SENATE OF THE FACULTY, April 17, 1998
The Senate of the Faculty met in Room 106 of the Law School.
Present: D. Adler (2), L. Blenman (PPP), A. Bomba, G. Buskes, F. Coles (PP), C. Cunningham, R. Dorsey (2), A. Elsherbeni, A. Fisher-Wirth (PP), W. Gardner (1), F. Gilbert (1), R. Gordon (2), D. Graves, K. Green, F. Gu (1), L. Hanshaw* (P), L. Harper, F. Laurenzo, F. Love* (2,P), T. Marshall (P), H. Owens (P), J. F. Payne (3), J. S. Payne (1,PP), L. Pittman, S. Prasad (1,P), T. J. Ray, J. Reidy (3,P), S. Schreiber, E. Sisson (4), M. Slattery (P), K. Sufka (P), P. Temple (1), M. Tew, M. Van Boening, M. Vinson (1,P), Jay Watson (1), R. Westmoreland (1,P), C. Wyandt (P)
Absent: K. Beason (1,PP), N. Bercaw* (3,P), C. Dale* (1,PPP), R. Haws (1,P), J. Mizenko* (PP), C. Mullen* (P), D. Nichols (6), T. Ownby (3), R. Pulliam (1,P), W. Rayburn (5), S. Rodgers* (2,PP), D. Schlenk (2), N. Schroeder (6), W. Scott* (5,P), S. Skemp* (1,PP), L. Smith (1,P), K. Wakefield* (2,PP), John Watson (4,P), M. Wilder (3), J. Williamson* (1,PPP), J. Winkle* (1,P), E. Young-Minor* (5,P)
* = Prior Notification of Absence Given, (x) = number of absences this session
The meeting began at 2:06.
Chair Karen Green announced that a new Vice Chancellor for Finance had been hired.
Senator Cunningham led the discussion about theproposed substitute draft of a copyright policy, highlighting the differences between the two policies. For the university to claim part of the copyright, the previously proposed policy required substantial use of university resources and sole or partial intent to develop the material for commercial value; the alternate proposal requires extraordinary assistance, and spells out more clearly what is excluded from extraordinary assistance. The previously proposed policy resulted in 100% ownership by the university after royalties passed a specific dollar amount; the alternate policy has maximum university share of 50% and allows the creator to reimburse the university for its extraordinary assistance and retain the copyright. The previously proposed policy requires the creator to disclose the development of a product; the alternate requires the Department Chair to disclose the fact that extraordinary support is occurring. In the previous proposal, the creator's royalty share changed from 45% below $50,000 to 25% after $100,000; the alternate rates are 75% to $50,000 and 50% after $100,000. The alternate proposal shifts more of the royalties to the department and less to the Office of Research. In the discussion that followed, it was pointed out that the alternate policy treats works created by students (such as TAs) differently than works created by faculty.
The Chair recognized Debra Young of the Office of Research, who thanked the Senate for tackling the issue of creation of a copyright policy (Ms. Young had participated in the creation of what has been termed here the "previously proposed policy"). Ms. Young asked for a clarification regarding "sponsored works" and "supported works"--for example, does university cost-sharing constitute "support"? Other issues discussed included: appeal process if a faculty member disagrees with a statement of extraordinary support and resolution if extraordinary support exists but notification is delayed. The sense of the senate was that the proposed alternate policy is a better document than the previously proposed policy, and that some issues will need to be addressed by the policy's authors.
The minutes of the February and March meetings were accepted (moved, Hawes; seconded, Fisher-Wirth).
Chair Karen Green reported on the status of re-engineering. She had been given a copy of the preliminary report that she had read twice. The report is forthright and critical. The Chair believes that it is very positive that we have undertaken such a self-examination. The introduction to the report states that achieving the goal of becoming a great public university is most closely tied to achievements in the classroom and in research--all other efforts support these.
The findings include a lack of accountability in management, a lack of performance measures, and a lack of rewards for achievements. There are three critical areas: the Office of Information Technology, services to students (Financial Aid, Housing, etc.), and the university's physical facilities. The areas of emphasis are currently: 1) putting the university's financial picture in order, which will be addressed using new hardware and software; 2) the focus on Information technology, where Executive Insights is continuing to work on restructuring; and 3) restructuring campus maintenance (part-time workers are being phased out, and full-time workers are being compensated better). The report finds that implementation of the Provost model has been only partially successful, and finds the number of the university's job categories to be excessive, creating unnecessary hardship. The Physical Plant should spend more time on maintenance and less on renovation. The university's fundraising currently has three different offices competing. There is no plan to coordinate the university's distance-learning efforts.
An Operations group is currently reviewing the preliminary report. At a meeting with the senate executive committee this morning, the Chancellor agreed to add full-time faculty to operations group and that the Information Technology oversight committee should have a faculty majority. Phase I of reengineering has been completed by KPMG, and RFP's will be issued for Phase II.
Chair Karen Green next reported on the executive committee's meeting with the Chancellor. The Board has approved a tuition increase for 1998-1999. The university will receive funds equivalent to 3% of salary that will be used for merit pay increases. The university has received an equity adjustment of +$2,000,000 and funds to address the "year 2000" problem. There will be increased funding of the operations budget and and additional $300,000 has been designated for library acquisitions.
Lapsed salary monies will be used to build a road to the intramural fields, to cover the deficit at NCPA, and to buy out Mr. Woodruff's contract. The Chancellor said that in the future, if it's not in the budget, then it won't happen. There'll be no more "we'll find the money" procedure.
The Chair is making a presentation to the University Planning Council on the senate's recommendation regarding the Office of Research. Chancellor Khayat wants to move the Office of Research to "hard money". The senate's position is that with 17 research institutes on campus there is a need for central reporting. Currently, decisions are being made at a variety of levels.
Dr. Kellum has responded to the senate's inquiry and reports that there have been 21 waivers of hiring procedures in the last 2 years. She soon will be able to provide the figures on hiring in the last 3 years.
The senate thanked Karen Green for her diligence and hard work during her tenure as Chair of the senate.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:12. The next meeting will be election of officers for the new senate and will be held during the first week of May.