10 05 09 minutes

University Senate

Memorandum

Date: October 30, 2009

To: The Academic Community

From: Sharon Pitcher, Secretary of the University Senate

Subject: Minutes of the October 5, 2009—Meeting of the University Senate

The second regular meeting of the University Senate was held on Monday, October 5t, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. in Rooms 314-315 of the University Union.

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL- Professor Siegel, Professor Webster, President Caret, and Vice President Brasington were absent.

APROVAL OF AGENDA – Agenda approved. Professor Zimmerman requested flexibility for some of the committee reports, since some of the chairs of the committees may be arriving late.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR September 21, 2009 - Unanimously approved as corrected.

REPORTS OF EX OFFICIO SENATORS

Vice President Sheehan

Update of Budget Cuts – A little bit of history in 2009 we had a total amount of budget cuts totaling 5.7 million dollars. Total amount from the furloughs given back was 1.4 million dollars. The system also gave back fund balance, which our share was 2.5 million. They did reinstate most of the cuts except for the fund balance to bring us back to a base. So far this year we have had two budget cuts: first in July a cut of $1.6 million, then $1.9 million cut from fund balance, and then a month later they took $845,000 from operations and cut fund balance by $1.7 million. They are talking about the possibility of another budget cut, which could be as much as $2.5 million dollars out of our budget. The outlook for next year is sad because the state is looking at a 2 billion dollar deficit from operations. This could mean $16.8 million in possible budget reductions. This is the worse case potential. We are looking closely at the budgets this year. It is still early in the year and we will know better at the end of the quarter when the state gets the revenue. Possibility, that there could be another cut in 2010. We need to look carefully at what we are doing and look at next year’s budget as we move forward. It is an election year, which may have a positive effect.
Professor Vatz asked what the process is for deciding what is cut. Vice President Sheehan answered that we had some money in reserve that took us through the first and second cut. Beyond that, we have to wait and see what happens. Professor Vatz then asked if the Vice President of Academic Affairs has to make cuts, how is it decided. The Provost answered that she would ask the Deans what could be cut without hurting the institution and then she decides what impact it has on students.
Professor Tabak asked about the 10% increase in parking and considering how the economic situation is, how was this decision made. Sheehan answered that we are in the process of building another parking garage, which is very expensive, so we have to be able to raise these funds. The state does not pay for parking structures so we have to raise the funds from fees from students, faculty and staff. Professor Vatz asked how the system tells us to expand and then we have to pay the cost for parking to expand. Sheehan answered that if we asked for money for a parking structure, the system may come back and say what academic building don’t you want.
Professor Cox asked about the letters being sent out about furloughs. Vice President Sheehan answered that the letters are being developed right now but a lot of data has to be analyzed to do these. They have to be checked and re-checked before being sent out. Professor Cox asked that she heard that the furloughs will be temporary reduction in salary and how is this done. Sheehan answered that they are calculated as a pre-tax so it doesn’t affect retirement.
Professor Pitcher commended Vice President Sheehan on the team that presented at the town meeting last week complimenting them on doing a great job. Then she asked how parking publicizes some of the initiatives that Pam Mooney presented since the faculty that Professor Pitcher have shared these options with have asked, “How are faculty suppose to know about these?” She even went back to the mailing on parking done during the summer and these options were not in the mailing. Vice President Sheehan suggested that they are probably on the website. Professor Pitcher responded that it is difficult to find information on the website and how are faculty to know to look there. She then suggested when new efforts are put in place, could the information be put on the Daily Digest. Vice President Sheehan replied that this was a good suggestion and he would pass it on.

Vice President Moriarty

We have moved in 2400 new students.
Sitting with past student leaders at the family event, many reflected how different student involvement is on this campus from six or seven years ago.
Amount of attendance at weekend events and at the football game were all indications of increased involvement.
All of the activities of the welcome program were hugely attended.
One of the new programs we are looking at is the Community Ambassador Program. We are depending more and more on student leaders to work with issues off-campus. We have received fewer complaints from the neighborhood to date, as a result of the new program.
We successfully launched the Science Scholars Program, which is a partnership program between Housing, Resident Life and Fisher College. We will continue to have some more of these living/learning type programs.
Housing and resident life has donated 58 tons of beds to a community agency as we were doing some re-cycling over the summer. We are looking at ways to recycle materials rather than take them to the landfill.
The Career Peer Advisory Program to provide additional support in Counseling Center in a way we can continue with services in these difficult budget situations and the student can provide some initial counseling of students.
H1N1 flu – we peeked in week three and have gone down since. Faculty will report 20% absentees in classroom to track this, since many students do not live on campus. Faculty have done a good job in support the university efforts of this and we encourage faculty to continue to do this.
Campus Climate Issues – You may have read in the Towerlight that the Black Brotherhood Organization has helped us to bring problems out into the open to broaden this dialog, which is good thing. We are using this as opportunity to deal with these issues. We just received the results from the campus climate survey we did last year and we hope to be sharing these results with the Deans and the campus community soon. We took an ad in the Towerlight and have distributed posters to show faculty and staff how to report hate incidents.

Vice President Rubin

Fund raising efforts are even more important with the budget cuts.
He thanked Jim Anthony for his leadership with the faculty campaign.
It is critical that we get as much support as we can for next year.
We are aware of the difficult economic straights that everyone is in but as important as dollar amount, the support of faculty, staff and alumni of any kind is important.
We should reach our goal for this year of 6.4 million dollars. Our capital campaign goal of 50 million is within our means since we have reached 39 million this year but we are not sure how much beyond that we will get. Many of our larger contributions are not from alumni of the university but from those that respect what we are doing here.

Professor Ballengee/AAUP

The Annual AAUP Crab Feast/Bull Roast/Vegetarian Extravaganza was a big success, with a higher turnout than ever before.
The Maryland Regional AAUP Meeting will be held at Towson on Saturday, Oct 31, from 9 AM-2 PM in the Loch Raven Room of the University Union. The theme of the meeting is Legislature and Higher Ed, and there will be a roundtable featuring Delegate William Frank, Maryland Legislative District 42; John Curtis, Director of Research and Public Policy, AAUP; and Brian Turner, Government Relations Committee, AAUP.
The TU-AAUP Fall meeting will be on Thursday, November 19, 3:30-4:40 PM in University Union 315-316.
The Second Friday event this Fall will be Friday, December 11, at 3 PM in the Burkshire Marriott. Provost Welsh will be the featured speaker.

Jon Graf, SGA President

Finding student representatives for university committees has been on-going. If anyone does not have a representative, let him know.
Anthony Puglisis is working on academic issues. He serves on the Latin Honors and Textbook Committees representing SGA. He is also working on a priority registration policy.
SGA is using Student Voice software to survey students and be able to report back on what students think on issues.
SGA is concerned about students not getting printed catalogs but copies of it on disc are available. The Provost shared that the discs are available in Book Store. SGA is concerned that the catalog on disc is more difficult to use than just having a paper copy. Many students have complained about this.
Student participation on campus has improved as exhibited by over 3000 at first football game, over 8000 at the game on Saturday.
SGA every month is doing a newsletter about what they are doing.
SGA is sponsoring a student spirit activity on October 14 at 1:00, where students forming the letters TU will pose for a picture dressed in black and gold.
Professor Maronick asked if the students do not get a catalog, could this be a problem in the future. Professor Sullivan asked whether this was done for cost. Provost Welsh suggested that it did save money but it is also convenience. Professor Cox suggested with as slow as the website is that not having a paper catalog makes it more difficult for advising since we only have time a limited time to meet with each student. Provost Welsh shared that the Counseling Center also has similar concerns. Professor Burks also commented that she was told that it would still take as long for changes to the catalog, which she thought would be shorter now that it is on-line.

REPORTS OF OFFICERS OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

Professor Sullivan welcomed Gloria Gaguski, a TUSC representative, attending our meeting today. Professor Ballengee asked if we will change the constitution of Senate to include a TUSC representative. Professor Sullivan answered that this may be a possibility in the future.

OLD BUSINESS
Motion 09/10-07: To accept the annual report of the University Assessment Council Report 08-09 (attached 9/21/09) (Executive Committee)

Jane Neapolitan represented the committee. Professor Zimmerman suggested that the report was very vague in places and then asked about Gen Ed assessment requirements and stated that in his department they have about 70 different Gen Ed courses, so for his department it will take many hours to do the tabulation that is required. Professor Neapolitan shared that a sub-committee has been set up for this and it is at a state of frustration because there are many sections involved in the assessment. This is a first attempt to create something for Gen. Ed., but since there has not been an assistant vice president for assessment, this has been difficult. We have hired a new vice president so hopefully she will come to the Senate to talk about this in the future. Possibly technology can be used to tabulate the Gen Ed assessments. This leads to the concern of how does this kind of assessment get done. If we are going to do this kind of report and collect data, we are going to need someone designed to oversee this. We may need to devote someone’s job to be in charge of the assessment data. Professor Zimmerman shared that one of his main concern is that they are being told that they have to do this, where on the website it is listed as still in negotiation. Also, this has not come before the University Senate yet. Professor Neopolitan shared that they are an advisory body but since there was not an assistant vice president, they did what they could. Catherine Horta-Hayden is the chair of the subcommittee and she has met with many to understand this problem, but these sections need to be evaluated. It was also shared that the Subcommittee for Gen Ed Assessment was very important for our Middle States Review. Professor Zimmerman voiced that with large departments, this is even more work. Provost Welsh suggested that assessment can be done through sampling because Middle States will ask how we used assessment data to make change. We can do sampling and be smart about it. Professor Zimmerman shared a concern that his department has 65 adjuncts teaching these courses and they are not being paid for this extra work. Professor Vatz asked if research one institutions have the same assessment requirements we have. Provost Welsh answered that no matter what kind of institution we are, we will be asked to do assessment and show how we use the data. She cautions us about worrying about research one because we do not want this to change the institution we are and Carnegie is always changing these designations. Then Professor Vatz asked if research one institutions have different requirements for assessments. Provost Welsh answered assessment requirements under Middle States are the same for all. Professor Bergman inquired if by accepting the report, does that mean we accept what is in the report since we do not know the status of those proposals. Professor Neopolitan explained that before the report was written, the assistant vice president for assessment left, we often didn’t know what the status of some of the issues were so we did what we could do. Professor Burks asked about finding a replacement on the committee when a college representative was on sabbatical. Professor Neopolitan answered that we have tried to that but sometimes someone is assigned and they are not interested in assessment. They are trying to follow-up on this. Motion to accept the report passed 22-0-0.

Discussion Item: Free Expression in Film Policy (Pornography Policy) (Executive Committee) - Professor Faller from the Film

Department came to advise the Senate on this policy. Senator Graf is concerned about students’ right of free speech and expression. Professor Manesse asked whom do we speak to on this issue and what does this really mean. Professor Faller answered that it is not who does this but who makes the decisions. This has been a problem all along. Professor Sullivan asked what does this policy refer to. Provost Walsh answered that this is only for films not shown in classes. Professor Faller pointed out the many films do not follow the ratings board so who would make these decisions. Professor Sullivan shared that Board will make the policy decision on Nov. 1. Professor Faller suggested that no policy should be made that restricts freedom of speech. Professor Bergman also shared that he would not like to see freedom of speech restricted. He said it was hard to determine what is for entertainment. Professor Ewell shared that he realized that every vote he makes on this group he hopes will bring about good. He feels that there can be moral wrongs from viewing films and he wants to know what is being done to keep students from emotional harm or injury from this. He feels that this is similar to the smoking ban we talked about last month, and wanted to know what is being done to protect the students from this harm. Professor Manasse shared that she felt since it is about recreational issues, that not attending is the students’ choice. She was concerned that the policy says that the university should design an educational component but she questions who this “university” group is going to be. Professor Vatz suggested that we could have something on campus that does create an atmosphere on campus that we would oppose. Professor Manasse came back and said that we have to say who is going to make this decision – everyone can say it or no one would say it. Vice President Moriarty suggested that if something were done on campus and not in a classroom, a student group would sponsor the event. She suggests that this policy is not clear, but we do realize that students need to have a choice. She feels that the Time, Place and Manner policy may take care of this. Professor Zimmerman stated that we do need to craft a response to this to send to the system. Provost Welsh shared that the University of Maryland Senate did send a statement and we are sending something forward from the Deans. Professor Zimmerman suggested that we should have a committee that brings back a statement that the Senate would vote on. He suggested that our comments could be added to what has already been done. The committee was formed and includes Professor Bergman, Professor Vatz, Senator Elfreith, and Professor Siegel.

Discussion Item: The composition of the Resource Planning Advisory Committee (RPAC) (Executive Committee) - Professor Sullivan reminded everyone of our discussion last month and the suggestion that the committee should be smaller. Professor Bergman suggested that actually a representative of the library should be included. Professor Ballengee asked Vice President Sheehan why he was concerned about this. Vice President Sheehan responded that he wanted to make clear that he was never suggesting disbanding RPAC and if we did not have something like this, he would have asked for it. He is suggesting that we make this a smaller group since there are 15 to 16 people on this group. It is difficult to discuss serious budgetary items with a group of this size. His staff spends a lot of time preparing for this group and some serious conversations have come out of the meetings. The vice presidents have never met as a budgetary group but relied on their RPAC representative to discuss the budget. Since the budget is such an important issue this year, the vice presidents will begin meeting as a group for this purpose. He is suggesting that the Senate appoint a small committee of five or six and they would give recommendations to the vice presidents. Professor Zimmerman suggested that maybe we need to appoint an executive committee. Dean Spicer came forward and said he disagreed with Vice President Sheehan. He feels that RPAC is very important in these economic times. He has represented the Deans on RPAC, and some very important decisions have come out of the group. For example, RPAC came forward with the change in fees and there were concerns that the fees and tuition have been lumped together. He suggested that the committee has had excellent leadership in the past. Professor Zimmerman suggested that RPAC draft a proposal for an executive committee that would then meet with the Vice Presidents. Professor Lawson voiced concern about decreasing the size of RPAC, because in her college there was a feeling that the committee helped to keep budget affairs transparent. Professor Zimmerman suggested that an executive subcommittee would just make it easier in working with the vice president of finance. Many members of the Senate voiced that RPAC has a very important mission in the university and we would like to keep the membership as it currently stands. Senator Davis also felt that the library should be on the committee. The Senate took a straw poll and decided to add a library representative to RPAC. The straw poll carried 19-0-0. The Senate also suggests that RPAC should develop a smaller executive committee that could represent them in meetings with the vice-presidents. Professor Merriman, former chair of RPAC, came forward to state that the committee advises the president. She was on the Middle States committee representing RPAC for resources and they found that this committee was our only vehicle for representing the university community on this.

NEW BUSINESS
Provost’s Address to the Senate

She began by thanking everyone for the warm reception that she has received on campus. She wants to listen and has heard much good about Towson.
She introduced Lynnette Zelezny, who is a fellow in leadership on campus.
She has the General Education proposal on her desk and has started reading it. She wants to know the Gen Ed learning goals to make sure the proposal is addressing the goals.
The new assistant vice president of assessment will start in two weeks.
The entire discussion of Gen Ed will continue during the semester.
Sabbaticals for this year will be honored but going forward for next year, we are not sure what the budget will be. We will try to move this forward for next year and she will ask the deans and chairs to prioritize requests.
She shared that we are accepting nominations to for regent awards. This reflects well on the university.
On H1N1 issues, we are handling this very well. We do not want sick students in class with healthy students. The policy put in place has helped us on this campus.
She commented on the TU Community website, which showcases community engagement policies at this institution both from students and faculty. She encourages us to look at the website and if we are doing research that could be on this website, she encourages us to go on the site and register.
Furloughs will go into affect Oct 7 for regular employees and Oct 10 contingence employees. She went to HR to see the record we keep. On this form we will put number 41 on leave days. She knows that as faculty we will be responsible for this and department chairs should not have to do it.
The President’s Council did not agree with the resolution of the Senate to close the university for a day, but will send the University System a letter sharing the concerns. She then shared that Jennifer Ballengee developed a statement for faculty to put out when they are on furlough and she supported the context of the statement.
The Textbook Committee met for a first meeting. A proposal will be brought to a future meeting on how books will be listed and changed. She will keep us informed as this moves along.
The university received funds for STEM education and the university will use some of the funds to develop a STEM school in Cherry Hill.
She has been meeting with the Academic Standards Committee on Latin Honors. She has talked to SGA, Deans, and others concerned. She hopes it will result in a sound policy.
In updating us on the Chapter 3, she is aware that much more than Chapter 3 in the Faculty Manual needs change. Kate Dennison and Barbara English will meet with Senate and AAUP leadership. Then it will go to PTR&M committee and Senate.
The Middle States Report has been completed. The chair of the visiting group will be on campus to meet with the president in the coming weeks. She thanked the co-chairs for the work that they did on this.
Professor Vatz asked if it is an administrative policy that we do not miss a day of classes. Provost Welsh answered that we are looking at this. Professor Vatz asked if we have other furloughs, will we then do it differently. Professor Vatz then suggested that if we do not take the days off, that it is a statement that furloughs do not make a difference to students. Provost Welsh responded that they are making it clear that furloughs do affect students.
Professor Burks shared that the PTR&M committee does not meet until November and asked if they receive the chapter ahead of the meeting. Provost Welsh agreed that if it was completed, she would do that.

Motion 09/10-09: B.S. In Information Technology (Executive Committee)

Professor Ewell asked about whether with the budget as it is was there enough funding for the program. Provost Welsh suggests that if there are students in the program that will support the program. She, though, was not sure whether this was just moving students from one group to another. Dean Vanko introduced the leaders of the program and suggested that students would produce the funding for the program. Provost Welsh volunteered that information technology was important for the work force, which is priority of the university. Professor Bergman asked about library resources, and representatives of the program answered that from other programs in the department that there were enough resources available. Senator Davis from the library shared that we are moving towards e-books and on-line resources. Professor Maronick asked about software. Program leaders explained that the same software used for the present graduate programs would be used for this program. Motion to accept the proposal carried 18-0-1.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:06. The Senate will re-convene on October 19, 2009 to complete the rest of the Agenda.

University Senate

Memorandum

Date: October 30, 2009

To: The Academic Community

From: Sharon Pitcher, Secretary of the University Senate

Subject: Minutes of the October 19, 2009—Meeting of the University Senate

A continuation of the second regular meeting of the University Senate was held on Monday, October 19t, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. in Rooms 314-315 of the University Union.

Professor Siegel, CUSF:

We passed a motion to send a short recommendation to Chancellor Kirwan to ask the board to work with legislature to rescind the film policy.
Textbook issue – The system thinks we are way ahead of the other universities. We do have faculty input, which is not happening at other campuses.
We should hear more about Morgan/USMC and the offering of on-line programs soon.

New Business

Motion 09/10-10: To accept the annual report of the Students’ Appeal Committee (Executive Committee)

Motion passed 18-0-0.

Motion 09/10-11: To accept the annual report of the Students’ Financial Assistance Committee (Executive Committee)

Professor Cox raises the question of the role of faculty as advisers to assist students with this. Professor Bergman responded that the committee wants some guidance about how faculty want to be involved. He believes that most faculty do not want to be too involved with this, but should know where to send students. Professor Siegel asked if this office was sufficiently staffed at this critical time. Provost Welsh answered that it is well staffed and asked students if there were any problems. Senator Graf suggested that there should be one place that students should go. Provost Welsh responded that she will look into this. Professor Siegel shared that often the website is not updated in a timely manner. Provost Welsh will look into this, too.