University Senate Links
University Senate
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 2, 2004
To: The Academic Community
From: James M. Anthony
Subject: March 8, 2004-Meeting of the University Senate
The sixth regular meeting of the University Senate was held on March 8, 2004 in the Potomac Lounge of the University Union. Chairperson Norma Holter called the meeting to order at 4:08 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Acting Vice President Phillips, Vice President Rubin, and Professors Forbes and Gallagher were excused.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Professor Zimmerman (AAUP/Faculty Assn.) asked that two new committees be formed:
1. Junior Faculty Committee with the purpose of giving junior faculty a voice.
2. Work Load Committee to examine work loads across colleges.
There was no objection.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes were approved as distributed.
REPORTS OF EX OFFICIO SENATORS
President Caret spoke about several bills before the legislature:
1. Senator Frosh and Delegate Busch are sponsoring bills aimed at balancing how much we get from tuition increases vs. how much get from state appropriations. The System supports these bills.
2. Senator Harris is sponsoring a bill calling for tuition to be capped for two years. We find this problematic.
3. Senator Hogan is sponsoring a bill to put everything into a two-year study.
4. Senator Hooper is sponsoring a bill to eliminate the System altogether.
Enrollment: On the subject of Enrollment projections through 2012, the System is predicting a 30% increase. They are looking at what we need to handle and the cost of educating each student. Some campuses will need to absorb more than others. There is no growth money in the System at present. Towson University is planning to grow, but not without additional resources both operating and capital.
Workload issue: The System is looking at workloads and how they are computed. The Provost will be examining the system at Towson to see if our formula works. We have many more non-tenured faculty than a few years ago.
President Caret has realigned the athletic program and is satisfied with the decision. Between $1 and 1.4 million has been realigned.
Question: Professor Sullivan asked how our funding meets the minimum standard set up by the Larson task force. Answer: The funding guidelines aim at being at 75% of our peer group. We are one of the higher achiever in funding guidelines. But it doesn't build in for new growth. We cannot grow without funding for growth.
Chairperson Holter introduced the new Provost James Brennan.
Provost Brennan delivered a short address to the Senate.
Chairperson Holter asked Associate Provost Deborah Leather to come to the podium. She thanked Dr. Leather on behalf of the Senate for her service as Interim Provost and noted that she had worked tirelessly for shared governance. She presented her with a clock as a token of the Senate's appreciation for her contributions.
Vice President Harnage noted that President Caret had represented Towson very well at various hearings before members of the Legislature. Next week we go before hearings on the capital budget. These hearings are much more critical this year because we have a great deal at stake. The Governor has presented much in his capital budget. Our testimony will focus on critical issues. Vice President Harnage has completed a study of many of the fees on campus this year and is happy to announce that there will be no increase in parking fees next year.
Question: Prof. Anthony voiced concern for the need for a new crosswalk from the Center for the Arts to the University Union area. Answer: That is under discussion with Baltimore County. They are putting in a new crosswalk at Osler Drive.
Acting Vice President Clements passed.
Professor Siegel (CUSF) reported that CUSF sent budget reports to the hearings in the House and Senate. They had a wonderful turnout for Student Research Day. The student displays were fabulous. The Chancellor went to each exhibit and a few legislators came. Monday, March 15 is a faculty rally in Annapolis. She asks us to get in touch with our legislators and lobby for providing funding without raising tuition.
CUSF is working on redefining the workload metric. Vice President Goldschmidt is collating the data.
They are reviewing the P & T section of the ART document. Professor Siegel is going to speak to the Effectiveness and Efficiency Task Force.
Professor Zimmerman (AAUP/Faculty Assn. announced that they are running the elections. Nominations are due by tomorrow at 5 p.m. He said they hope to have the ballot out before spring break. Professor Pitcher said she thought that was unrealistic.
Ms. Pica (SGA) announced Tiger Pride Day in Annapolis. The SGA has passed a resolution supporting the Frosh bill. They have passed a resolution not supporting the Busch bill.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATORS
Ms. Berlanstein (Member at Large): No report.
OLD BUSINESS
1. Motion 03 /04-20: To approve the ratification of the College Constitution & By-Laws for the College of Fine Arts and Communication.
Dean Spicer spoke to the motion and answers questions.
It was clarified that the Dean is a member of the College Council ex officio, non-voting.
The Technology Committee is to be left as an ad hoc committee. Professor Siegel suggested that the Dean of the College should be named in the membership list as number one and as a non-voting member.
It was noted that the copies the Senators received were missing a page. Therefore it was requested that final consideration of the motion be delayed until a later meeting pending the distribution of a correct copy.
2. Motion 03 /04-24: To approve the ratification of the College Constitution & By-Laws for the College of Science and Mathematics.
Professors Tim Dwyer and Jay Nelson spoke to the motion and answered questions.
It was noted that it was unnecessary to approve the By-laws and that this phrase be stricken from the motion.
The motion was approved 15/1/0.
NEW BUSINESS
3. Motion 03 /04-26: To receive the report of the Information Technology Committee.
Professor William Sadera spoke to the motion.
Questions about E-portfolio policy were postponed to the Discussion Item later on the agenda.
The motion to receive the report was approved 20/0/1.
4. Motion 03 /04-27: To approve two additions to the Grounds and Procedures for Appeals for Promotion, Tenure, Reappointment, and Merit.
Professor Diane Taylor spoke to the motion.
She explained that there needed to be clearer delineation between appeals to the University P & T Committee based on procedural issues and appeals to the Provost. The timing is not clear.
Professor Sullivan questioned the wording of the discrimination clause and that there is a difference between the Towson University policy and the USM policy. He suggested that the category of sexual orientation be added.
There was further discussion concerning the timeline for appeal and the process for moving from level to level.
The motion was tabled until the April meeting.
5. Motion 03 /04-28: To approve a process for extension of the probationary period towards tenure.
Professor Diane Taylor spoke to the motion.
Chairperson Holter asked why there is no provision for allowing an extension for the care of an elderly relative.
The policy should dovetail the family leave policy.
Professor Siegel noted that the CUSF proposal on these issues will leave the details up to the individual institution.
Professor Zimmerman said he felt it shouldn't be left up to the individual department or college.
Provost Brennan said he believed that a recommendation for extending the probation should come from the department or college. The Provost should make the review and the final approval should be by the Provost.
There was a question about the stated one-year limit.
It was agreed to send the motion back to the committee and that it include: Language on the medical situation and family member illness. It should dovetail with the Family Medical Leave policy. Approval by the Provost One time, one year
The motion will be brought back at the April meeting.
There was a question about the report of the ad hoc merit committee. Professor Taylor explained that the committee delayed its report until receipt of a report from the Deans Council dealing with Chapter III of the Faculty Handbook regarding the merit policy.
Provost Brennan said that the Dean's report will go to the University P & T Committee.
There was a question raised regarding any distinction in merit considerations between graduate teaching and undergraduate teaching.
Professor Cox asked if we are talking about the designation "graduate faculty."
Chairperson Holter asked if there is a difference between graduate and undergraduate teaching in the P & T and Merit policies.
Professor Cox said the Graduate Studies Committee will address this.
Professor Siegel said she thought we shouldn't mix workload and P & T issues.
Professor Anthony stated that he felt that under the new workload policies where individual faculty will have different workloads, that these both of these two areas must be considered in deliberations.
6. Motion 03 /04-29: To approve an extension of the waiver for fulfilling the requirements of GenEd category IIA.
"Students may fulfill their IIA general education requirements: 1. by taking two courses in IIA1 that total eight credits or more; 2. by taking two courses in IIA1 that total seven credits or fewer AND one course in IIA2; or 3. by taking two courses in IIA1 AND a third IIA1 course in any discipline.
To take option number three, students must complete ALL three courses by the end of May 2006. In IIA1 students must take either one course in two different disciplines or two sequential courses in a single discipline; one of the IIA1 courses must be a lab course."
Professor O'Pecko, Director, General Education spoke to the motion.
He explained that the University has not provided enough courses in the second category. We are making progress in adding enough courses in IIA2, but for now we need to extend the waiver. He would prefer to make it open-ended.
President Caret asked what is holding up the development of these courses? Professor O'Pecko said resources and budget problems.
The motion passed 19/0/1.
The Senate recessed until Monday, March 15 at 4:00 p.m.
Monday, March 15, 2004
Chairperson Holter called the Senate back into session at 4:04 p.m.
President Caret, Vice-Presidents Harnage, Rubin, Acting Vice-President Phillips, Ms. Berlanstein, Professors Cox and Whitman were excused.
Professor Zimmerman (AAUP/Faculty Assn.) announced that the Faculty elections would be held directly after spring break.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
7. Adoption of Uniform Software for Electronic Portfolios.
Professor William Sadera, Chair of the Information Technology Committee, answered questions on the policy.
He stated that the Committee had distributed a proposal sent to Vice President Harnage to adopt a uniform software for Electronic Portfolios. CIAT was concerned that there were multiple software packages being used on campus and that there was need to consider a package that could be supported.
After consideration, the Committee selected Live Text. The policy now is that this is all that will be supported by CIAT.
Ms. O'Connell expressed the concern that this package will cost students $90, while Front Page is free.
Professor Gallagher asked that departments be consulted on this matter and that it should be equitable for students.
Professor Sadera said that an advantage of Live Text is that data can be pulled out for assessment purposes. The decision wasn't made in a vacuum.
Chairperson Holter asked about the policy regarding student materials for assessment and to whether special permissions must be obtained.
There is also the question of security against plagiarism. Answer: No one has access to student projects except those who are allowed.
Ms. O'Connell said that a year or so ago the SGA researched the University technology fee which is $120/semester. Where does this money go? The cost of this software will be like another technology fee.
Professor Pitcher said that the software would be used by students throughout their career at Towson.
Professor Ballangee expressed concern about the additional cost to students. She wondered if there is any fund that could defray this cost.
Chairperson Holter expressed concern about privacy. Answer: Students have option of sharing their material.
Chairperson Holter said she is concerned that this matter didn't come to the Senate. It is an example of how we need better liaison with the Senate committees. She asked each liaison to communicate with their committees and with the Senate.
Professor Gallagher asked to get the opinions of the Assessment Committee and NCATE on this matter. Chairperson Holter asked the liaison to the Assessment Committee to address this.
Professor Hartzler-Miller mentioned another point to consider: Every faculty member using the E-Portfolio must tailor their assignments so that those areas can be assessed.
Professor Siegel noted that there are Education majors in many departments. Chairperson Holter asked Professor Pitcher to obtain a report from the TEEB.
Ms. O'Connell expressed concern that some faculty will use it and others will not. She asked that part of the $120 technology fee go to supplement this program.
Chairperson Holter noted that this is an example of much miscommunication.
Associate Provost Leather noted that the committees should be coming to the Senate and we should debate the issues.
Professor Sadera stated that he sees the problems of making decisions without coming to the Senate, but when the ITC was reorganized they provided for representatives from all colleges.
Professor Siegel said that in her opinion how the software is used is a Senate issue, not necessarily the issue of the choice of the software. But she supported the request that some of the $240/year technology be used for this expense.
The issue will be addressed again at the April 19 meeting.
8. Adoption of a policy concerning consistency of the Plus/Minus grading system for courses with multiple sections.
Members of the SGA expressed concern about the inconsistency of the present policy: that in case of two students in different sections of a course receiving identical scores one could receive a plus or minus grade and the other the straight letter grade. It was also noted that the policy that the use of the plus/minus system is an option for faculty is not in the catalog-only the Faculty Handbook. According to their research other institutions do not allow a variance of the policy.
Ms. Pica moved, Professor Siegel seconded a motion to establish that the use of the +/- grading be uniform across the university.
Professor Zimmerman supports the motion, but also feels that the C- should be dropped.
Professor Vatz said in his opinion we cannot defend the use of two systems.
Professor Sullivan noted, however, that the grading system is the prerogative of the person teaching the class.
Professor Siegel brought up the issue of the C- grade. Professor Gallagher noted that we are only discussing the consistency issue at this point.
Provost Brennan said that in his opinion we cannot support more than one grading system. The contracts that we make with students dictate that we follow a consistent policy.
The motion under consideration was reworded and clarified as follows:
"For undergraduate courses when letter grades associated with quality points apply, the grading system of the University requires the use of plus/minus grading."
Professor Lu moved to table the motion until the next meeting to give Senators a chance to poll the faculty.
Vote to table: 7/12/1: The motion failed.
The vote on the motion itself was taken. It passed unanimously.
The policy will take effect in Fall 2004.
9. To eliminate the C- grade.
Professor Zimmerman said that in his opinion we have three options:
a. Delete the C-
b. Reorder the quality points required for passing so that the C- counts
c. Make the quality points for C or C- the same.
Ms. Pica moved and Ms. Schlechter seconded to eliminate the C- grade.
Due to the late hour, Professor Zimmerman moved and Professor Anthony seconded a motion to table the motion until the next meeting.
The vote to table was 15/4/0.
The next meeting will be held on April 19. The other discussion items will be addressed at that meeting.
Ms. Schlecter moved and Professor Ballengee seconded to adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned.
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 the meetings are located in Cook Library in the Media Resource Services area on the second floor.