FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Sheri Layral 312 Signers' Hall 474-7964 FYSENAT For Audioconferencing: Bridge #: 1-800-910-9620 Anchorage: 561-9620 A G E N D A UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 Monday, May 13, 1996 1:30 p.m. - 4:15 p.m. Wood Center Ballroom 1:30 I Call to Order - Eric Heyne 5 Min. A. Roll Call B. Approval of Minutes to Meeting #63 C. Adoption of Agenda 1:35 II Status of Chancellor's Office Actions 5 Min. A. Motions Approved: 1. Motion to recommend the adoption of a policy on evaluating educational effectiveness. B. Motions Pending: none 1:40 III Remarks by Chancellor J. Wadlow 15 Min. and Provost J. Keating Questions 5 Min. 2:00 IV Governance Reports A. ASUAF - J. Hayes/C. Wheeler 5 Min. B. Staff Council - M. Scholle 5 Min. C. President's Report - E. Heyne (Attachment 64/1) 5 Min. Correspondence with Chancellor Wadlow (Attachment 64/2) D. Faculty Alliance meeting - D. Lynch (Attachment 64/3) 5 Min. E. Report on the Western States Association of 5 Min. Faculty Governance - M. Jenning (Handout) 2:25 V Public Comments/Questions 5 Min. 2:30 VI Unfinished Business A. Ratify motion to approved list of 1996 degree 5 Min. candidates, approved by Administrative Committee, May 3, 1996 (Attachment 64/4) 2:35 VII Discussion Items A. Evaluating Educational Effectiveness - D. Thomas 15 Min. 2:50 VIII Annual Committee Reports 20 Min. A. Curricular Affairs - D. Thomas (Attachment 64/5) B. Faculty Affairs - B. Alexander (Attachment 64/6) C. Graduate Curricular Affairs - R. Carlson (Attachment 64/7) D. Scholarly Activities - P. Layer (Attachment 64/8) E. CNCSHDR - R. Krejci F. Developmental Studies - R. Illingworth G. Faculty Appeals & Oversight - D. Bischak (Attachment 64/9) H. Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement - R. Seifert (Attachment 64/10) I. Graduate School Advisory Committee - P. Schumaker (Attachment 64/11) J. Legislative & Fiscal Affairs - M. Jennings K. Service Committee - M. He'bert L. University-wide Promotion/Tenure - J. Keller 3:10 IX 1996-97 Faculty Senate Members Take Their Seats A. Roll Call of 1996-97 Members 5 Min. B President's Remarks (Attachment 64/12) 15 Min. 3:30 X New Business A. Motion to endorse 1996-97 committee membership, 5 Min. submitted by Administrative Committee (Attachment 64/13) **BREAK FOR 15 MINUTES FOR ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONS** 3:50 B. Motion to empower the Administrative Committee 5 Min. to act on behalf of the Senate during the summer months, submitted by Administrative Committee (Attachment 64/14) 3:55 XI Discussion Items A. Report on Distance Delivery - J. Craven 5 Min. (Attachment 64/15) B. Changes to student athlete and other financial aid 5 Min. policies - T. Robinson C. University Benefits - M. Tumeo (Attachment 64/16) 5 Min. 4:10 XII Members' Comments/Questions 5 Min. 4:15 XIII Adjournment ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/1 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 PRESIDENT'S REPORT - Eric. Heyne At the last Administrative Committee meeting I asked the chair of Faculty Development, Assessment, and Improvement to look at two issues: establishing a policy regarding privacy of SOI's while in the custody of the student courier, and establishing an annual Senior Faculty Colloquium Series for every faculty member promoted to full professor the previous year. The Faculty Affairs Committee has been coordinating with the Provost Council's subcommittee on class size, which will continue to work on the resource issues relating to under enrollment and class sizes. I think it is important that the Senate also work on these issues, emphasizing pedagogical and other academic perspectives, rather than simply allowing the administration to set policy based on financial directives from the Legislature and Board of Regents. Discussions regarding Regents' Policy changes have been put on hold by President Komisar pending the union vote. That gives us at least another two months to make our case to the provosts and 'Nanne Myers before the Regents will consider our recommended changes. Unfortunately, we won't be able to negotiate with the provosts about these issues during that time, but we can at least be working on what we will say, and making our positions known to them and to the Regents. I have included as attachments in the agenda responses from Chancellor Wadlow to our motion on using salary money for equity and my letter about her draft list of alternative tasks for faculty whose classes are cancelled. The union vote is obviously the biggest single issue for the next month or more. I will be talking to colleagues at other schools, asking about their experiences with unions, trying to get a clearer picture of both the benefits and the drawbacks of being unionized. I welcome any information from any UAF faculty member, because I am still undecided. It has been a pleasure working with you this year. Thanks for your hard work, and for those of you continuing on the Senate, best of luck with the challenges of the coming year. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/2a UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 23 April, 1996 Chancellor Joan Wadlow 320 Signer's Hall UAF Fairbanks, AK 99775 Dear Chancellor Wadlow: At the April 22 meeting of the Faculty Senate members asked me formally to express our disappointment with the "Chancellor's Draft List of Alternative Assignments for Faculty Whose Classes Are Under Enrolled." Many of us considered the list inappropriate, both because of the contents themselves and because it was generated without faculty input. We have initiated in the Senate a discussion of academic policy concerning minimum class sizes and under enrolled classes. This will dovetail with the Systemwide Academic Council's discussion of faculty workload, for Regents' policy revisions, and would also be central to any discussion on this campus about alternative faculty assignments, such as that currently being carried on in a subcommittee of the Provost's Council. Many members of the Senate feel that workload distribution and alternatives should be decided at the unit level. Whether or not we eventually decide to do it that way, the Senate as a whole considers this administratively developed list as premature and totally lacking faculty perspective. We look forward to talking with you about workload, and trust that you will find a way to incorporate faculty input before proceeding further in the direction of developing alternative tasks for faculty whose classes are under enrolled. Sincerely, Eric Heyne, President UAF Faculty Senate ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/2b UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 April 24, 1996 Eric Heyne, President UAF Faculty Senate Governance Office Fairbanks, AK 99775-0680 Dear Eric: I was very pleased to get your April 23rd letter about the Faculty Senate's willingness to help develop alternative tasks for faculty whose classes are underenrolled. This is great news, and I look forward to receiving the ideas. As soon as something is prepared, please send it both to me and the Provost. The information can be used by the Provost subcommittee that you mention in your letter as alternatives are addressed. It would be ideal if alternatives would not need to be used, yet it is better to prepare. It is possible, of course, that not every class in the fall of 1996 will meet minimum enrollments. Thanks. Sincerely, Joan K. Wadlow, Chancellor University of Alaska Fairbanks JKW/mjb cc: Provost Jack Keating ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/2c UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 May 6, 1996 MEMORANDUM TO: Eric Heyne, President UAF Faculty Senate, Governance Office University of Alaska Fairbanks FROM: Joan K. Wadlow, Chancellor University of Alaska Fairbanks Thanks for sending the Faculty Senate's idea to change University of Alaska Fairbanks's salary process. I have discussed the suggestion with the Provost and we agree that UAF is so far along in the process that we should not change directions now, simply because another chancellor is doing something different. Many UAF faculty have already spend much time and talent to develop a faculty-driven system called for in the Board of Regents policy that will assign salary increases both for equity and for performance. To change directions now, in my judgment, would not be the best decision. JKW/mjb ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/3 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 REPORT ON FACULTY ALLIANCE MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 - Don Lynch The Faculty Alliance elected Phil Slattery of Sitka as its President for 1996-97. We heard reports from Anchorage and Southeast, both of whom are using all salary monies for equity and not for merit pay raises. Southeast is using Cupa plus 10 percent as its base for determining equity. Southeastern is reorganizing and will have only one Dean and Faculty clusters in the future. Anchorage is reducing the number of Deans from eight to four. Critical issues for the future are: Locus of Tenure; Statement on the definition of Consultation with Faculty Governance; Post-Tenure Review; Faculty Work Loads; Outcomes Assessment (or Assessment of Teaching Effectiveness). The meeting with the Statewide Academic Council was canceled and we were told that all issues related to tenure and work load have been removed from June Regents agenda because of the possible union vote on United Academics. This should mean that current rather than proposed policies should govern tenure and promotion. The Presidents of the three Faculty Senates or their designees will represent the Alliance over the summer. Reports from those who attended the Western States Governance Conference indicate that the new Regents policies are a mirror image of those being proposed elsewhere. In short, our Administration is following what everyone else seems to be doing. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/4 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MOTION ======= The UAF Faculty Senate recommends to the Board of Regents that the attached list of individuals be awarded the appropriate UAF degrees pending completion of all University requirements. [Note: copy of the list is available in the Governance Office, 312 Signers' Hall.] EFFECTIVE: Immediately RATIONALE: These degrees are granted upon recommendation of the program faculty, as verified by the appropriate department head. As the representative governance group of the faculty, we are making that recommendation. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/5 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 CURRICULAR AFFAIRS, ANNUAL REPORT- Dana Thomas, Chair Curricular Affairs stayed busy this year with a variety of topics summarized below: 1. Course Compression - motions were passed by the senate which require college/school curriculum councils to approve courses compressed to less than 6 weeks and all new course proposals shall have a section indicating compression formats which are appropriate for the course. 2. Interdisciplinary programs - a motion passed the senate specifying the minimum number of credits remaining in a student's program when approval is sought for an interdisciplinary degree program. 3. Grade Appeals Policy Amendments - a motion passed the senate amending this policy to deal with NB grades and to deal with situations when the instructor is the department chair. 4. Last date catalog issues - a motion passed the senate simplifying the last days to drop, withdraw, and change from credit to audit. 5. Class Schedule Times - a motion passed the senate changing the daily class schedule to allow 15 minutes between morning classes and MWF afternoon classes. 6. Concurrent Enrollment - a motion passed the senate allowing the implementation of the Ahead Program which grants UAF admission to exceptional high school seniors. 7. Leadership Honors - a motion passed the senate establishing a student leadership honors recognition procedure. 8. Initiation and deletion of degree programs - A BFA in Theater was approved, a B.S. in Geography - Environmental Studies was approved, and the MAT in Music and the M.Ed. in College Student Personnel Administration were deleted. 9. Other curricular issues - our committee dealt with many issues which do not come before the senate per senate policy. These included, for example, approval of specific B.T. requirements and clarifications concerning course numbering. Curricular Affairs met every two weeks during the 95-96 academic year to deal with these issues and many others which did not result in further action. Issues for Curricular Affairs next year include the following: a. Review of the status of the major. Are UAF's standards for linkage of courses in the major appropriate? Are the directions of our majors appropriate? Should all majors have capstone courses? Are our majors modern? b. Consider a policy on program-specific admissions. The Justice program proposed a program-specific admissions policy with a detailed catalog description concerning criteria, date of application, identification of a faculty committee for reviewing applications, etc. This proposal was revised in cooperation with Curricular Affairs, passed by the senate, then denied by the Provost. The denial was based upon a philosophical argument against the establishment of different admission standards for each program. This is contrary to existing program-specific admission standards for the education, business, airplane power-plant and social work programs. c. A review of grade policies. For example, there is a specific policy establishing the criteria for issuing an incomplete. This policy is regularly abused by faculty and administrators alike. The existance of the incomplete is connected in some sense with the use of the NB grade. A clarification of the purpose and use of the I and NB is needed. Similarly, the change of grade policy establishes criteria for changing a grade which are commonly abused. d. A review of academic standards. In particular a review of the standards and practices concerning probation, disqualification, academic bankruptcy, and Chancellor and Dean's lists is needed. Policies in these areas for graduate students and non-degree students are needed. e. Course compression standards. Although the 95-96 curricular affairs committee did take some action with regard to course compression many of the committee members feel that further action to ensure quality is needed. f. The petition process. A review of this process should be conducted. g. Policies on auditing and credit/no credit options should be reviewed. I thank all the committee members for their hard work and sincere interest in the activities of Curricular Affairs this year. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/6 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE REPORT - Barbara Alexander, Chair UAF Faculty Affairs Committee remained involved with discussion on and recommendations for compensation policy implementation and Regents' Policy reviews ("collections"). The issues of workload and class-size policy are closely connected and will have to be addressed in future meetings of Faculty Affairs. Several studies on workload have been conducted in the recent past and should be consulted. (cf. AAUP reports) Norm Swazo serves as representative of the Faculty Affairs Committee to the Provost Council's Ad Hoc Committee on Underenrolled Classes. The Ad Hoc Committee met on 4/30/96 to consider what steps are to be taken to meet the Chancellor's request for a campus-wide policy by Spring semester 1997. Provost Keating emphasized that the review of classes having underenrollment (relative to current criteria of minimum class size by level) is an "efficiency study," not a "productivity study." The issue is in part a response to complaints from UAA and UAS faculty about UAF being "overstaffed" with full-time faculty with significant teaching at the other campuses being handled unfairly with adjunct faculty. The Provost reported that by comparison with a survey on "the proportion of full-time faculty to adjunct faculty," UAF falls "in the middle of the pack." In considering what counts as an "underenrolled class," the Ad Hoc Committee has identified "clear exceptions" to the stated limits (20 for 100-level; 12 for 200-level; 10 for 300- level; 8 for 400-level; 6 for graduate course). Exceptions include: lab stations in Music and Art; undergrad/graduate combination courses; cross-listed courses; practicums; 060/070 in English and Math; 600-level courses; theses/dissertation courses; independent study courses; trial courses. Individual case exceptions are also allowable following discussions between departments and the respective college dean. Provost Keating favors a policy that is relatively "soft" on numbers criteria, yet enforceable. The Provost also sees such a policy going hand-in-hand with reforms in course scheduling (faculty may not get preference for some courses, e.g., when courses in a department are offered at the same class-hour and so compete for student enrollment). The Ad Hoc Committee plans another meeting in May for a review of data provided by Institutional Research staff. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/7 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 GRADUATE CURRICULAR AFFAIRS, ANNUAL REPORT - Robert Carlson, Chair The Graduate Curricular Affairs Commitee met a number of times during the academic year to review and approve thirty graduate academic change requests. The Committee forwarded to the Senate a motion to delete the M.Ed. in College Student Personnel. Other changes approved include six new STAT courses and two new PETE courses; addition of a non-thesis option for the M.S. in Resource Economics; and course changes in Psychology, Chemistry, Natural Resource Management and Fisheries. Considerable time was spent on the Journalism & Broadcasting new course requests and the issue of course compression. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/8 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 SCHOLARLY ACTIVITIES, ANNUAL REPORT - Paul Layer, Chair The Standing Committee for Scholarly Activities did not meet during the 1995-1996 Senate session. There was no interest in meeting expressed by the committee members and little or no Senate business was referred to the committee. The committee was asked to look over the proposed Regents Policy and to comment on the impact on research and creative activity. This was carried out by the chairman without consultation with the rest of the committee. The chairman also participated in the Research Working Group. In November 1995, I presented a report questioning the need for this committee. There was an overwhelming lack of comment on my 'radical' proposals and it was not addressed beyond comments made at the November Senate meeting. The only positive comments came from Bob White, the Administration Representative on the committee, who pointed out to me that the committee did have a history of taking a more active role in the Senate. Upon reflection, I feel that the committee should exist and can play a role in the Senate and University. I urge the new committee to examine this role and to actively seek out tasks relevant to it that are currently being addressed by other standing committees (e.g. Faculty Affairs and Curricular Affairs) which are currently bearing the load of Senate business. The committee could and should take a more active role in the Research Working Group and in the matter of patent and copyright issues, perhaps interacting with the UAF Technology Development Corporation headed by Meritt Helfferich. The question of workload distribution in the context of increased research/creative activity loads could fall under the purview of the committee. I regret that the committee did not pursue these directions this year. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/9 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 FACULTY APPEALS & OVERSIGHT, ANNUAL REPORT - Diane P. Bischak, Chair In its first year of existence the Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee formally brought under its purview a number of functions related to appeals and oversight that were previously performed on an ad hoc basis. 1. The UAF grade appeals policy was amended by the Faculty Senate so that several members of the five-member review committee will be selected from the membership of the Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee, if available. 2. A hearing panel pool subcommittee of eight committee members was designated. The UAF Grievance Council may select members of this pool to fill out the hearing panel of five members appointed when a request for a hearing is granted, as specified in Regents' Policy 04.08.08.VI.A. 3. Two committee members were nominated to serve as the faculty representatives on the UAF Grievance Council for next year. 4. A promotion/tenure appeals subcommittee composed of five tenured committee members was formed to hear all promotion and tenure reconsideration requests. 5. A subcommittee on administrator evaluation began the process of oversight of the evaluation of academic administrators. Once the draft reports from each of the administrator evaluation committees have been completed, this subcommittee will meet with the chairs of each of the evaluation committees in order to review the documents and to assure uniformity of procedures across the committees. Since the evaluations were begun so late this year, one of the first tasks to be addressed in the committee next year is to complete the review of this year's process. 6. Two other subcommittees were formed to address procedures for appeals of non-retention of faculty and to review issues dealing with faculty prerogative. These subcommittees will work to clarify these aspects of the charge of the committee. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/10 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 FACULTY DEVELOPMENT, IMPROVEMENT, AND ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE, ANNUAL REPORT - Rich Seifert, Chair The Committee met regularly over the entire school year and its early meetings centered primarily around the advice and review of the selection process for the Usibelli awards. Several chairs of those selection committees for the Usibelli award were interviewed by our Committee and although I'm not sure a formal report was made, several recommendations were passed on to the Provost to hopefully improve the process. In December, Rich Seifert took over the committee chair position from the former chair, Joan Moessner, who is on sabbatical for the spring semester. In the spring semester, we primarily talked about options for the post-tenure review of faculty, which was being promulgated by actions of the Regents. The Faculty Senate has since expressed its preferences in that regard and the final decision on the policy will be made by the Regents. At the end of the year, we still have several important issues remaining to be resolved and undertaken, if not in our final meeting, by early Fall. One of them is a recent difficulty with a breach of secure transport and evaluation of student opinions of instructors. An incident occurred where actual reviews were being read aloud in the back of a classroom before the final submissions of the review were made to the student collection person. Although there appears to be no formal oversight of this, this does fall under the jurisdiction of a campus official in charge of assembling and publishing the student opinion of instructors. One of the simple solutions for the problem encountered this year with disclosure of student opinion of instructor results before they actually got collated and secured, is to simply issue a sheet of student instructions for same to be distributed to prevent this in the future, hopefully. Also, it has been suggested by outgoing President Heyne, that the Committee on Faculty Assessment, Development, and Improvement be the lead committee in a new effort to develop a series of faculty seminars utilizing the faculty who have recently been promoted or otherwise honored. It is possible that those who secured sabbaticals or Fulbright Fellowships and whatever, could be included in a schedule of faculty colloquia over the year to share their experiences and expertise with the rest of the University community. This was felt to be an excellent idea and effectively all that needs to be done is to organize and institute it on a first try. That will be a major goal of the committee in the next year. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/11 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 GRADUATE SCHOOL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ANNUAL REPORT - Peggy Shumaker, Chair The Graduate School Advisory Committee members include: Susan Henrichs, Mark Oswood, Peggy Shumaker, David Smith, Steve Sparrow, and John Zarling. Here is a brief overview of the Graduate School Advisory Committee (GSAC) business during the 1995-96 academic year. For the full record, please refer to minutes of the GSAC, held in the office of the Dean of the Graduate School. GSAC was reorganized this year to include three representatives appointed by the Faculty Senate and three appointed by the Provost. All members are faculty in departments and/or institutes offering graduate degrees. One graduate student member was also appointed. As a group, we were charged with setting and reviewing university- wide policies regarding graduate study and to provide advice and guidance to the Dean of the Graduate School. Highlights of the issues we faced this year include: ** Clarifying policies governing interdisciplinary Ph.D. students. We still need to define these policies, so that the major department reviews the applications and makes a commitment to prospective students before they are admitted. ** We reviewed and approved an option for an interdisciplinary professional Ph.D. combining education and management courses. Later, Statewide disallowed all "option" approaches. ** We strengthened record-keeping requirements, trying to aid departments in helping students focus early and develop coherent Graduate Study Plans. We reinforced the requirement that each thesis committee meet annually to monitor the student's progress, and file a report with the graduate school. The intent is to graduate students in a timely manner. ** We discussed at length the allocation of funds to support graduate students. The graduate school currently funds: --Travel grants (Most severely underfunded category. Recommended for an increase in funds.) --Chancellor's Fellowships (Not as effective a recruiting tool as anticipated. We've recommended reallocating these funds.) --Tuition scholarships --Graduate Resource Fellowships --Thesis Completion Fellowships The selection committee was comprised of GSAC members, plus representatives from five additional programs. We reviewed over 1,300 pages of application materials, debated the merits of the competitors quite carefully, and made selections based on criteria published in each call for applications. The quality of applicants was quite high, and many worthy students could not be funded. For a full report on the proceedings and recommendations, please contact Susan Henrichs, chair, Graduate Fellowship Review Committee. For next year, a major issue will no doubt be the proposed collaborative graduate degrees. Under discussion is a scenario that would have UAF conferring graduate degrees on students who reside in Anchorage or Juneau (or elsewhere), and who hold concurrent registration at UAF and UAA or UAS. GSAC will play a primary role in developing policies to ensure quality and to provide appropriate academic oversight. This is an active, hardworking committee. As chair, I would like to say thank you to all members of GSAC, and to the members of the Fellowship Selection Committee. Special appreciation goes to Elke Richmond and Kim Dempsey, graduate school staff. Thanks, also, to Dr. Joe Kan, Dean of the Graduate School. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/12 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 STATEMENT BY DONALD F. LYNCH, PRESIDENT, UAF FACULTY SENATE I should like first and foremost to thank all the Senators for their participation this last year and particularly President Eric Heyne and Alliance Representative Mike Jennings for their guidance and leadership. Both have represented you very well in the Faculty Alliance and with the President, Chancellor and Provost. I wish further particularly to thank Faculty Affairs for its yeoman work this year and most especially its chair, Dr. Barbara Alexander. I should also compliment Dr. Dianne Bischak for getting Faculty Appeals and Oversight organized and functioning and Sheri, Kathy, Pat and Jeannine for organizing all of us. I am pleased that Dr. John Craven is our President-Elect and Mike Jennings is continuing as our third representative to the Faculty Alliance. They will I am sure carry the torch into the coming year. One of the major accomplishments of this past year has been the deep and sincere cooperation which has existed amongst all the governance groups on all three campuses. I have been impressed with the quality of the people involved, their high levels of motivation, dedication to the University of Alaska, and ability to cooperate one with another. There are no philosophical divisions amongst faculty in our system of any significance. From a philosophical point of view permit me to comment on just one enduring problem, and this is the frequent efforts to impose what is termed The Factory Model on publicly supported higher education in the United States. This is a model which caused failures in the Ford and Chrysler Motor Companies, major failures in defense policies in the 1960s and 1970s, and failures in American industry in the 1980s. The Japanese wisely rejected this model after World War II and as a consequence were able to beat American industry at every level. The enduring popularity of this model among those who would direct--or should I say--destroy publicly supported education in the United States can only be explained by the thought that higher education is a convenient political target. But let us not forget that we slowly but surely are being hamstrung in just about everything we do by federal and state laws and regulations and University policies, regulations, rules and procedures. Each and everyone of us now faces such a maze of rules and no one can understand all of them. The common thread is accountability, an effort to impose factory style uniformity on a highly diverse institution. Our University is special in that we are the only publicly supported accredited institution of higher education in Alaska, and as such has a wide range of research, educational and training functions, a range so broad that one uniform system of management simply will fail. But that has never stopped those who would centralize and standardize everything from trying, whether it be the Protocols, the Strategic Integrated Operation Plan, the Goals and Objectives of the late 1980s, the revised Mission Statements, the Strategic Plan, the Program Review, or the Program Assessment. What we are experiencing is a real effort to limit not just academic freedom, but creativity, imagination, and all those intellectual pursuits which have made the American universities the envy of the world and which have contributed so substantially to our economic and military achievements during this past half century. It does no good to attack The Administration, because all our managers are doing is following what they perceive to be state and national political trends. It is the national trends which are at fault, and these I can assure will reverse themselves in time, perhaps in five years, when the high cost and failures of the Factory Model once again become apparent. In the meantime, we as Faculty have an obligation to our discipline, to our profession, and to the people of Alaska to make the University of Alaska a continuing center of education, learning, creativity, and the development and dissemination of knowledge. We as regular (that is tenure track) faculty are a group of 526 people, fewer today than a decade ago. Our junior ranks are increasingly being filled by part time temporary people, teaching assistants, and graduate students. Our salaries, benefits, and official workloads (defined as FTE student per FTE faculty) are at national norms. We are as a group meeting our obligations to the University of Alaska under circumstances which promise to become more difficult before they become better. The national attacks, however, are not focused on all 526 of us, but rather on the 293 tenured faculty, on something like ten percent of total employment on our Campus, on about forty percent of total instructional staff. And the attacks and policies and regulations and reported data concentrate on one subject and one subject alone: production of credit hours. Policy makes few references to education, and research is taken as a given and hardly addressed especially if it is funded by the Federal Government or others. In short, it is undergraduate instruction by tenured faculty which is carrying the burden of the attacks. In my view, quality undergraduate education is under severe attack both nationwide and in our system. According to UA in Review, 1996, in the total University of Alaska System there are 564 associate and full professors out of a total instructional staff of 2,163, or 26 percent. And those 2,163 instructors are providing education and training to something like 33,000 people. That is not a bad ratio at all. What makes this University what it is today, what has always made the University of Alaska special, has been the people who are here and especially those faculty who have dedicated their lives and their professions to Alaska. The primary task ahead of us is to insure that that sense of dedication to this state, to this University, and to this Campus remains not only with us but is transmitted to those who come after us. If we fail in this task, then faculty will be moving through a revolving door and all our traditions, values, creativity and positive attitudes will vanish. We as Senators are taking the lead in this endeavor, and I trust we shall continue to do whatever is necessary to preserve, defend and improve the University of Alaska as an intellectually stimulating and creative place of learning, to make our institution the finest in the North, to meet our obligations to study and understand our Sub-Arctic and Arctic world and to educate and train Alaskans for the future. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/13 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MOTION ======= The UAF Faculty Senate moves to endorse the 1996-97 committee membership as attached. EFFECTIVE: Immediately RATIONALE: New Senate members' preference for committee selection were reviewed and weighted against membership distribution from schools and colleges. ************************ 1996-97 UAF FACULTY SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP STANDING COMMITTEES -------------------- Curricular Affairs Sukumar Bandopadhyay, SME (98) Carol Barnhardt, CLA (98) Joan Braddock, CNS (97) John Creed, CRA (97) DeAnne Hallsten, CRA (97) Jerry McBeath, CLA (97) Terry McFadden, SOE (97) Maynard Perkins, CRA (98) ^Paul Reichardt, Dean, CNS Madeline Schatz, CLA (97) Ex-Officio: Ann Tremarello, Registrar's Office Wanda Martin, Advising Center , Student Faculty Affairs Rich Boone, CNS (98) Burns Cooper, CLA (98) ^Ralph Gabrielle, Executive Dean, CRA Ray Gavlak, ACE (98) Deborah McLean-Nelson, CLA (97) Hans Nielson, CNS (98) Michael Pippenger, SOM (97) David Spell, SOE (98) Norman Swazo, CLA (97) Jane Weber, CRA (98) Graduate Curricular Affairs James Beget, CNS (98) Mark Tumeo, SOE (98) Craig Gerlach, CLA (97) John Kelley, SFOS (97) Kara Nance, CLA (98) Ex-Officio: Joe Kan, Graduate Dean. Dennis Stephens, Libraries Ann Tremarello, Director, A&R Graduate Student Scholarly Activities Phyllis Fast, CLA (98) Bruce Finney, SFOS (98) Walt Tape, CLA (98) James Walworth, SALRM (97) ^Bob White, Director, IAB PERMANENT COMMITTEES ---------------------- Committee to Nominate Commencement Speaker and Honorary Degree Recipients Joan Braddock, CNS/IAB (97) John Creed, CRA (97) Larry Duffy, CNS (98) Koji Kawasaki, CNS Rudolph Krejci, CLA Jenifer McBeath, SALRM Claus-M. Naske, CLA Non-University: Phil Younker Student: Ex-Officio: ^Karen Cedzo, Director University Relations Developmental Studies Committee Susan Blalock, English, CLA (97) John Bruder, Bristol Bay CRA (97) Nancy Ayagarak, Kuskokwim, CRA (98) Jerah Chadwick, Devel. Studies, CRA (98) Richard Clausen, Math, CLA (98) John Creed, Chukchi, CRA (97) Cindy Hardy, TVC (98) (shared seat w/Weber) Ron Illingworth, Interior Campus, CRA (97) Rose Kairaiuak, RSS (97) Wanda Martin, Advising Center (97) Mark Oswood, Biology/Wildlife, CNS (98) Joe Mason, Northwest, CRA (98) Riki Sipe, CCC, CLA (97) Jane Weber, TVC (98) (shared seat w/Hardy) Ex-Officio: ^Ruth Lister, TVC Faculty Appeals & Oversight Committee Barbara Alexander, CLA (98) Diane Bischak, SOM (97) Dale Feist, CNS (97) Greg Goering, SOM (98) DeAnne Hallsten, CRA (97) Alan Jubenville, SALRM (97) Meriam Karlsson, SALRM (98) Ken Krieg, ACE (98) Jonah Lee, SOE (97) Joe Niebauer, SFOS (97) Olayinka Ogunsola, SME (98) Nag Rao, CLA (97) Richard Stolzberg, CNS (98) Mark Tumeo, SOE (98) Wayne Vandre, ACE (97) Daniel Walsh, SME (97) Craig Wiese, SFOS (98) Barbara Wilson, CRA (98) Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement Ron Barry, CLA (98) Linda Curda, CRA (97) Wendy Ernst Croskrey, CLA (98) Barry Mortensen, CRA (97) ^David Porter, Dean, SOM Channon Price, CNS (97) Raymond RaLonde, SFOS (97) Tom Robinson, SOM (98) Rich Seifert, ACE (97) Graduate School Advisory Committee Susan M. Henrichs -FS appointee Mark Oswood - FS appointee David Smith -FS appointee Curt Scuberla - Graduate Student Peggy Shumaker -Provost appt. Stephan Sparrow -Provost appt John Zarling -Provost appt Ex-Officio: Joe Kan, Graduate Dean John Craven, Senate President-Elect Legislative and Fiscal Affairs Michael Jenning, SOEd (98) Wendy Redman, SW Univ. Rel. Janice Reynolds, CLA (97) ^Robert Trent, Dean, SME Charles Wade, CRA (97) James Walworth, SALRM (97) Service Committee ^Hollis Hall, Director, ACE Don Kramer, SFOS (98) Tara Maginnis, CLA (98) Kara Nance, CLA (98) Yinka Ogunsola, SME (98) Diane Ruess, CLA (98) Richard Seifert, ACE (97) Non-University: Herb Smelcer, US BIA Non-University: Vacant University-wide Promotion & Tenure Committee Larry Bennett, SOE (98); Deben Das, alt Brian Paust, SFOS (99), Dolly Garza, alt. Walter Benesch, CLA (99); Kes Woodward, alt. T. Harikumar (98), SOM; Kelley Pace, alt. Scott Huang, SME (97) M. Karlsson, SALRM (98); Stephen Dorfing alt. *John Keller, CNS (97), John Morack, alt William Parrett, CLA/SOEd (99); Dauna Browne, alt. Sheryl Stanek, ACE (99), Don Quarberg, alt. Joli Morgan, CRA (97), Ruiz Ann Rozell, alt. OTHER COMMITTEES ----------------- Core Review Dan White, SOE / D. Hatzignatiou, SME (98) Jin Brown, Speech, CLA (98) Lillian Corti, English, CLA (97) Tara Maginnis, Humanities, CLA (98) Doug Schamel, CNS (98) Basil Coutant, Math, CLA (98) Janice Reynolds, BSHS, CRA (97) Student, ASUAF Ex-Officio: ^Gorden Hedahl, Dean, CLA Sue McHenry, RSS ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/14 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 SUBMITTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE MOTION ======= The UAF Faculty Senate moves to empower the Administrative Committee to act on behalf of the Senate until the Senate resumes deliberations in the Fall of 1996 on all matters within its purview which may arise. Senators will be kept informed of the Administrative Committee meetings and will be encouraged to attend and participate in these meetings. EFFECTIVE: May 13, 1996 RATIONALE: This motion will allow the Administrative Committee to act on behalf of the Senate so that necessary work can be accomplished and will also allow Senators their reights to participate in the governance process. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/15 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 PROVOST'S AD HOC COMMITTEE ON DISTANCE DELIVERY AND TECHNOLOGY ENHANCED EDUCATION, APRIL 29, 1996 John Craven This regular meeting of the committee was divided into two parts; a visit to the media classroom within the library and a discussion about facilities enhancements for "smart" classrooms. Focus of the visit to the media classroom was a demonstration of internet access to courses, etc. in the lower 48, which also precipitated a discussion of the diversity of offering appearing on the internet, competition, etc. The use of video on the internet presents a serious problem, as the available bandwidth is quickly consumed, bring everyone else to a standstill. In other words, you can only push so much information through the system (like water through a pipe), and a few data hogs can bring the delivery system to a halt. This has immediate impact on in-state distance delivery. Commercialization of the internet is also going to have an impact on the cost of use. It seems to me that we too glibly acknowledge that we are being sucked into the great era of global communications, but are being ostrich-like about the fact that its new cost structure may have a large impact on us and we don't want to think about it. The second part of the meeting comprised a discussion about the "smart" classroom, which appears to mean a classroom with network/video connections AND access to all the audio-visual equipment I thought was standard for the past 15 plus years. The cost estimates presented are for a number of small (~27), medium (~15) and large (~7) classrooms and for auditoriums (3). It is from a subset of these rooms that the distance education courses would be conducted. I sense a host of unresolved technical questions that can arise when blending the old methods of presentation (e.g., 35-mm slides, movies) with distant sites via the internet. Demonstrations of feasibility must precede the expenditure of funds, none of which presently exist. As a follow-up to the meeting, the provost and I attended Kara Nance's computer class later in the day to witness distance delivery in action between Fairbanks and Anchorage. I had no trouble envisioning how some classes could easily be taught using the facilities provided, but can also see how it would require significant compromises for some courses. For example, the working space for graphic information is some fraction of a standard view graph (i.e., transparency), which the font size must be greatly increased to be readable. We all know that a projection of this page on a screen would not be readable to most people. It's much the same if projected by a TV system. This could be a great hindrance to technical courses requiring a high density of material with repeated references to previously presented material. Distance education can also be hindered by the use of rooms with lighting designs and other items now considered standard. ************************ ATTACHMENT 64/16 UAF FACULTY SENATE MEETING #64 MAY 13, 1996 RESOLUTION =========== WHEREAS, The University of Alaska is dedicated to promoting an environment of non-discrimination and fairness in which all employees, staff and students are treated equally; and WHEREAS, The establishment of domestic partnership benefits programs has been used by top institutions and companies around the country to attract and retain highly qualified employees (over 450 companies and 100 institutions of higher education, both public and private, including Princeton, Harvard, the University of South Carolina, the University of South Dakota, Stanford, and the University of Iowa, offer similar domestic partnership programs); and WHEREAS, The University of Alaska, last September instituted a Domestic Partnership benefits program that has not resulted in economic or administrative impacts; and WHEREAS, The cost of continuing the domestic partnership program already in place is less than 0.05% of all the benefits costs incurred by the University per year ($88,000 out of $18 million) and has increased the number of people insured by less than 1%; and WHEREAS, The current and continuing advantages of the domestic partnership benefits program are the creation of a fairer and less discriminatory workplace environment, and improved morale among faculty and staff who feel more fairly treated and valued; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Faculty Senate of the University of Alaska Fairbanks requests that the Board of Regents leave the existing domestic partnership benefits program in place and take no action to remove or reduce benefits provided to bona fide domestic partners, spouses and legal dependents of UA employees.