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.