MEET AND CONFER
September 25, 2003
Meeting Notes
Faculty Association: Theresia Fisher, Tony Akubue, Dale Buske, Fred Hill,
Steve Hornstein, Chris Inkster, Robert Johnson, Judith Kilborn, Bill Langen, Andrew Larkin, Tracy Ore, Annette Schoenberger, P. N. Subbanarasimha
Administration: Roy Saigo, Michael Spitzer, Diana Burlison, John Burgeson, Larry Chambers, Lin Holder, Steve Ludwig, Roland Specht-Jarvis,
Rex Veeder
Guests: Frances Condon, Debra Leigh, Geoffrey Tabakin, Michael Tripp, Margaret Villanueva
There is one change on the September 11th notes: under IFO/Collective Bargaining agreement negotiations – two-step increase for faculty who were promoted last spring (FA), the first FA comment should read “to treat decorous as decorative.”
IFO/MnSCU Collective Bargaining Agreement Negotiations (FA)
FA: Would the university administration support faculty receiving an increase if they are promoted?
Adm: Yes, we would be supportive of this.
Civility and Academic Freedom Draft (Admin)
Adm: A response to this draft was requested.
FA: Senators were asked to take this draft back to their departments for discussion. This discussion will continue at the next Senate meeting on
October 7.
Major/Minor Curriculum Policy (Admin)
Adm: I asked to meet with the Curriculum Committee regarding major/minors and double majors.
FA: I have been in contact with the chair of the University Curriculum Committee (UCC); and the chair indicated that the UCC is very interested in meeting with you. She requested I submit a request for a sanctioned meeting for the next Senate meeting on 10/7; and I will follow up with you then.
Add/Drop Dates (FA)
Adm: At the last Meet and Confer, FA requested a change in the add/drop date so it would be one day later. I have looked into this, and we can do this. This change will be implemented in the spring semester, and an announcement will be distributed to faculty in the next day or two. We do want to ask that if students should come to a faculty member after adding a class on the last day, faculty not tell them “you’re too late,” since this would not be a good way to handle the situation.
FA: We understand the issue and we will work with students. Of course, it is the student’s responsibility to make up any material. We are interested in preserving the rigor of our courses.
FA: We had talked about this process at the last Meet and Confer – are you going to do the facilitation?
Adm: Yes.
FA: Are you going to move the add day later or the drop day earlier?
Adm: We will move the add day later.
FA: We do have arranged how many days we have for drop and for add. Are faculty and students going to be prepared?
Adm: We will announce this change via the student newspaper as well as make a statement on Announce and ask for the Registrar’s Office to notify students. This change can be included on the schedule as well.
FA: Just so I may inform students, is this effective for spring?
Adm: Yes.
Retention Goal (Admin)
Adm: Our enrollment for the fall semester is approximately 100 FTE below our target. One of the ways to increase enrollment is to increase the number of students enrolling in the spring and improve retention from fall to spring. We are asking for the faculty’s cooperation in encouraging students to continue in the spring. When we advise students, we need to be conscientious and spend time with them and recognize there might be another section available, encouraging enrollment. We are making a plea for help on the part of the faculty.
FA: Are all of the numbers in?
Adm: No, not all. The final numbers won’t be in until the 30th day.
FA: I understand as faculty we have a role to play as far as retention goes; but the parents of students talk about too much bureaucracy – giving people the run around. Anything we can do for parents or students to give them information should help retention.
Adm: We have difficulty with the laws of student confidentiality – we can’t give parents grades. Parents can’t call to add or drop. Parents can talk to teachers to get reports and grades only if the student gives their permission.
FA: We can all agree – no access codes on door – connection with students.
FA: Can we give parents a response that reflects the spirit of our policy – put on a “human face” rather than “robotic” answers.
Adm: That type of connection you’re referring to is one of the major factors in retaining students.
CODE & CODAS Committee Letter and Recommendation (FA)
FA: Are all of the committee reps here? Are we okay to proceed?
CODE & CODAS Committee: Yes.
FA: Members of the committee voiced their concerns at Senate in a letter to Provost Spitzer. They have several concerns, and I’ll highlight some of them: Their main concern was the approach to addressing issues –- about the manner of which efforts are taking place, in light of the committee members’ time and experience to address these issues. The faculty Senate has endorsed the creation of committees to work with administration and passed motions to move the issues forward and tried to make efforts to improve situations dealing with racism and anti-Semitism. Some committees have raised the issue of having their work recognized and appreciated – sometimes they are not properly identified and the missions of their committees are confused. There are also concerns about competition with committees. It appears individual conversations or individual interactions are taken in lieu of committee work or recommendations with Senate to Meet and Confer. There are concerns with regard to support and long-term commitment. After individual consultation or discussion with committee members, what are considered “draft” are considered “university policy.” These are their main concerns. The question of civility was addressed and will be discussed by the larger faculty in our Senate meeting of October 7.
FA: I want to introduce the Committee on Diversity Education and the Committee on Diversity, Anti-Semitism and Social Justice representatives.
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: Do you have any questions for us?
Adm: My initial response to the letter is yes – I guess the letter refers to the meeting on September 11, with committees meeting jointly. I wish I had been invited to the meeting – we would be a couple of weeks ahead of where we are now. In terms of a draft plan, you indicated that we have a plan. The plan was a draft and not intended to be prescriptive or proscriptive. There were a number of efforts and workshops by faculty and activities taking place during convocation. One of them was by the CODE committee (as a whole) and was part of our effort to include as many different opportunities as possible to address issues of diversity on campus. Whatever kind of opportunities people are interested in presenting will be encouraged and supported. The more we do in promoting inclusiveness, the better we’ll be as a university. I encourage committees to talk with me in scheduling other activities. I would be happy to meet with the committees separately or together. In reference to the Bremer grant, as soon as I was asked, I wrote a strong letter to encourage this activity. I want to move forward to promote an atmosphere to change the climate – to diminish and eliminate the issues and problems of the past.
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: I didn’t refer to our activities. The problem is not having collaboration – if our approach does not coincide. The diversity plan does not seem to be planned together with the people on campus.
Adm: As you noted in your letter, we were required to have something in place for fall and the committees declined to meet during the summer, so we put something on paper and in place tentatively – we would be glad to work with these committees. Just let us know.
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: I think the committees recognize and value the administration’s desire to provide a range of activities to consider diversity issues. The CODE Committee has spent a lot of time (years) thinking about what kind of diversity education could be offered on campus to faculty. I think we would like to have more and better conversations about racism education that faculty Senate endorsed last spring and the university endorsed by signing the Bremer grant.
Adm: We would be doing “train the trainer” activities under the Bremer Grant?
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: Yes.
Adm: This is not to say it is the end of it. Again, I invite the committee to talk with us to develop something more comprehensive. Nobody’s intent is to exclude either committee from this process. We want their involvement and participation. From my perspective, I can’t go to the committee and say “let’s meet.”
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: This is the reason why we came here – we didn’t know how to further the diversity plan being implemented, and we weren’t asked to be part of the process. We didn’t see any movement and were concerned with the stability component.
FA: Is there a process issue with the university asking for a joint sanctioned meeting?
FA: I would rather not explore this issue here. After the Senate explores the issue, we can go forward.
FA: One concern is how plans, drafts, or ideas get labeled and presented because public presentation of ideas appears final; and a lot of time people read the newspaper and will ask “where did that come from”? (When it was never finalized). That’s problematic. Maybe the reporter is making judgments or maybe there is the need to present something to the public when internal constituencies have not been processed. Maybe it would help if we said “this is tentative.”
Adm: I thought that’s what “draft” meant.
FA: Sometimes it comes across as a “done deal.”
Adm: Okay.
CODE & CODAS Committee Representative: I hear what you’re saying – having a meeting should be our next step.
FA: That is under the topic of sanctioned meetings – on both the Executive Committee and Senate meeting agendas for next week. I’ll come back to the committee at that time.
FA: FA President called a caucus for the FA to discuss sanctioned meetings.
FA: We are ready to proceed. Some advice I got from the Executive Committee was I was not being clear enough, and I appreciate this advice. I want to be clear – we do support the CODE and CODAS Committee meeting with administration – by whatever process (we’ll deal with). You should meet with administration to do this work.
Adm: Let me make a clarification for the record. I have before me two documents regarding training and diversity. These are similar but not the same. One may have been an early draft by Academic Affairs, identified with the word “civility” in the center. The other document is the one I’m working with that does not have the word “civility” in the center, and has “draft” on it. Maybe this will help people understand the difference between the two. The one without “draft” is an earlier version and not the one we’re working on in Academic Affairs.
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: It would help if you could send the appropriate draft to the committee and the FA since we’re working blind under these circumstances. We need to be working from a reliable document.
Adm: Administration provided a copy of the relevant document to the FA.
FA: Is there a process in place for this difference in perceptions; i.e., meeting with someone to clarify that a draft is a draft and not a done deal?
Adm: I would hope so. I think the way to address this is to call someone in Academic Affairs if it’s from this department.
FA: FA President thinks she sent it to the FA committees.
FA: I’m wondering if you could have some sort of plan on what the collaboration looks like.
Adm: I met with the CODAS Committee once and talked about this. The committee then declined to meet in the summer. I tried to put something together since we needed to – as a draft.
FA: We have identified consultants and speakers to address these issues, and we have people on campus who devote a great deal of time and effort and have a great deal of expertise in these areas – many serve as consultants to organizations. I question using these resources to support our efforts on campus. Maybe we can facilitate our work here rather than with outside resources. Some people are here for the long haul.
Adm: We brought in a convocation speaker, Terrell Jones; the other people who gave presentations were from the university.
Adm: Most of the workshops scheduled on diversity related topics were conducted by faculty from the university.
FA: In talking about the planning part of this – if we could have planned this, then this might have been avoided…
Adm: We tried to do this.
Adm: In regard to the civility statement, I’d like to reiterate the use of the word civility in the statement was in the title of the source document I used. I realize civility has a certain resistance on this campus. I believe changing this word is within the bounds of what we want to do. My interest in the overall document is because some of the exchanges that take place tend to have the effect of stifling conversation. We want to generate discussion without attacking, by creating meaningful dialogues. Dissent is not the issue, disagreement is not the issue – tone is what we need to deal with to change the climate on campus, and the way we address issues by talking about them in an appropriate way with one another without screaming and shouting and attacking on an individual basis. We want people to understand this. One of the things that happens when we write e-mails is that non-verbal cues are left out and this leaves people with interpretations not intended.
CODE/CODAS Committee Rep: I don’t want to think there is more to the issue than the definition of civility -- who defines more issues needing clarification. Safe space is a very crucial part of the issue of who is allowed and who is not allowed – communication and feeling safe by all parties. Misreading concerns to see who is accepting of the definition or not – the notion that action can be taken by those who determine what is civil or uncivil.
Adm: I like your use of “safe space.” The issue of taking action has always existed within the context of our system, and I don’t think it changes in any way. The goal of the document is to create a safe space for all people to speak their minds without being attacked. Maybe we should call it “Safe Space and Academic Freedom.” The goal of that document is to create that kind of space.
FA: It seems to be an excruciating process to work through in a satisfactory way. On one hand, who will be excepted? What is the risk of a prolonged scholastic decision (I don’t share your enthusiasm for a third way)? Many interesting issues will need to wait for some conclusion to the “rule book,” at the end of which, we’ll make a bunch of exceptions. This really seems like an impossible project.
Adm: There is difficulty, but I also think it is part of the process of establishing parameters for the way we speak to one another.
CODE & CODAS Committee Rep: I don’t think we want to find ourselves trapped in an academic exercise as was stated. Some of these concerns can’t help but evoke compassion. Being subjected to racism and anti-Semitism is painful and this needs to be part of the message.
FA: At the last Faculty Senate meeting, members of Meet and Confer were a little bit put to task since it appears we were approaching without the larger faculty; so we put it out to the departments. The notes will show this has been discussed at this meeting again. We assured our colleagues we would not address this issue without their input. The committee members are addressing the issue, and that’s appropriate; but beyond that, some of us will then be accused of betraying trust.
FA: What I’m hearing is mostly how what is in place wouldn’t work; but I’m not hearing solutions. Would it be too much to ask that co-chairs possibly appoint the representative body to take the word civility, professionalism and these other similar words and work on them; establish parameters; and meet for scrutiny and subsequent approval in order to establish a replacement word that is less threatening to the constituencies?
FA: FA President will take this back to Senate for discussion.
FA: We do need to move on.
Desire2Learn (Admin)
Adm: I put this on the agenda because I thought Administration would be here, and she is not. The software program is intended as an alternative to Web CT, and we’ll talk about this at our next meeting.
First Year Experience Pilot Program Affecting
Academic Programs – DGS Committee Recommendation (FA)
FA: The DGS Committee asked Faculty Senate to bring this subject as a concern, specifically regarding the First Year Experience effect on the DGS Program. The committee is very supportive of the First Year Experience program, student personal growth, and retention. Students were selected for the program without their knowledge by virtue of their housing choice alone. They were told by the organizers of the program they did not have to take courses required by DGS. We decided we didn’t feel DGS students at risk should be made guinea pigs. What happened this year was the curriculum of the First Year Experience Program overtook the curriculum of the DGS Program. Students were tested for reading, and the students who were placed in First Year Experience were told they didn’t need to take reading courses and could take CT 150 to include reading. I’m very confused by this so we feel that the whole process undercuts the program and the director’s control of the program and the academic content. I simply want to share these concerns and ask that the control of the academic content stay in Academic Affairs and with the director of the program.
Adm: Clearly, academic units must be handled in Academic Affairs. Can we respond to this in our next Meet and Confer? When those classes were cancelled, Administration did give Records and Registration the go ahead to drop students. A lot of confusion was unnecessary. We don’t want to be creating any negative publicity.
FA: I appreciate the administration recognizing that the curriculum should be in the hands of the faculty. We raised this at last year’s First Year Experience Committee, and Administration assured us the First Year Experience involved no curriculum -- however, it has involved curriculum – and all students would know what would happen – and they didn’t. It makes us concerned now. The faith in the process from the committee is shaky, and there are a lot of issues.
Adm: Regarding DGS, thank you for recognizing that we tried to fix the problems as they occurred – part of the result of any pilot is confusion. Regarding the DGS piece, just to be sure – no DGS student will end up being dropped from courses placed in the end. All were rescheduled into courses they tested for – there was no loss of courses. Of the students who were tested into beginning college course reading 18 students wound up in the program by housing choice and not by recruiting and were offered the choice to defer their 110 enrollment into spring—two of the 18 chose to do this -- that’s what we did to be sure.
FA: One issue needs a system change. The discussion regarding the DGS Advisory Committee -- whether Administration had the right to cancel. The Dean would have the right in consultation with people who taught the courses. There is a concern. I would hope that if we’re looking at assessing DGS, having some curriculum put on there – something the committee should advise rather than from outside.
Adm: Let us discuss this more fully at the next Meet and Confer.
FA: It occurs to me if we think about this in the context of retention, this kind of stuff before they even come here has an effect. What is causing this kind of screw up?
FA: If you recall from last year, in addressing budget problems, the administration decided to cut back on reassigned time. Some received reassigned time and others didn’t and some got additional reassigned time. We’re requesting a couple of things. How is reassigned time being assigned? Some people who lost reassigned time did not have their workload reduced and were not informed on how to reduce it. A faculty member had ¼ reassigned time and is advising 40 students each semester. This year, they only have 1/8 reassigned time. How do we handle workloads for less reassigned time?
Workload Report (Admin)
Adm: We need to have entire workloads of faculty members and look at the number of advisees in the department. One of the things we’re trying to do in relation to Item #6 (Workload Report) is a report we’re trying to put together with regard to looking at faculty workload and other kinds of assignments with students. We don’t know how to address this since we’re operating with less money and fewer faculty and slightly fewer students; but the reduction in staff is greater than students. There is more work to be spread around, and we don’t know how to get around it without winning the lottery! We’re looking to make the workload as equitable as we can. A listing of people with reassigned time will be provided.
FA: The previous list was inaccurate.
Adm: Maybe I can help by giving out what we’re working on. A credit hour report was shared with the group. This is a work in progress. We’re trying to have this done with the office of Academic Affairs and it is a realistic picture of what the teaching load is at the university. People have suggested data is not accurate – we didn’t count this, that – it’s not final. What you see is a summary page of the credit hour generation for the university. When it is complete, it will be broken down by college, department and individual faculty member. This will be distributed to each of the Deans to go back to the departments to verify that the data is accurate. Then, they’ll return it, and I’ll say “yes,” it’s in its final form. The second page attached is a set of definitions for you to understand the terms. I think the data in this report will help us see a number of things.
FA: Where did the data come from?
Adm: Registration information.
FA: Contracts we sign in the summer.
Adm: In terms of reassigned time? Yes. We’re trying to get it for you and for us.
FA: The data is a work in progress – can you give us a confidence level in this data?
Adm: As of 9/17/03, I would have a 98% confidence level. On an individual faculty level, I would have less confidence. We are working with departments so we’re able to feel it’s entirely accurate.
Adm: In some departments, student credit hours will be higher than others.
FA: Do you plan to make this data public?
Adm: Yes.
FA: To individual faculty members?
Adm: We’ll put it on the Web.
FA: Roughly, when would you expect us to get the final document?
Adm: We should have the individual material on faculty workload in a few days; then I will distribute it to Deans for their reply – so in a couple of weeks.
FA: Will you bring it back to Meet and Confer?
Adm: Yes. When it’s done, it will be a 250+ page document. We will put it on the Web, and it will answer a lot of workload questions.
Adm: This is something I’ve been saying – I’m working on it, boss! (laughter)
Adm: MnSCU is also collecting this data and is comparing it to other MnSCU campuses. I think this is a good thing, and the Provost deserves credit since we’ve been talking about this for three years. Different departments may have different kinds of responsibilities; but this goes back to transparency, and we want to have open, honest communication.
Adm: We are working with MnSCU, and it is being generated by an individual working in my office. We’re working with MnSCU to have the same report generated by them to be available almost instantly for future semesters.
Adm: One item worth considering is putting faculty members’ names with their workload. It doesn’t feel right for people to collect data on colleagues. We need to think of another mechanism. We don’t want everyone to draw data out. A firewall should be step 1. A suggestion is a department level without names. People might start counting what people are doing what.
FA: What would be wrong with that?
Adm: I’m just concerned it would be abused. I’m just saying to think about it.
FA: Regarding MnSCU collecting data, will they have the same database?
Adm: Yes.
FA: Will everyone have one data set -- accurate and complete?
Adm: Yes.
FA: Will there be discrepancies until then?
Adm: These would be extremely slight.
Adm: MnSCU is going to take it to the 30th day.
FA: Is this an announcement of a data reporting system draft for comment?
Adm: A draft to share information.
FA: Used for what purpose?
Adm: One of the things will be to make determinations on where to put additional positions, to be supported by data.
FA: How will this be tied into our mission?
Adm: We’ll take mission into consideration.
FA: It seems we’ll have more discussion. Should we put this on the next Meet and Confer agenda?
Adm: Yes.
Overloads in COE (FA)
FA: We have been told there are no overloads in the College of Education. Last year, we spoke about this and we agreed there could be overloads on a case-by-case basis for pedagogical or financial reasons. Is this still the case?
Adm: I would expect there to be some exceptions.
FA: If you could develop a list of criteria in how you grant overloads, it would be helpful to faculty.
Adm: Okay, this is a good suggestion.
FA: Who should we come to when we have issues like this?
Adm: Me – in all my extra time! (laughter)