University Senate Links
University Senate
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 12, 2001
To: The Academic Community
From: James M. Anthony, Secretary
Subject: November 5, 2001 Meeting of the University Senate
The third regular meeting of the University Senate met on November 5, 2001 in Rooms 314-316 of the University Union. Chairperson Holter called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. Professor Stevens-Ratchford was absent; Vice-President Parker was excused; Student Senators Lockard and Sharp were absent. The Agenda was approved as distributed. The minutes of September 10 were approved as distributed. The minutes of October 1 were approved as corrected.
Announcements:
Acting Provost Jones announced that the University is working on a 1_% budget reversion to the State. There will be no impact on Faculty.
There is some concern that the annual workload report continue to show a precipitous productivity decline. Towson University has the fewest percentage of core faculty teaching at undergraduate lower level courses. There are questions about design of the schedule, the schedule matrix, and the assigned time of faculty. We need better accounting of faculty load and may need to alter certain practices.
The job description for the new Chancellor has been circulated.
Professor Sullivan (AAUP-Faculty Association) announced the publication of a new edition of the AAUP Red Book. It is available on the AAUP WEB page. The Fall general meeting will be held Wednesday, November 14 at 3:30 p.m. in the Chesapeake III room of the University Union. The annual membership drive is underway. Dues are $15.
Mr. Crusante (SGA) announced that he is appointing students to academic committees. The USM student association will be meeting next week.
Dean Loeschke, chair of the search committee for the Vice President and Chief Fiscal Officer, reported on the search. She thanked the faculty for its input into the process. They have received 72 applications and more are arriving. They have narrowed the field to 8 and will then narrow it to 5. They will be bringing in 2 individuals next week. Although the search process has been confidential, the candidates will meet with (besides the Search Committee) the President, the Provost, Vice-President Parker, the Board of Visitors, a representative of the Alumni Association, the Councils of Deans and Chairpersons, Professor Sullivan (AAUP- Faculty Association), Stuart Stein (representing the Senate) and an SGA representative.
Professor Clements, chair of the search committee for the Vice-President for University Advancement, reported on their search. They employed an outside search firm; they have received 50-60 applicants and have narrowed the list to 12. They intend to conduct airport interviews with 8 of them and invite 3 to come to campus. The committee hopes to conclude its activities by the first week of December. Both committees are pleased with the excellence of the pools.
Chairperson Holter reported on meetings of Senate chairs at USM. Items discussed: shared governance, especially how part-time and librarians can be better included, and the evaluation of administrators.
Discussion with Chancellor Langenberg regarding institutional policies on assessment. The institution must provide evidence that academic goals are being achieved. This data must show how they are being met intellectually as well as statistically.
New Business
Discussion Item 1. Policy on Awarding the Honorary Degree. Provost Jones noted that the Board of Regents has forbidden the awarding honorary degrees to political figures.
Under the new policy the committee must nominate persons for these awards and receive prior permission from the board. The question was asked if the Senate should play a larger role in this process. Professor Siegel and Professor Sullivan both voiced support for a large faculty say in the process.
Professor Christian asked if there is any student role at this point.
Mr. Crusante stated the opinion that students should have some say and asked that students be appointed to the committee.
Provost Jones stated that it is the faculty that grants degrees. We need to decide the guidelines for making nominations. Professor Whitman (a member of the current Honorary Degree Committee) noted that the faculty has always been slow in submitting recommendations.
Professor Siegel moved, Professor Chen seconded a motion That the Senate chair appoint a committee to develop a set of guidelines and any recommended changes in the current campus policy for making nominations for Honorary Degrees and report back to the Senate at the February meeting. (Motion 01 / 02-6).
Professor Vocke asked if the current Honorary Degree Committee could do it, but Professor Siegel stated that it should be a Senate committee. Professor Nelson voiced the opinion that at least some members from the current committee should serve on the new body.
The motion passed 17-1-2.
2. Professor Sullivan moved, Professor Chen seconded a motion: To approve the Graduate Certificate in Database Management Systems. (Motion 01/02-3).
Professor Behforooz spoke to the motion.
Professor Zimmerman asked that the proposal include documentation that the Computer Science Department had been consulted and was in agreement. Professor Behforooz explained that the procedures only require that a copy be sent to the Computer Science Department. After a brief discussion of the policy, Provost Jones noted that in this case the Computer Science Department was notified and that there is no requirement that a letter from that department be included with the proposal.
The question was called and the motion passed 20-0-2. 3. Professor Chen moved, Mr. Crusante seconded a motion: To approve the Student Academic Integrity Policy. (Motion 01/02-4.)
Professor Connolly spoke to the motion.
Mr. Crusante noted that the proposed policy had been brought to the Student Government Association where it was approved. He thanked the committee for its good work. He noted that two students had served on the committee.
Professor Gallagher suggested that some reordering of the statements be considered for clarification and consistency.
There was considerable discussion of Section F: Multiple Submissions [This covers the issue of ÒIntentionally or knowingly submitting substantial portions of the same academic work (including oral reports) for credit more than once without authorization.Ó].
Some speakers noted that certain scientific discoveries are regularly presented in different venues. Others questioned whether it would be acceptable to present slightly modified projects in more than one class, e.g. an essay in a writing class and a speech in another. One student (Katie McCullough from the Tower Light) asked about what should happen in a situation when professors from different classes asked for papers dealing with the same current event, e.g. that of September 11, 2001.
Professor Holter questioned that the issue of purchase of term papers was not included in the policy.
Professor Holter asked that the policy be reconsidered and brought back to the Senate at the resumption of the meeting on November 19. Professor Connolly asked that members of the Academic Community send suggestions and concerns to his e-mail address.
4. Professor Vatz moved, Professor Siegel seconded a motion: To receive the annual reports of the Admission Committee, the Curriculum Committee, the Academic Computing Committee, and the Academic Standards Committee (Motion 01/02 Ð5).
The motion was divided among the different reports.
The Admissions Committee
Professor Hull spoke to the motion. The motion to receive the report passed unanimously.
The Curriculum Committee report was deferred because there was no one present to speak to it.
The Academic Computing Committee
Professor Lidtke spoke to the report.
The Committee did not meet at all last year because issues were pre-empted by other bodies.
The motion to receive the report passed 16-0-4. The Academic Standards Committee
Cecilia Deems, Academic Standards Coordinator, Enrollment Services spoke to the report.
Professor Nelson complimented the committee on a very professionally prepared report.
Professor Siegel wondered if the policies adopted by the committee should be decided by the Senate.
Professor Hull reminded the Senate that the chairs of all committees send the minutes of each meeting to the Member at Large of the Senate to notify the body of decisions made.
The committee is presently looking at policies on the awarding of concurrent degrees.
The vote to receive the report was unanimous.
Professor Gissendanner moved, Professor Siegel seconded a motion: To amend the motion by omitting the Curriculum Report from the motion and to accept the three reports. The motion passed 18-0-0.
Associate Provost Leather announced that a new project for technology fluency needs to be considered by the Academic Computing Committee.
The Committee is presently being reconstituted.
The Senate recessed at 6:13 PM until November 13, 2001.
Respectfully submitted,
James M. Anthony, Secretary
The University Senate usually meets the first Monday of each month during the fall and spring semesters. The Executive Committee of the University Senate invites all interested parties to attend the meetings in the University Union.
Copies of documents relevant to agenda items are available at the Faculty Reserve Desk in Cook Library. Recordings of meetings are located in Cook Library in the Media Resource Services area on the second floor.