noted that there was no student body for representation within the college.
For the past nine years the College has operated according to this Senate endorsed constitution. Since
this constitution has been acceptable over the past 9 years, it is unclear to the College and to the
Faculty Council why it is now unacceptable. Additionally, Colleges other than CAS have seen the wisdom
in granting voice and vote to students. Moreover, our constitution does not claim that students share
in the sovereignty of the faculty, only that the faculty has delegated its authority to this body which
consists largely of faculty but with some input from students and non-tenure track faculty. Should
colleges not be allowed to do this? If the current Senate nullifies a decision of a previous Senate
(endorsement of a College Constitution) and a nine year practice of a College without providing rationale
for why it reached a different conclusion, is this not procedurally problematic?
Additionally, there is ambiguity in the University handbook and the current motion does not deal
with that issue. If language in the Handbook is open to multiple interpretations (which by definition
it is, since two different conclusion have been reached in the past decade), shouldn't a campus-wide
discussion ensue regarding the legitimate authority of Colleges and departments to afford their students
(and adjunct, full-time temporary, and special purpose faculty) voting privileges even though
university-level governance bodies do not? With all due respect, on April 11th 2007 the CAS FC voted
17-0-3 in favor to reject the logic of the Parliamentarian with regard to the ambiguity in the handbook
and asked that it be clarified. For example, in Article 8, Section 2 of the University Handbook it is
consistency not conformity that is required with regard to college constitutions and the university
handbook, even though conformity was what was noted by the parliamentarian in the Senate executive committee
minutes of March 13, 2007. The term University Faculty as used in the University Handbook, clearly refers to
a particular governing unit of the university, that is the twice-annual convention of all 391 members of the
faculty. It does not appear to be a generic term, referring generally to all faculty governance bodies. Thus,
article 1 section 3 is irrelevant.
With all due respect, I think that the college deserves an explanation as to why a previous senate’s
ruling would be reversed. In line with the spirit of the democratic process and the esteemed status of
the senators on this body, the senate should engage in a dialogue themselves as to why the change should
occur. On a personal note, I feel that in the spirit of shared governance, the university mission for
student engagement, and the fact that the college does not have a student body for representation, that
the colleges at this university should have the discretion to have student voting rights on their
- Approval of Minutes, as amended (Hightower/Minty) 33-0-0
- New Business
- Curriculum Proposal: Construction Management Minor, new undergraduate degree – approved un-amended,
original copy (Bermudez/Pontius) 34-0-0
- Student Vote (Bolinger/Ghosh) 23-8-2
- Disallowing student votes also affects special purpose faculty votes.
- Both student groups and special purpose faculty are allowed speaking seats
- The issue is not the merit of student votes, but being consistent with the university
- Ambiguity in the Handbook was noted.
- A suggestion was made that special purpose faculty should be taken care of in a
purposeful manner with a comprehensive discussion.
- A friendly amendment was offered: The Executive Committee will craft language to add to
the Faculty Constitution to clarify the outcome of this resolution.
- The amendment was withdrawn.
- Education is in the process of changing their constitution. NHHP is in the process of
writing a new constitution. Only Arts & Sciences is affected at this time.
- The minutes from the Executive Committee meeting of March 13,, 2007 were read. “The
Parliamentarian produced the following statement for inclusion in the minutes: “Only tenured
and tenure-track members shall be voting members of the University Faculty.” It was noted
that this would preclude special purpose full time faculty as well. The College of Arts &
Sciences appreciates having these people being represented.
- Will subcommittees be able to allow voting by anyone besides tenure and tenure track
- The issue is that the constitution is consistent and clear, as written, that students
should not vote. It came out of FAC with a vote of 3-2-1. It then came out of the Executive
Committee last Spring with a vote of 8-0-1. This Executive Committee voted to reaffirm to
send it to the Senate.
- If faculty wants to extend voting rights to students, the Handbook should be changed.
- Concern was expressed over the possible ripple effect.
- Question called (S. Davis)
The Executive Committee will craft language to add to the Faculty Constitution to
clarify who has voting rights. (T. Stieger/S. Allen) 30-2-2
- V. Sheets clarified that this would become a charge to FAC and SAC to address
- Old Business
- Motion to amend the August 23, 2007 minutes regarding item b. during the Q&A with Dean Foster. From
“will bring cost savings and increased efficiency” to “will bring sustained cost savings of approximately
$135,000 and increased efficiency.” (Halpern/Pontius) 32-0-0
- Standing Committee Reports
- AAC – The committee has met once since the last Senate meeting. AAC is meeting again tomorrow.
On the agenda is a broad issue regarding future academic calendars. AAC is also considering whether
to have budgetary considerations.
- AEC – No report.
- CAAC – The committee has met twice since the last Senate meeting. CAAC approved the proposal
from Physical Education to revise the Dance Minor (Catalog Copy Only), approved the proposal from
History to revise the HIST 356 and remove it from General Education, approved the proposal from
Psychology to revise the Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Science in Psychology by making a minimum
grade of “C” required for core courses, approved the proposal from Political Science to revise the
Public Administration Minor, and tabled the proposal from Math and Computer Science to revise the
Information Technology BA/BS Degree, removing banked courses.
- FAC – The main focus has been Criminal background checks.
- FEBC – Two meetings have been held since the last Senate meeting. The committee met once with
Candice Barton, and once on their own to work on disability issues. The committee will meet Friday
with G. Floyd.
- GC – “GC has met four times since the last Senate meeting. Council approved new guidelines for
granting Graduate Faculty Status, which was a charge from the Senate Executive Committee. Currently,
the GC is revising the Mission, Vision and Core Values of the SOGS. In addition, we are revising the
guidelines of the Graduate Student Assistantship/Fellowship Policy.”
- SAC - The committee has met once since the last Senate meeting. There is still no Senate liaison.
“We have received the charges and have begun acting on them. One of the charges that we’ve made for
ourselves is to oversee student representation on standing committees. We’re working toward improving
the process for selection and institutionalizing those improvements. One other note to anybody who is
on any of the standing committees, we need to communicate with the student members. Recently there was
committee that cancelled a meeting but did not notify the student members. They showed up and were a
little bit disappointed that their time and efforts were wasted. So, please do communicate with these
- URC – No report
Chair Sheets requested that all Standing Committees send an electronic version of their reports to the Faculty Senate Office.
back to top