Final Approved at FS 12-6-05

Executive Committee Meeting Minutes

November 29, 2005

 

Attendance:   (Those present indicated by an underline)

Officers:  President Judy Kilborn, Past President/President-Elect Annette Schoenberger, Secretary JoAnn Gasparino, Treasurer Robert Johnson

IFO Board Members: Andrew Larkin, Jayantha Herath

Unit Representatives:  COB P. N. SubbaNarasimha, COE Steve Hornstein, COFAH Frankie Condon, COSE Balsy Kasi, COSS Mary Clifford, SPEC Susan Motin

Negotiator:   Bill Langen

 

1.     Call to order at 3:15 p.m.

 

2.     Approval of EC Minutes of November 15, 2005 (EC 112905 2)

 

Motion to approve EC Minutes of November 15, 2005—(Condon/Schoenberger). Passed

 

3.     Treasurer’s Report—to be given at first meeting of the month.

 

4.     Announcements

a.     Plan to Replace Outdated Computers (faculty and disciplinary centers)—Yesterday the Provost told Kilborn that Administration is getting together a plan/proposal to replace outdated computers (some are eight years old) for faculty and disciplinary labs, starting with the oldest computers.  There is $20,000 allocated for the plan. 

b.     Counseling Center—Kilborn gave an update of when she met with faculty from the Center.  They set up a conference call with Pat Arsenault regarding questions that need to be addressed.  One of the documents, Unit Clarification Order, Kilborn passed around.  Whatever is brought forward needs to be supported by the FA and the IFO.  There was discussion about the Center.  EC members discussed the Center and its situation compared to other faculty situations, as well as the situation for faculty in the LR&TS.  EC discussed asking at Meet and Confer to see the MSUAASF proposal. 

c.      International Studies Committee Meeting—Kilborn met with the Provost and the ISC an hour ago and went through the form and reviewed budget issues.  They are asking for a budget chart.  When there is a negotiated draft of the Short-Term Study Abroad Proposal Form, it will be brought forward to Senate. 

d.     COE and COB Searches (EC 112905 4.c)—Note: COB is also on the agenda.  There are 12 people on the COE ballot.  We will know what the search committee looks like next Senate.  The COB at-large person has been appointed by Senate.  Kilborn has extended the COB call three times, and there are only four members who have put in their names. 

e.     Request to Hire Form (EC 112905 4.d)—There is a form in the packet that has been updated since Senate.  Kilborn has stressed to the Provost that requests to hire should not be held up because of the form.  The Provost has suggested using this form in the meantime.  This item will be added to the agenda under new business, form for hiring: 8.l.    

f.       Mary Clifford has resigned from the EC—She has been asked to find a replacement.  Kilborn asked Larkin and Johnson to also help find a replacement for this year.  Kilborn will put out a call for a permanent replacement. 

 

5.     Call for new agenda items:

·         l. form for hiring

 

6.     Unfinished Business

a.     Higher Education Research Institute: 2004-2005 SCSU Faculty Survey Report (EC 062105 5.i.)—not discussed.

b.     Template – task force

c.      Attendance – task force

 

Template and Attendance task force volunteers: Dorn, Dobey, Hornstein, and Palmer.  EC discussed the Senate motions made on the task forces.

 

Motion to put on the consent agenda Palmer and Hornstein for Template Task Force and Dorn and Dobey on Attendance Task Force—(Schoenberger/Condon).  Passed 

 

Motion to have the members on the task forces report back any recommendations to Senate for approval—(Condon/Hornstein).  Passed

 

d.     University College – task force—Kilborn asked for clarification from Meet and Confer.  EC discussed the makeup and roles of the task force and who will decide the makeup.

 

Motion to have University College Task Force Committee makeup consist of one representative from each college and one representative from EC—(Larkin/Langen).  

 

There was discussion about the motion and EC’s concerns regarding the makeup of the task force.  EC discussed whether the University College is definite or not, and there were no concrete conclusions, only speculation.  There was discussion about getting as much input as possible from the committee representatives.  The nature of the task force and several configurations were discussed.  The need to have voices of “special expertise” people heard was noted, as against the motion.  Note:  Administration can always appoint people with special expertise to the committee, who the FA has approved, but the people with special expertise do not have a vote on the committee.  It was pointed out that the committee does not need to even consult with people with special expertise.  It was suggested to go to Senate instead having this discussed at EC.

 

EC members questioned the vision of the University College, and why there needs to be such a committee: the need to pick up the students for the University College, the need to increase enrollment, and maybe because MnSCU has asked them to—basically to provide more opportunities. 

 

There was discussion against the motion since it limits what the committee consists of and there needs to be much more representation.  There was discussion about Administration’s proposal and the fact that it was just a draft at this point. 

 

Motion to close debate—(Motin/no second).  Motion died

 

There was more discussion about whether there will be such a unit as the University College or not, and if so the people in the units need to decide who will represent them.  There was discussion against the motion because the people mentioned to represent the task force in Meet and Confer would best represent the University College Task Force Committee.  EC expressed confusion about how many situations they were considering.  It was noted that faculty representatives could be added to the list of representatives that Administration has brought forward. 

 

Motion to substitute motion—(Motin/Larkin).  Passed

 

Motion to propose to the FA Senate that a task force should be created to investigate the feasibility of the University College.  The task force would include one representative from each college, one EC member, two members from DGS Advisory, one member from the Academic Learning Center, one CETL Advisory Board member, one Write Place member, one Math Skills member, one Honors member, one Counseling Center member, and one FYE Advisory Board member.  Passed 

 

e.     Doctorates—not discussed.

 

7.     New Business

a.     Consensual-relationships Policy (EC 062105 8.e)—not discussed.

b.     Committee for communications policies/processes for Office of Clinical Experiences (OCE) (Hornstein)—not discussed.

c.      Short-Term Study Abroad Programs: Application Form and request for Budget (EC 100405 8.c)—not discussed.

d.     Parliamentary Procedure and Departmental Processes in COE and elsewhere—not discussed.

e.     DGS Program (EC 111505 7.g)—not discussed.

f.       1.B.1 Equity Officers selection—not discussed.

g.     request for information from Continuing Studies—not discussed.

h.     search committee for COB 

 

Motion to send out the ballot with four representatives on the ballot (sample ballot in packet)—(Larkin/Motin).  Passed  

 

Use of search firms in Affirmative Action and Student Life and Development searches—Kilborn has been advised that the contracts have been sent out, but she has yet to receive them at this point, and as soon as she gets them, she will share them with EC and Senate.  It was noted that candidates’ names and discussions regarding their qualifications cannot be discussed, but any problems with the process can be discussed with bargaining units.  EC discussed the role of the search firms and faculty search committees in accordance with the RFPs, and discussed what should be covered in Kilborn’s meeting with the President.

 

It was noted that the reason to have search firms is so they can help faculty search committees, but not to limit the search committee’s role.       

 

i.        Bargaining Unit Meeting on December 14th (EC 112905 7.k)—Kilborn said that she cannot attend the meeting on December 14 because she has a retention retreat.  The bargaining units want to send forward a proposal that asks for procedural consistencies regarding search committee representation.  Kilborn asked for someone in EC to go to the meeting to represent the FA.  Larkin volunteered to represent the FA.

j.       issues concerning online education (load, staffing, intellectual property)—not discussed.

k.     form for hiring 

 

EC discussed what Senate discussed about using this form as a draft form and the Senate motions.

 

Motion to recommend to the Provost to use this as a draft form, and that he proceed expeditiously with the searches in the meantime—(Larkin/Motin). 

 

There was discussion against the motion because different colleges have different needs. 

 

          Separate motion:

 

Motion to recommend to the Provost to use this as a draft form.  Failed

Motion to recommend to the Provost to proceed expeditiously with the searches in the meantime. 

 

Motion to substitute motion—(Johnson/Condon).  Passed

 

Motion to recommend that current searches go forth under the current criteria and that they be carried out as expeditiously as possible.  Passed

 

8.     Adjournment at 5:24 p.m.