MEET AND CONFER
January 22, 2004
Meeting Notes
Faculty Association: Theresia Fisher, Dale Buske, Fred Hill, Robert Johnson, Judy Kilborn, Andy Larkin, Tracy Ore, Annette Schoenberger, P. N. Subbanarasimha, Sandra Williams,
Donna West, Notetaker
Administration: Roy Saigo, Michael Spitzer, Diana Burlison, Nathan Church, Lin Holder, Steve Ludwig, Roland Specht-Jarvis, Rex Veeder, Kristi Tornquist
Admin: They already went out to the community; but Provost Spitzer stated someone pointed out a correction on the first page referring to Desire2Learn – #7 should read “…given to the deans and to the TLTR members who will take it to the TPR Committee.”
Unfinished Business:
1. Civility and Academic Freedom Draft (Admin) on Senate Agenda
FA: We would like to group item numbers 1, 3, 6, 7 and 8. They are on the Faculty Senate agenda; so they will be brought up in due time.
2. Desire2Learn (Admin)
FA: Do we take this off?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Have the registration difficulties been worked out for the workshops?
Admin: I can’t answer that question.
FA: I couldn’t register on line.
Admin: With regard to the workshops at the start of school, one was full; but they’re offering a lot more.
3. First Year Experience Program (FA)
Admin: I guess I want to issue a call for proposals from faculty. I also had meetings with the First Year Experience Committee members. While the general package presented is very helpful, and a number of changes were discussed and there probably needs to be more discussions, there is also a need for the committee to meet with Residential Life and Academic Affairs. There should probably be a task force set up to pursue what we need to get done so this can go into effect by fall for the implementation of the First Year Experience. Members of the committee were amiable to meeting with the staff. We need to come up with mechanisms on how we describe the program, recruit faculty, and select proposals.
FA: So the Administration is accepting the First Year Experience proposal that was recommended?
Admin: With modifications – many were discussed with committee members.
Admin: We’re accepting the general outline; but there are some things we couldn’t afford (putting it mildly), depending on how other things fall into place -- structural modifications too.
Admin: I am Interested in turning this into a faculty development issue so people can hear and know about this when people are preparing international programs with new hires and new students.
FA: One issue held up in Senate is the need to talk about the concerns -- is there some way we’ll get the results of your discussions on what changes were made to the First Year Experience Program?
Admin: We can have another meeting with the First Year Experience Committee to put on paper what we agreed to and how we’ll modify the program.
Admin: Are there any curricular changes?
Admin: No. Primarily changes with staff levels – funding certain pieces of it.
Admin: Regarding the curricular piece – it sounds like we’ll go ahead with it.
Admin: Yes.
4. Student Credit Hour Generation Report (Admin)
FA: This issue also needs to go before Senate. We need some kind of sample in order to go to Senate to ask how this data should be released; i.e., totally released, since there are confidentiality issues. I’m wondering if we could get, perhaps, university-wide data. We don’t know all of the pieces. Is it possible to get one college’s data and two departments’ data? We can take the names off.
Admin: Sure.
FA: It is on the agenda.
Admin: If the names are erased, it will give Senate the impression that it is the only mode this information may be communicated; but it can be communicated with names.
FA: We just want names blanked out before we release the data.
Admin: I can sit down with FA President Fisher to put together a package to determine what gets blanked out. We may want to blank out department names.
FA: This is just a fact.
Admin: Just give them the numbers! (Laughter!)
5. Academic Calendar (Admin)
Admin: We consulted with a number of constituencies on campus, and I gave you a memo indicating the adoption of 2005-06 calendar. We focused on the 2005-06 calendar; but early on, there was an understanding of 2006-07 as a template, and I’ve attached this. It didn’t seem to make sense because of the impact on students to start the calendar before Labor Day, so we did not.
FA: How many instructional days are there?
Admin: We don’t know.
Admin: 84.
Admin: That’s duty days.
FA: My question is – I understand there was negotiating around the start, but are there equivalent instructional days?
Admin: We weren’t able to get identical numbers.
FA: Is there an approximate number we’re at?
Admin: 68-69.
FA: So we’re at the same place as before.
FA: If we could get those numbers, it would be good.
Admin: OK
FA: Are there any other comments? Are we ready to delete this issue from the agenda?
FA: Maybe we can delete this issue from the agenda when you can give us the information on what was changed.
FA: You can send me a memo, and I can pass it along.
FA: So we’re deleting this issue?
Admin: Yes.
FA: If there are issues, we can put this back on the agenda.
6. Sponsored Programs Indirect Cost Sharing Policy (Admin)
Admin: I understand that some letters have gone out to communicate we’re partially implementing this on an interim basis; but if somebody reports they’re getting funding, they are getting such letters.
FA: So you’re open to our comments?
Admin: Yes.
Admin: Don’t regard those letters as a final determination.
Admin: We’re finished with numbers 1, 3, 6, 7, and 8.
7. Proposed Policy for On-line Courses (Admin)
(No discussion)
8. American Democracy Project Survey (Admin)
Admin: We really need to get this distributed to folks in order to get their responses. Can you expedite this in Senate?
FA: We’ll give this the highest priority.
Admin: It does not need the highest priority, but it does need priority.
FA: I’ll work with the FA President on this.
FA: I’ll tell “my people to tell your people.” (Laughter!)
9. Financial Aid – Verification of Attendance (Admin)
Admin: We’re still waiting for some people to be appointed to a committee to handle this issue, and we’d still like to hear from faculty. We have received a 40 percent return rate, and we appreciate this – it is very helpful. We can use this information to work through the issue.
FA: On our end, there continues to be some misunderstanding on what this will lead to – is it finding a way to take attendance? Can we frame the issue a little clearer? How late in the semester do students attend class? If we can frame this, then we won’t have misunderstandings. So I’m wondering if this makes sense.
Admin: We have a particular interest in the 60th percentage point of the semester, if they indeed attended. We are also interested in finding out early whether students are there and if seats are available. There are issues of financial aid over the course of the semester; so if we needed to take attendance every day, I suppose it would solve some of the issue, but the point is to know if students are engaged in class over the course of the semester and after the 60% point -- I think that’s part of the discussion. Because we distribute financial aid at the beginning of the semester for services over the course of the semester, there is concern from the Fed that the students take the money and don’t use the services.
Admin: Something to consider would be perhaps a midterm grading process, which would give the opportunity to do two things: 1) to learn who is attending and 2) to let students know if they are in academic jeopardy. Nobody has suggested we have mandatory attendance.
FA: We understand that. I guess my only response is to say we have these issues – seats are available or not and financial aid.
FA: There is no policy on attendance – and I’m concerned people are interpreting this as a policy on attendance.
Admin: Maybe you ought to write a paragraph or two on the financial aid guidelines and what it will cost us if we don’t get this information.
Admin: We have drop/add policies about payment of services -- used even if you didn’t successfully complete a course.
FA: These are policies we could provide to the task force to have as a guide – people from the Business Office should be on the task force.
Admin: Those interests are parochial. For issues around academics and good notification for progress is great -- I can see asking the task force to do that. My interest around this issue is the fact of there being a liability for students if they don’t go through the processes, because it’s bad for a student to purchase a service and not receive value from it.
FA: You mentioned the notion of reporting mid-term performance of students -- is that a passing thought?
Admin: It is something I’d like the task force and the faculty to consider. It would help students to know if they’re not doing well – it would give them a warning; and if we could do that and advise those students to get academic support, we might be able to help those students. It’s sort of a passing thought, but more.
FA: I just want to make sure it doesn’t get lost.
Admin: It would be important to students and our institution for students to be more successful.
Admin: We don’t want to get too far into the task force’s work – this is just a thought.
FA: Are there other comments? So are we ready to take this issue off of the agenda?
Admin: Yes, if we get the people we need on the task force…
FA: Would you like to wait for the task force to be established before taking this off of the agenda?
Admin: Let’s keep this on.
10. Director of Affirmative Action/Social Equity Job Description (FA)
Admin: That was modified based on discussions and sent to MnSCU. This position has been benchmarked and returned to us. We need to identify the search committee and search for this position. I should formally request names of people to serve on the committee.
FA: Have you decided on the composition of the search committee?
Admin: Yes
FA: What is it?
Admin: I’m not going to say. [Laughter]
Admin: I think we’d like to have 7 faculty members, 2 from administration, 3 from the unions, 1 student, and maybe one member of the community.
FA: I appreciate you have given faculty the majority. Thank you.
Admin: There is the opportunity to co-chair this committee.
FA: Are you looking at faculty and administration?
Admin: Yes.
FA: You answered my question.
FA: We’d like to get an updated copy of the job description with changes.
FA: Should we take this issue off of the agenda or wait until the search committee has been constructed?
Admin: We can take this (title) off and substitute the search committee instead.
Admin: We want to advertise the search committee to start the process right away.
FA: May we get the job description as soon as possible?
Admin: Yes, absolutely.
Admin: This is an important thought for a dean search, so you don’t have a job description that’s old – and the need for a committee to do this.
FA: We have begun the process and sent out ballots.
11. General Education Assessment Director (Admin)
Admin: This is one that has been somewhat problematic in talking about the possibilities to kick-start the General Ed process. We talked with a few people regarding the possibility about some people taking the task on for the spring semester but it hasn’t worked out. Therefore, I’m going to ask people to volunteer to be considered for this task for the fall semester and solicit applications from the faculty, with a 3/4 time reassignment.
FA: At what level rate and in the interim?
Admin: We’ll work with college assessment directors to start talking about some of the issues.
Admin: The General Education Assessment Director is to sit in on those meetings.
Admin: With regard to the potential for university-wide directors -- would we be willing to send them into training so we could have a group of educated people?
Admin: Maybe the FA could provide a list of people willing to take this on and send them to courses….
FA: Can I get a memo from you to put out a call?
FA: Is starting in the summer another possibility?
Admin: Yes – we could start in the summer.
Admin: Yes – that’s a great idea, we’re willing to entertain.
FA: Anything else?
FA: Will the department from which the director comes be compensated for the loss of services?
Admin: Yes, with adjunct replacement funds. Otherwise, I would suggest in certain cases where people are already adjuncts, FTNPs would be in that number.
FA: We could have a problem if some of those who have been adjuncts would expect being limited to adjunct (Would you please confirm this is indeed what was said.)
Admin: Right now, we’re budgeted for adjunct.
FA: My question is department coverage.
Admin: They would have coverage replaced.
FA: If someone is very qualified but if they’re taken out for three-quarters, they might not be able to be replaced with an adjunct. Could we consider a fixed- term?
Admin: Funding is the limitation; if we had funding, we would allocate another fixed-term position.
FA: Could we keep 50 to 75 percent depending on the nature?
Admin: If someone is willing to do less, yes.
FA: If a faculty member were to carry the weight.
FA: So it’s basically unlikely the department would receive a fixed-term replacement?
Admin: There is the overload possibility. I wouldn’t volunteer as a faculty member with the assumption I’d have a fixed-term replacement, since we can’t promise. If we get increased allocation, this may change.
FA: Do you have any further comments? May we take this item off of the agenda?
Admin: Yes.
12. Study on Dependent Tuition Waiver – Data from Steve Ludwig (FA)
FA: At the last Meet and Confer, we learned about a study on this usage, and we’re wondering if you have the data.
Admin: I thought I sent to this to the FA President.
Admin: All we have is a little spreadsheet, and I thought I sent it to the FA President.
Admin: Here it is – just a little worksheet Administration uses for the budget.
It is not a study, and there is no fine science to this, I have to tell you. Each year, I go in and pull data with the help of the Business Office so I can properly record, to estimate the amount of tuition revenue we hope to bring in – that’s all we use it for. There are no MnSCU ties – it is what I call a “Q&D” “quick and dirty”!
Admin: We put this together because these are credits for which we do not receive tuition – in order to estimate the budget. These are number of credits – not bodies or names, broken down by whether it’s faculty or dependents, people who come to this university and get their tuition waived (only those who come to St. Cloud).
FA: Do all state universities do this?
Admin: I don’t know -- I just do it because when a previous administrator put together budget estimates, they were broadly estimated and it made me nervous. I went in after the change of management, since I knew it meant some real money – half a million dollars.
FA: So, is the accuracy of all of this the same?
Admin: They’re equally as accurate.
Admin: All of these are credits taken at SCSU. The other schools listed are where the faculty is from.
FA: So 3,585 is the total number of credits that don’t pay tuition?
FA: We raise this question because it was a negotiations issue – because of the health care reduction. We were told this is a real issue for us -- how much does faculty cost.
Admin: The point is it wasn’t about the contract; and, eventually, I said I know of no study….
Admin: I’m never releasing this to anyone again! (Laughter!)
FA: What we’re questioning is we don’t have this information broken down by how much faculty is taking advantage of the tuition waiver.
Admin: The reason was to get an estimate of tuition that would not be paid because of the faculty waiver, and I use it to do revenue projection for the university budget.
FA: One question is fall faculty and spring faculty – it’s not a study of faculty?
Admin: Faculty is faculty/staff – there is no distinction. I didn’t edit my worksheet before releasing it.
Admin: It’s very pretty!
FA: Going back to the original issue, let me see if I understand your opposition to the idea in its original form -- the idea of a tuition waiver -- it is that these are credits that would go to SCSU anyway.
Admin: No. There is no assumption about bargaining on this. This is not a collective bargaining tool.
FA: The university does have a position.
Admin: This is not a political document. This is a document I use to make some estimates on revenue. I use a number of documents, and I can bring them in -- International Studies’ students, war orphans, Senior Citizens. Don’t misconstrue this document for what it is.
FA: No, I grasp your motive in doing it; but then beyond that, we heard that there was a next step -- campuses mainly opposing tuition waivers because it constitutes a cost to the campus. When I look at this issue, someone must conclude we’d get money if it weren’t for tuition waivers.
Admin: No. You wouldn’t have a business, if we didn’t give it away.
Admin: This is independent data and has no relationship to bargaining. Making any inference about policy is incorrect; and if you want, there is a bargaining team and that is where sides are represented. We can and will not make inferences about negotiations since these have to be made at the bargaining table.
FA: What I understand is when administration figures how much (this much for tuition and this much for state), it’s where the equation starts, with the total number of credits; and when the money comes in, you subtract.
FA: That interpretation I considered. I find it disingenuous. We’re told that state university administrators as a block oppose and have always opposed tuition waivers. We were told implicitly there’s no point in discussing the issue with “us” -- take it up with “them.” I will, of course, take it back to the table if we ever have another negotiating table; and I know what I’ll be told.
FA: I’m hearing this is where administration is, and this is where this ends and you know nothing else.
Admin: I don’t send this to anyone.
FA: I think there are points to remember: administration’s point is very well taken – if there are any arguments, they need to be at the negotiations table and not at Meet and Confer. Maybe there needs to be some kind of disclaimer that needs to be put on this document so it doesn’t find its way to the negotiations table.
Admin: The only reason this document is here is administration knew administration had it! (Laugher!)
FA: Are you categorically denying any position on the tuition waiver?
Admin: We are making no statement with respect to negotiation. We are making no representation.
Admin: You’re getting into a dangerous area.
Admin: It’s time to move on.
FA: If we’re told at negotiations our administration has made a statement, then where do we find out?
FA: First of all, we did not hear a call from you for a caucus.
Admin: I didn’t call for a caucus.
FA: So, we continued to ask questions. Our concern is sometimes we ask a question in St. Paul, and they say “ask your local administration;” and we get here and we’re told “we don’t know, ask St. Paul.” We want to go back to where do we find out if we’re asked to consult with our local administration?
Admin: One of the things we need to do is talk to the negotiators to ask what they’ve told you in order to clarify a course of action, so we will do that.
Admin: It would be easy for us to answer, but we set a precedent; and we don’t know what they’ve said. If you take it back, I want to be very careful -- so this report needs to be handled very carefully. I was surprised at the number of schools sending their people here. I don’t want to get into a hearsay thing -- when the IFO says that -- it becomes real muddy. We’ll check into this and will get back to you.
FA: I have a feeling there is not only a cut in communication between SCSU and MnSCU, but we’ve lost a lot of our autonomy – saying we don’t know if we can do it, we first need to ask St. Paul. How autonomous is SCSU? I hear the chancellor is coming out to say “you deal with the issue” – all of the campuses are doing their own thing. I don’t think this happens -- we start getting directions from St. Paul.
Admin: I think the appropriate person would be Jim Pehler.
Admin: It’s not appropriate for me to speak.
FA: The Faculty Association can’t be autonomous.
Admin: You do have a representative from the IFO.
FA: In every negotiating session, anytime anyone opens their mouth within a meeting with other side or among ourselves, we create a verbatim record; and sadly we lost the person capable of doing that, but we lost after last session. We have a verbatim record and you can have that maybe as late tomorrow afternoon.
Admin: Sure – it would be helpful if you provided that.
FA: So, we can remove item #12 from the agenda.
New Business:
1. Hiring Retired Faculty as Adjunct (FA)
FA: The dean in the College of Ed has said that we cannot hire retired faculty as adjunct, and we’re not exactly sure where it’s coming from and need clarification.
Admin: I think there are certain faculty who have accepted early retirement incentives who cannot be hired as adjuncts except under certain emergency circumstances – it is not a blanket policy.
FA: Where should departments go next beyond their dean?
Admin: I think the particular issue has been dealt with. HR has the answer for this because they know the type of retirement. The number 1 rule is “retirement is about retirement” and not about continued employment. Retirement is about retirement, and when we have adjunct needs, we go to adjunct pools.
FA: I don’t know if this is the specific issue, but it was certainly done for this semester.
Admin: Done in the sense the individual was a retiree because of emergency reasons.
FA: In the case of Special Ed, it was not true.
Admin: Not in Special Ed.
FA: This causes more trouble, because people were told “no.”
FA: This is a one-time thing out of need, because we’re short people since we had people pulled out for assessment -- for this one-time thing, it makes sense.
Admin: That’s why the President would okay one-time employment.
FA: I don’t know if that person took the incentive or not.
FA: So, the department should first go to personnel to find out; and at that point, they talk to the Presidents’ office?
Admin: To the dean.
FA: If the dean says no….
Admin: I tried to do this – I contacted HR, and I was told a flat out “no.” I’m guessing that’s the same thing that occurred.
FA: No retired people at all?
Admin: That’s what I was told. I went to MnSCU, and I found out about the provision about the emergency situation and if the President is willing to sign off. MnSCU is not happy about these situations.
FA: It’s not a blanket policy -- only people who retired in a particular way.
Admin: It was anyone who retired under the MN retirement system I was told.
We need to get more clarification.
FA: Can we have someone get more clarification?
Admin: Why don’t you have someone from HR respond so we can all get the same information.
Admin: I’ll ask.
Admin: We’ve hired two people to teach one course each.
FA: We don’t even know if the people we’re talking about are in the category of the person who couldn’t be hired.
Admin: Right now, we have two different versions so let’s clarify.
FA: Hiring is loosening up, but we’re using more adjuncts. It would be nice to have clarity.
FA: So we’ll leave this on the agenda.
FA: The fact is across the university, retired faculty have been hired for different reasons – it’s a matter of fact. The question is the clarification of communication.
2. NSSE (Admin)
Admin. We sent an electronic copy to the FA President, and I believe it was distributed to everyone. We want to inform faculty here that we discussed this report at the Academic Affairs Council and discussed it at the Deans’ Advisory Council, so it will be broadly discussed throughout campus; and I want to make this known at Meet and Confer.
Admin: One of the things the deans talked about is identifying 2, 3, or 4 areas for improvement.
Admin: One of the things we looked at is as we look at the data, we can see it as “half empty or half full.” In several respects, our scores on these questions were better than 2001; but we’re below the national average, and we thought it would be helpful to identify a couple of areas to focus on to make the biggest difference to improve how students respond. I don’t know whether it would be worth us looking at areas where our scores are not so strong. I know it’s possible to argue the statistical validity. I hope we don’t get into this kind of discussion; but it’s data used nationally, and if it’s flawed, it’s equally flawed, and we’re comparing “apples to apples.” We can learn from information collaborated in the report of the SCSU survey and other reports regarding campus climate -- areas we’ve done well in and areas where we can improve. It would be helpful if we can identify the areas where we can make an impact to improve the scores on these surveys. These are used on US News and World Report ratings, and they have ramifications.
FA: In terms of approaching this, I’m not sure if we’re in a position to discuss. Maybe we can identify ways of assimilating this -- ways to host discussions on this to present areas of concerns or interest; and let us report this and get back to you. We’re not in a position to do this now.
Admin: I wasn’t expecting we would do that today.
Admin: One of the things to look at in the document is those areas in “Effect Size” and difference in “Effect Size.” For example, Appendix A beginning with Academic and Intellectual experiences, if you look at Effect Size -- anything above 0.4 would be those things I’d want to look at, where they would be the largest areas of divergence. The third column from the right is where it says 2003 Effect Size – the top one has a -.52 above. Anything above 0.4 or higher we need to pay attention to – there is a significant difference between our rating and the national norm.
FA: Is this an absolute value?
Admin: Yes.
FA: How is it calculated?
FA: It is indicated on the bottom.
Admin: I don’t think we have anything as high as a 0.8. If we can look particularly at the 0.4 areas -- if faculty can look at these areas, talk, and establish a task force to come back with strategies to improve, we can move forward.
FA: We may want to take this to Strategic Planning.
Admin: Yes and Enrollment Management.
FA: Did I understand -- this is being disseminated to various departments, not just to the FA -- both in every which way and you’re asking for discretion.
Admin: Yes.
FA: I heard they did not receive the Power Point presentation, and we did.
Admin: They didn’t get copies?
FA: I got an electronic copy.
Admin: I think some deans did not distribute the Power Point version and some did.
FA: I was sent an electronic copy.
Admin: There is no reason to keep this a secret – we didn’t want to put it out on the Web or Discuss because we didn’t want this information to go off campus – it’s not right to do this at this time.
FA: I can use this with faculty?
Admin: Yes, absolutely.
FA: There are some areas where we significantly improved.
Admin: There are some positive things in here.
FA: We have succeeded in making a difference and could look at that.
Admin: Of interest is students taking a racial issues course in their freshmen year and the desirability of forcing some things later on.
FA: Is there a list of the institutions we’re being compared to?
Admin: Yes, regional universities comparable to ours – Masters 1 institutions.
FA: How difficult would it be to find out what the faculty workload is on average at those institutions?
Admin: I’m pretty certain it’s comparable to ours. The standard is 12 credit hours.
FA: I looked at this, and I see slightly differently from what I saw regarding student service, advising, even shorter papers vs. longer -- all things seem to be workload related and what we’ve complained about – the allocation formula hurting SCSU; and I wonder if we can’t compete that way because the allocation formula is low. Is that data we can use at the state the next time the allocation formula goes up?
FA: This is stuff we’re aware of. I’m wondering if there is some way we can ensure it gets focused on in particular groups. You mentioned a task force we can make up from certain groups because it would be easy to have a widespread discussion. Some of this is no surprise to a lot of us -- if we were looking at the First Year Experience, they’d be looking at things like encouraging people to think of ways to think academically – talk to their professors.
Admin: I would certainly think the First Year Experience proposal is designed to address a lot of issues dealt with in this report. Let’s see if there are other things as well.
FA: Some of these issues come back from meetings of the Strategic Planning Committee and the Enrollment Management Committee; i.e., having a number of courses with a large number of students to enable a significant number of classes with a small number of students. What we should look at where we have large numbers and small numbers is students’ connectedness.
Admin: One out of six being large – so the mix should be healthy. We have less office support than a lot of universities, so you need to look at this.
FA: Also, under the relationship with faculty members, a key component is advising and having infrastructure support in advising and having that, perhaps, is a significant component in promoting retention.
Admin: That is where the area of 0.4 comes in.
Admin: Can we set another time when we can come back?
FA: Should this stay on the agenda?
Admin: Yes. We’d like to come up with a strategy together to deal with these issues so faculty could discuss a way to move forward.
Admin: When we bring up an issue under “New Business,” would it be possible to put a date it was brought forward and have a second date of when it was brought back. This would give us a time line.
Admin: As I said, I hope we can work together to work out a set of plans to address these issues so the next time it comes out, our scores are higher and we can feel much better.
FA: I don’t know much about this survey – is it done every two years?
Admin: It is done annually, but we only participate every two years. We might want to talk about participating every year.
Admin: As part of the Enrollment Management Committee we decided to do this.
Part of the reason the group selected this was because there is a strong academic component (academic vs. whether they like parking or not!). I’m not sure if we can afford to do this every year, but I think it’s one of the best surveys out there.
Admin: Isn’t this coordinated by one of our graduates from SCSU? We should be very proud we’re participating in a study of this magnitude. We should get an alumni discount! (Laughter!)