, Ohio University Faculty Senate

English

OHIO Open Library (Ohio University)

FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 1 Ohio University Faculty Senate  Monday, October 19, 2009 Room 235, Margaret M. Walter Hall, 7:10 p.m. Minutes (approved 11/16/09)   The meeting was called to order by Faculty Senate Chair Joe McLaughlin at 7:10 p.m.  In attendance: College of Arts and Sciences: D. Bell, R. Boyd, K. Brown, C. Coski, K. Hicks for C. Elster, J. Gilliom, S. Hays, B. Heckman, D. Miles for D. Ingram, P. Jung, C. Kalenkoski, J. Lein, J. McLaughlin, R. Palmer, S. Patterson, W. Roosenburg College of Business: R. Frost, L. Hoshower, T. Stock  College of Education: T. Leinbaugh  College of Engineering: J. Dill, J. Giesey College of Fine Arts: A. Reilly, E. Sayrs, D. Thomas Group II: H. Burstein, M. Sisson College of Health and Human Services: D. Bolon, M. Li, J. Thomas College of Osteopathic Medicine: P. Coschigano, J. Wolf Regional Campus—Chillicothe: A. Rumble, R. Vance for R. Knight Regional Campus—Eastern: J. Casebolt Regional Campus—Lancaster: P. Munhall  Regional Campus—Southern: E. McCown Regional Campus—Zanesville: J. Benson, M. Nern Scripps College of Communication: J. Bernt, G. Newton, J. Slade, S. Titsworth   Excused: T. Anderson, C. Bartone, M. Phillips, T. Heckman  Absent:  T. Franklin, H. Pasic, D. McDiarmid     Overview of the Meeting: I. President McDavis and EVPP Pam Benoit II. Roll Call and Approval of the September 21, 2009 Minutes III. Chair's Report—Joe McLaughlin • Resolution on Core Goals (Executive Committee)—First Reading IV. Educational Policy and Student Affairs Committee (EPSA)—Allyn Reilly • Resolution on Minimum Graduate Hours on Semesters—First Reading V. Finance and Facilities (FFC)—Scott Titsworth  VI. Promotion and Tenure (P&T)—Peter Coschigano VII. Professional Relations Committee (PRC)—Steve Patterson  VIII. New Business IX. Adjournment    FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 2 I. Remarks by President McDavis and EVPP Pam Benoit   President McDavis began by discussing the budget, noting that state support in 1999 was 46% of the budget; in 2009, it is 31% of the budget. Next year OU will receive $10 million less from the state. A process to address the budget shortfall is being developed. This will involve deciding what we can no longer do that is not central to our core academic mission; how to increase revenue, including through enrollment management and smart growth; and how to reduce costs. In the fall, input will be collected from planning units, all of the Senates, and Budget Planning Council (BPC). In the winter quarter, Deans and executive staff will join the planning units, Deans, and Senates in reviewing the input. A preliminary progress report will be presented to the Board of Trustees at the January meeting. At the end of winter quarter and through spring quarter Deans, executive staff, and Senate leaders will draft a set of recommendations; these will be reviewed by the President, and final recommendations will be presented to the Board at the April meeting. President McDavis also noted that revenue included in the state budget from slot machines will not be realized this year; Governor Strickland has proposed delaying a planned personal income tax cut in order to replace the slot machine revenue, but it is not known whether this will be approved by the legislature. Executive Vice President and Provost (EVPP) Benoit began by congratulating the College of Education for passing their NCATE accreditation review with flying colors. She then described the duties of the ad hoc major code and academic program committee, which has been charged with two main tasks: 1) To make recommendations about how to structure the work of UCC so that colleges/departments/schools can quickly remove major codes that no longer serve important pedagogical, programmatic, or recruiting purposes; and 2) To provide advice on how to develop a process that would be respectful of the Faculty Handbook, but allow for efficient major and/or program changes given current budget pressures. Benoit then reported that academic restructuring is entering phase 2, which asks departments to address issues critical to successful realignment; once this input is received, final decisions will be made. More information about academic restructuring can be found at http://www.ohio.edu/provost/ under “academic restructuring.” The EVPP’s full report is available at http://www.ohio.edu/provost/upload/EVPP_FSUpdate19October2009.pdf. McDavis and Benoit then took questions. Joe Bernt noted that there were no members specifically representing graduate studies/graduate council on the ad hoc major codes committee. Benoit responded that one could be added. Ken Brown asked about the status of the early retirement and faculty fellowships when we transition to semesters. Benoit responded that these issues are still under discussion.  Several questions revolved around the budget. Willem Roosenburg asked how much tuition would have to be raised to cover the budget shortfall, and/or how many new students would have to be enrolled. McDavis and Benoit responded that each 1% increase in tuition generates about $1.2 million, so it would take more than an 8% tuition increase, which is not possible because this exceeds the state tuition cap. Approximately 750 new undergraduate students would be necessary to meet the budget gap. Leon Hoshower noted that removing unused major codes could make it more time-consuming to bring back those programs in the future, so there is something to be said for keeping some programs on the books. Joseph Slade asked whether any schools and departments FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 3 had already been targeted for cuts. McDavis answered that we’re not at that point yet; the process is still be developed, and it will be a quarter or so after the process is settled on that we will begin looking at those questions. McLaughlin added that the ad hoc committee on major codes is about developing this process, but it is not a review committee. He further explained that there is already a process for program cuts in the faculty handbook, but there are no timelines on the process, which is something this committee might address. Raymond Frost asked how fundraising and private support might affect the budget situation. McDavis responded that fundraising, including the capital campaign, is important, but yields long-term results rather than quick infusions of revenue. Benoit added that much of this money is restricted in terms of its use. Steve Hays said that in trying to imagine the pending budget cuts, it was important to know the total costs vs. revenue generated for intercollegiate athletics (ICA), and fundraising.  McDavis replied that the current ICA budget is about $18 million; he would have to get more specific information on revenue. Last year’s fundraising yielded $24 million with $2-3 million in expenses – it costs OU about $.16 per dollar raised, which is on the less expensive side of national averages. Hays estimated that the ICA net cost (expenses minus revenue) was $13-14 million per year, and expressed skepticism that the value from ICA was worth the investment of almost $150 million per decade. McDavis responded that the value of ICA goes beyond the revenue generated. Roosenburg suggested consulting studies that analyze the relative benefits of Division I vs. Division III athletics.  Slade asked why the ombudsman position, which had previously been a faculty position, is being converted to a staff position. Benoit said that a survey of other schools showed that this is typically a staff position. Senators expressed concern that the protection of tenure is important for the ombudsman position. John Benson asked what the status of the raise pool and benefits was for next year, given the current budget. McDavis said it was too early to know anything definite.   II. Roll Call and Approval of the September 21, 2009 Minutes A quorum was present. A motion to accept the minutes (by Willem Roosenberg, seconded by Joseph Slade) from the September 21, 2009 faculty senate meeting was approved by a voice vote.   III. Chair's Report – Joe McLaughlin  • A report on the faculty appraisal of the President will be distributed next week. • The $10 million shortfall for next year’s budget does not include utility increases, raise pools, etc., so it is possible that the shortfall will be larger.  • Some budget decisions are happening more quickly this year because of the state budget; the Faculty Senate needs feedback about how the faculty feels about the relative priority between raises and benefits. • The Faculty Senate Chair’s annual presentation to the Board of Trustees focused on our goals and priorities. Along with faculty representatives to the Board, and the Chair FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 4 of the Board of Trustees addressing faculty senate, the FS Chair’s annual presentation is part of measures intended to improve communication and interaction with the Board.   • Resolution on Core Goals (Executive Committee)—First Reading  Concerns raised included the intended audience for and scope of this resolution; the interaction of the resolution with the Faculty Handbook; the absence of contingent faculty in the resolution; and whether it is strategically advisable to pass this resolution now. Support for the resolution focused on the purpose of the resolution as a checklist for those serving on committees so that there is a unified voice advocating for faculty priorities; to reinforce the role of Faculty Senate as an advocate for faculty concerns; and to provide a framework for the Faculty Senate to be proactive rather than reactive. This resolution will come up for a second reading and vote at the next faculty senate meeting.     • Upcoming Senate Meeting: November 16, 2009. 7:10 p.m., Walter Hall 235    IV. Educational Policy and Student Affairs Committee (EPSA)—Allyn Reilly  •  Resolution on Minimum Graduate Hours on Semesters—First Reading  This resolution establishes the minimum number of credits for a master’s degree as 30 semester hours beyond the baccalaureate; for a doctoral degree, as 90 semester hours beyond the baccalaureate. It was noted that this resolution does not specify how many credit are for courses vs. research. This resolution will come up for a second reading and vote at the next faculty senate meeting. EPSA is also working on: 1) a resolution in support of the honor code passed by Student Senate; 2) a proposal by Leon Hoshower to add mean class grades to student transcripts; and 3) determining credit hours for full-time student status under semesters, withdraw dates, etc.   V. Finance and Facilities (FFC)—Scott Titsworth   Titsworth noted that discussions have begun over what our priorities should be in the upcoming budget. As the President receives lots of input about budget priorities, it is important that Faculty Senate have a consistent voice as we articulate faculty needs. Based on initial planning documents, in fiscal years 2011 and 2012 the budget shortfalls could amount to $20.9 million and $36.9 million respectively; we need to have a unified voice to protect the core mission of the university. FFC is in information-collecting stage. A staff member from Bill Decatur’s office will come in to answer questions about the ICA budget. Questions about the structure of the ICA budget may be sent to Scott Titsworth. Greg Fialko will visit a later meeting to answer questions about benefits, including Express Scripts. Most importantly, FFC will be talking about priorities with respect to faculty needs, e.g. salary increase vs. FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 5 maintaining benefits, in order to put together a list of talking points from which to advocate. Senate discussion emphasized that as the budget process goes forward, it is important to guard against cost-shifting; to maintain benefits; and to make sure that we do not treat benefits vs. salary as an either/or decision, but instead focus on total compensation.     VI. Promotion and Tenure (P&T)—Peter Coschigano  P&T has received two appeals. Because of deadlines related to these appeals, the resolution that was not signed by EVPP has been temporarily put aside until the appeals are completed.   VII. Professional Relations Committee (PRC)—Steve Patterson   PRC has completed two of three grievances it has been working on. It will also introduce resolutions to clarify language in the Faculty Handbook to refer to existing policies and procedures.     VIII. New Business None.  IX. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m. (moved by Pete Coschigano, seconded by  Steve Patterson).      Sense of the Senate Resolution on Core Goals Executive Committee October 19, 2009 First Reading  Whereas Academic quality is central to the vitality and success of the University, and an outstanding community of students and faculty is central to the pursuit of academic quality,  FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 6 Be it resolved that the Faculty Senate of Ohio University dedicates its work to advancement in five specific areas:  I.  Faculty Compensation and Benefits  Attracting and retaining excellent scholars and teachers requires competitive salary and benefits and demands that the university both signal and honor long term commitments to improving the competitive position of Ohio University faculty.  II.  Maintaining and Enhancing the Tenure-Track faculty   A strong and stable university community is created by maintaining an optimal number of tenure-track faculty and building a core of faculty dedicated to the long-term health of the institution.  III.  Maintaining and Improving student quality, achievement, and diversity The university learning community is enriched by the recruitment and retention of a strong and diverse student body.  IV.  Supporting Faculty Research and Creative Activities An intellectually active and productive faculty is at the core of academic quality and can only be sustained with a strong university commitment to developing policies and providing resources to support appropriate teaching loads, faculty fellowships, and adequate operating funds.  V.  Shared Governance As it is stated on the first page of the Faculty Handbook, the Faculty Senate “acts on behalf of all faculty on matters related to University planning, governance, and resource allocation.” As a fundamental principle of the academy, faculty leadership must be consistently involved in setting the goals and priorities of the University.    A Resolution on Minimum Graduation Hours for Graduate Programs in Semesters Educational Policy and Student Affairs Committee October 19, 2009 First Reading   Whereas the minimum graduation hours for all Ohio University undergraduate programs beginning in Fall 2012 will be 120 semester hours; and  Whereas the Graduate Council has established minimum credit hours for graduate programs at 30 semester hours beyond the baccalaureate for master’s degrees and 90 semester hours beyond the baccalaureate for doctoral degrees;  Be It Resolved that the minimum number of semester hours for conferral of the master’s degree be 30 semester hours beyond the bachelor’s degree from Fall 2012; and  FS meeting 10/19/09, Minutes 7  Be It Further Resolved that the minimum number of semester hours for conferral of a doctoral degree be 90 semester hours beyond the bachelor’s degree from Fall 2012. 

Ohio University Faculty Senate Minutes October 19, 2009

https://ohioopen.library.ohio.edu/context/fs_minutes/article/1007/viewcontent/fsMinutes_10_19_09_final.pdf

Ohio University Faculty Senate Minutes October 19, 2009

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

OHIO Open Library (Ohio University)