|
|
|
|
|
|
MEET AND CONFER
April 1, 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: Michael Spitzer, Diana Burlison, Nathan Church, Lin Holder, Steve Ludwig, Roland Specht-Jarvis, Rex Veeder, Kristi Tornquist, Anne Zemek De Dominguez
Acceptance of Meet and Confer Notes of February 26, 2004 - Postponed
Acceptance of Meet and Confer Notes of March 11, 2004 - Postponed
Unfinished Business
FA: Items 1 through 5 are waiting to be completed at Senate. Item #6 is waiting for Administration’s response.
1. Student Credit Hour Generation Report (Admin) (9/25)
2. Proposed Policy for On-Line Courses (Admin) (11/20)
3. Financial Aid – Verification of Attendance (Admin) (12/11)
4. NSSE (Admin) (1/22)
5. Endowed Chairs and Professorships (Admin) (2/26)
6. Partnerships Agreements (FA) (2/26)
Admin: We are not ready to respond to item #6 – we need to go over those minutes. We hope to have a response at the next Meet and Confer.
New Business
1. Power Outage (Admin)
Admin: I’m going to distribute two pages – I’m representing Steve Ludwig. What you have is the tentative power outage schedule. This is the schedule for the summer. We started working on the electrical distribution system last summer; and we’ll continue work this summer with outages planned, and this is the tentative schedule. This item is a sharing item, and if you have any questions or concerns, call Steve (laughter)! This is all I’m going to say about it.
FA: What is going to be done?
Admin: The power grid is being rebuilt.
FA: Basically, this means we should stay home during these days?
Admin: No. A good many of them are Fridays. We tried to integrate Fridays since we will be closed in order to do the connections in the summer.
Admin: Any follow up or comments should be directed to Steve.
FA: Even the telephones won’t work – can we bring our own generators?
Admin: Steve and I have a deal – I don’t do facilities, and he doesn’t do the budget (laughter). Please direct this question to Steve.
2. Class Sizes, Core, Majors, Enrollment and Budget (FA)
FA: This issue is one faculty has been approaching me about regarding their concern for increasing class sizes – they are more than what they have been, especially in those departments with core courses. There seems to be consistent pressure to meet the seats. Faculty has concern for their majors; and as we all know, SCSU has the lowest four-year graduation rate of any state university. We have been told by the Chancellor that we have a course availability problem. The concern here would naturally fall into the next two topics on the list: enrollment -- how much do we need in order to make the university financially viable and at the same time not add to the course availability problem; and this takes us to the next item, the idea of budget and resources. In the Strategic Planning Forum yesterday, faculty brought up both the issue of General Education and majors, and it seems like we always get into a situation where General Education courses are more important than major courses because of the need to have financial stability by having the enrollment at a certain point and not looking at a decrease in tuition. I would invite other faculty members to voice their concerns, and Administration can address them.
FA: One of the issues brought to me was a department who is being told they must offer a certain number of seats in a course with no consultation or discussion about the major being affected and no data provided for why this must be. They’re being told any class not having 15 students must be cancelled. They’re being told to do so by the Dean who said this directive is coming from the Provost. They’re frustrated since they’re always taking more and more students and are being told it is temporary. There doesn’t seem to be any thought for how they’re going to do this; and when they ask the Dean, they’re told to take certain components out (of the class) that have been there for some time (with no consultation with the General Education Committee). It is extremely frustrating for members of the department.
Admin: Let me respond to parts. First, I’ve never told anybody to tell a faculty member to take components out of a course, nor would I ever suggest this, nor did I tell any Dean to include a certain number of students in a class. I’ve told the Deans we need more seats – adding more sections, but not class size. The whole notion of majors vs. General Education classes, I think, has several factors to it. Approximately 50 percent or so students come in undecided, not knowing what major or courses they want to take, and they tend to take General Education courses. If we don’t have enough seats, they leave and the retention rate has been decreasing. We know we have retained fewer students than in prior years. We know this is an issue from before and it hasn’t been resolved. The only way to reverse the reputation we’ve gotten from high school and transfer counselors is to make sure when they come in, they have classes. If they don’t get through General Education classes, they won’t stick around. We’ll end up becoming a community college. We need to make a decision for the cycle to stop so we’ll be able to provide seats for freshmen and then be able to offer upper division courses.
FA: One, if we have the lowest graduation rate of any state university, then aren’t we, in essence, going to the community college model where what we’re teaching then is General Education courses?
Admin: No. Graduation rates are predicated on the number of entering freshmen who graduate in that period of time. When a student transfers – the student leaves and goes someplace else -- the student does not count (only in the attrition numbers).
FA: But, if that’s the case for all, that wouldn’t explain why.
Admin: One of the reasons they’re leaving is they’re not getting into classes. If we can get them into classes and get them into majors, then this will address the severity of the situation. We need to look at longer-term strategies and perhaps look into programs. We need to do this in the short-term and we need to solve it and if we don’t, the cycle will continue.
FA: In regard to graduate education, there are many of us who have large graduate programs with classes of 30 but some of 15 to 20 -- those are helping to provide seats; but if we need to drop classes with seats of 15 or lower……I’d like us to keep in mind I realize we need to be careful not to jeopardize the well being and academic success of high-risk population.
Admin: Nobody has said that (drop classes of 15 seats or lower).
FA: Then, we’ve misunderstood.
Admin: It is 16 (seats) (laughter).
Admin: I won’t say cancel a clinical nursing class with 9 students because I know the guideline is about 8 students. That’s one of the ways we pay for smaller courses is to have larger classes in other courses. The recommendation from the Deans was individual classes would be considered. There are some departments with gradate classes, as I’ve been able to determine -- I’m assuming the data I’m looking at is accurate -- who will offer 6 classes in a semester with an average size of 6. If they used 3 classes with a size of 12, it would solve the problem – that’s a solution I’m looking at.
FA: Maybe you need to speak directly to departments rather than make a blanket broadcast.
Admin: What I’ve said is we need to have enough seats in courses.
FA: I would like to see the past retention data from the quarter system when we didn’t have this policy saying all freshmen had to be in general ed courses their first year.
Admin: It’s not the only issue.
FA: Back when we didn’t require that General Education classes be taken in the freshmen year, their classes were a mix between older and younger students; and the older students provided a model allowing quality of learning. The quality has gone down now, since there are only freshmen in the classes. They used to get a lot of their majors from sophomores taking the general ed class; so now, not only is the quality going down, but we’ve devastated their major by offering classes that don’t have the old mix of students. We need to get this clear when we made this decision with no consultation from faculty.
FA: It is not the position of faculty for freshmen to take all of their core classes in their first year. Is there a policy that says students should take their core in their first year?
Admin: No. They take some core and some General Education classes in their first year. Nobody is saying they should. We did a calculation. You don’t realize that you get about 1,300 transfer students, and a large number are coming in with fewer than 15 or 20 credits (really freshmen); and we did a calculation of how many seats we need to get for a full schedule -- just to have a full schedule -- and these are the numbers we’ve come up with so students have choices in courses.
FA: In my program, two things happen. Elementary Ed used to have 600 freshmen declaring Elementary Ed as their major; but we’ve had to collapse our program. Our transfers have died out. We only get less than 20% of this total; but what has happened is the word is out that there aren’t many seats available in Elementary Ed. On one hand, I have class sizes down; but on the other hand, you don’t have your enrollment. We need to get cores done, and we need to make sure seats are there.
Admin: I agree.
FA: One thing that might help is consistency of enforcement of policies; i.e., one Dean doesn’t enforce this, and mine will get cancelled and someone else’s won’t.
Admin: This shouldn’t happen.
FA: When might we know what might be happening in the fall. We have 500 seats with no one to teach them and five faculty leaving. How do we make sure we meet all of our classes? Other departments in COSS have similar challenges.
Admin: I talked with the Dean about this, and I thought this was being resolved.
FA: We have no answer.
Admin: I’ll get with the Dean.
Admin: I think there is another problem -- we have two General Eds. Most other institutions only have one, but yet part of our student population takes the Minnesota Transfer Curriculum, and we have to offer both.
Admin: Engineering has a different curriculum.
Admin: One thing we can do is look at General Ed to see if we can modify it to make it simpler.
FA: The General Ed Committee is talking about that.
Admin: We assume it would take two years to change.
FA: It would help to revisit the situation of students who transfer here with 12 credits. We might have a more committed population easier to retain. I’ve heard a lot about students who have not gotten accepted getting 12 credits and transferring here.
Admin: I don’t know if we have any way of measuring the retention of those students.
Admin: Retention and attrition rates are almost identical.
FA: I was a member of the Core Taskforce, and one of the issues was it seemed that Cores in areas 1 and 3 were most important to offer early. Faculty from Cores in areas 2 and 4 said it wasn’t as necessary to offer them in the first year; and Core 5 can be offered both early and later. I hope this message has gotten across. You asked the Deans to create seats and there is a question of how. We’re offering 100-seat sections in Core 3, and we have a very small 45-credit major and we’re still about 10 sections short (don’t have any one assigned). How will those seats be created?
Admin: Magic!
Admin: What is the rate at which students retake these classes?
FA: Pretty high – do I lower my standards?
Admin: I think having Enrollment Management on campus is very valuable -- this is the first time as a university we have really taken this step. Part of the discussion is how we’ve been informed. A lot of students who transfer are the undecided students. Coming up with a way of helping undecided students decide what direction they want to pursue is important, especially if they want to get into Engineering and Education.
Admin: We’ve taken a number of steps to address issues of retention, but those steps won’t begin to click in until next year. The establishment of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies and the coordination of academic support to students are actions and efforts designed for retaining students. We may begin to see some net effect next year. I understand there are some departments where the number of majors is booming and faculty resources are squeezed tight, but not in others. Your last item on this list is budget – I’ll comment on the budget. Our enrollment is going down, and we’re having these problems. The projection next year is 400 students lower vs. this year and 600 students below our projected budget target. Let’s focus on those academic programs where there is capacity and ask those faculty what they can do. Departments know where there is space and where there is not. I recognize we need to find resources to put in the classroom, and we’ll do as much as we can -- not all have been fully distributed yet.
Admin: There is a disconnect among our own faculty. There seems to be a difference between what departments teach in the course and what the rest of the faculty tell us that they want students to take. A suggested plan of study, or template, could be given to students. Almost every department has put their core in the first semesters. If a student chooses to take all 6 -- that’s 6 out of 10 (even if they’re undecided); so even if we don’t say they must take them, that’s what departments want them to take.
The calculation Michael talked about was shared with all Deans; and hopefully they have shared this with their chairs. I met with Roland and Sharon and David DeGroote and statistics and math department reps., and we had a good discussion on the basis of the numbers. They’ve agreed regarding more resources in development math, and we’ve agreed to reduce the backlog numbers in English. We’re not opposed to reducing projections, and that much information sharing has been done. That start was made.
FA: Should I tell these people they should request a meeting with their Dean? Not all Deans are sharing this information with their faculty. Some department chairs say they don’t have this data.
Admin: Do you want me to send a copy to Theresia?
FA: Yes.
FA: All I want to know is if they’re not getting this from the Deans, then how do they get it? You seem to be willing to give it.
FA: It’s there because we were told to put it there.
FA: I can send a note out to faculty and set up meetings so departments can have the maps they need.
Admin: The maps came to us from the Deans. The only ones I have are from this year.
FA: We were told when we created the maps that we had to have core courses in the first and second semesters because that is what they wanted. I was told “they” wanted it.
Admin: I don’t know who “they” are. In areas where there is strong demand to finish the core first, that’s part of the overall program. In Education, you require students to acquire a “C” before they can move forward with classes in the major. Such as Business, etc., there are departments where there is a particular need. Drafts of the degree maps can be sent out.
FA: I will send out an e –mail.
FA: I think there is a somewhat faster way to stabilize enrollment. If you can add those sections, you can have students right away. I used to have 4 cohorts a semester,
Admin: Who’s turning them away?
FA: We’ve been told to by the Dean who denied us resources. We’re willing to serve students.
FA: In talking about data, are we going to get degree maps of programs?
Admin: These are not done yet, but you can see them when they are.
FA: How many students are using the Minnesota Transfer Curriculum?
FA: I can answer this from speaking with Steve Klepetar. The majority of students use our General Ed Program – I don’t know what the percentages are.
Admin: I’ve heard the same.
Admin: I’d like to share data stating if you try to find where there are areas for improvement, you will clearly see in those numbers the overall average is substantially below and above, and improvements can be made but there is a clear language; and I hope you will find ways to follow up on those messages.
FA: One of the concerns faculty had is we have heard the need to recruit students for years, and when the Chancellor told us “you have a course availability problem,” it was a wake-up call, and we’re cautious about flipping back and forth. With huge class sizes of 800, 500, etc, our number one concern is we believe we are not academically distinct and that was supported by NCHEMS and is not reflected anywhere else in state universities. Mankato doesn’t have any class sizes like this. When I brought this up to the IFO Executive Committee, their mouths dropped!
Admin: Some don’t have that many students (laughter)!
FA: If class sizes can go up to a certain number, it becomes an expectation. If we’re going to do things differently to get out of the bind of large class sizes, then can we have a broader plan to see how it can unfold? You mentioned the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, etc, and we recognize this, but what about faculty advising? In my own department, the person who did this the best is somebody I won’t mention -- this is a person who was advising over 400 students. This was helping our university. Is there a way to value advising, and how can we do this?
Admin: I think advising is one of the critical areas in impacting retention and there are a number of questions about this. I think how students are treated, what their interactions are, impacts retention, and advising is a critical piece.
FA: How do we value advising?
FA: That’s my question. In a department, what happens is the same people who are being overworked in one thing are being overworked in advising. I have almost all of our department’s advisees. Why is that? The way I look at it, I’m happy to do it; but how can we balance it out and how can we reward faculty members who are advising?
FA: I want to support the proposal for hiring a set of advisors for the college. My faculty who work with student teachers have an average of 70 to 75 advisees, and they all end up in our lab. It really is a huge amount of time to see these students. Perhaps some reward would be reassigned time -- funding donated to advising. This would provide that intense early intervention majors need to make sure students stay.
FA: The way you value advising is through Article 22 and Article 25, and we acknowledge that work and value and reward it.
Admin: Quantitative elements are so important to retain students -- will cost resources as soon as faculty are taken out of the classroom. An option would be to increase class sizes to create labor committed to advising and coincide with experience with the hope after 10 or 15 years of service, they would rather be an advisor for a few years than continue teaching. This would have very positive elements but has to fit our budget sheet. This does not generate student credit hours and is ancillary to our current tracking of credits. We have to find payment somewhere in higher class enrollments in order to pay for it.
Admin: The other piece of this is how do we get those people to advise.
FA: I don’t want to force folks who don’t want to advise to do so.
Admin: Neither do I.
FA: Articles 22 and 25 only seems to work so far.
FA: Whether we think we’re paying for advising or not, we’re paying for it – by retention and the same people being busy. Maybe there’s something we can do.
Admin: That’s a good idea.
Admin: Important is the Article 22 change in the process helping them understand what members are doing. There is more ongoing sharing of information.
FA: Full professors and those tenured do a lot of advising.
FA: I was speaking about my department. We may have to do a better job of communicating the improvements of Article 22.
Admin: It’s not uncommon those colleagues who choose not to advise need to know they have more responsibility to pick up larger classes – the trade-offs to be had need to be recognized.
Admin: Hear, hear!
FA: I want to bring up another point regarding the budget – it has to do with a meeting President Saigo, Diana Burlison, and I had that looked at the cost of instruction. According to this, Mankato spends $49.8 million on instruction, and SCSU spends $60 million. We certainly would like more data on this. We talked about calling
John Asmussen on campus to help us identify mutual concerns and ask some questions about some data and see what we can get from it. I know President Saigo has been looking at NCHEMS data a lot, but I did point out in the meeting that according to NCHEMS data, faculty at SCSU get paid less than faculty at Mankato.
Admin: In regard to NCHEMS data, one thing to recognize is it’s at least 3 years old, and a lot has happened and changed. If you look at the data, it compares this year to that year, and you’ll find that difference has narrowed. We ought to figure out what is comprised in those numbers, verifying that the numbers going into that category at Mankato are the same as SCSU.
FA: That was agreed to by John Asmussen, so since President Saigo and I spoke of different concerns, I ‘d like to gather faculty issues and concerns and have those addressed.
FA: When you said faculty in Mankato are getting paid more – you mean the average salary there is more?
Admin: I don’t have approximate numbers.
FA: This is the same contract and my question is why is there this difference?
FA: Maybe I can transfer there!
Admin: We’ll be glad to share this information as we uncover it.
Admin: Are there additional comments on #2?
FA: With your request of faculty to help recruitment in areas that have capacity, would you write me a memo so I may take it to Faculty Senate for their consideration?
Admin: When is your next Senate meeting?
FA: Tuesday, April 6.
Admin: We only have three weeks to make an impact, but I’ll write a memo.
3. Right to Representation (Admin/FA)
Admin: You brought this to my attention and to President Saigo’s attention, and as far as we know, faculty’s right to representation is not an issue.
FA: Have all administrators verified this?
Admin: Yes.
FA: That hasn’t been our experience.
Admin: They’ve been told they could not?
FA: Either that or they’ve gotten rejecting responses.
FA: As soon as I have the names of the administrators, I’ll give them to you.
We need to go on record that Administration is prepared to respect this right and all administrators will be fully informed and accepting.
Admin: We did have this discussion two days ago in which all of the Deans said they respected that right of representation within those areas of the contract and that they abide by those.
FA: Do they know when they see it? There may have been a transformation as of this week.
FA: If it is a right, does that mean I as a faculty member know that I can automatically take with me a Faculty Association representative? What does that right mean?
Admin: If there is an issue connected with discipline, you have a right to bring a union person with you.
FA: Then, it’s not as bad as terms of employment?
FA: It actually is. Anytime a faculty member would be uncomfortable with an administrator, they have the right to bring representation.
Admin: I don’t know if this is what the contract says. I don’t know where – has it been refused?
FA: I’ve come into Article 22 meetings where the department was coming into the meeting with the Dean and not been questioned.
FA: Do I need to declare ahead of time to a supervisor I’m bringing someone?
Admin: I guess it would be courteous to let someone know. I am aware of a case where somebody brought a union rep. and the administrator was not informed, and they asked to reschedule the meeting; however, it doesn’t mean they were denied.
FA: We’ve had issues with FA members not feeling comfortable asking for representatives because of retaliatory behavior; and I would hope in a situation like that, you’d work with us with faculty and administration to address the situation.
Admin: Why would a faculty member fear retaliation for giving notification in advance?
FA: I don’t think it’s a rational situation. I can think of a faculty member who was terrified to tell the Dean about bringing someone.
FA: I’d like to say two things: It has very positive benefits from both sides to have a person there. (1) We’ve had troubles where the conversation essentially became disciplinary and there was a problem with due process. If a faculty member had brought in a union rep. at the time, these problems would have been avoided, and (2) Meetings go better because if there are only two people, they may have a deep confrontation. If I were a manager I’d recommend people bring in somebody.
Admin: I don’t know of a case where someone has prevented a rep from attending. I think there is the need for advance notice.
Admin: There is no single case I recall where the single presence of a union rep was a problem. What has been problematic, occasionally, is when a rep would take over the conversation and deviate from the agenda and talk to their own agenda, distracting where we needed to get with the faculty member. We should consider training reps where they need to take the neutral stance rather than furthering their own interest.
FA: I would hope if those issues come up you would take them to FA.
FA: If you folks knew about all the instances of poor reception over this issue of reps, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. We’re having this conversation since you’re not aware. Lack of awareness doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. The right of a rep is just that – it’s a given; and, therefore, any informed, astute administrator would understand this; so when a person comes in with a rep, then it’s a given and it need not be questioned. Perhaps a courtesy call would be nice; but the right is there, and it shouldn’t be postponed.
Admin: I’m not sure I have not been informed of an instance of denial of representation – they may have rescheduled the meeting…..
FA: Justice evaded – justice denied.
FA: I know of an instance, and this happened with a Dean not here anymore, where my department asked the Dean to come and we told him we’d have a union rep to take notes, and he declined to come to the meeting and any future meetings. There was a situation with a faculty member who ended up leaving the university – the Dean insisted this faculty member come to a meeting, and he wouldn’t say what the meeting was for; when she said she was bringing a union rep, he wouldn’t meet with her.
Admin: I can’t do anything unless you tell me what’s going on.
FA: If your Dean refuses to tell the faculty member what the meeting is about, then the faculty member has a right to bring a union rep.
Admin: Please let me know when this is violated.
Admin: More difficult are cases when a faculty member would like to be represented but the rep doesn’t show up; these cases indicate we need some support structure so they can obtain what they need so they don’t have to reschedule the meeting three or four times.
4. Communications regarding Affirmative Action and Social Equity Search Committee (FA)
There was an invitation extended to the FA President to come into an Affirmative Action and Social Equity Search Committee meeting; and then there was some correspondence and discussion between Anne and myself and the invitation was subsequently rescinded. I respect the right of the chair of the committee to both offer and rescind an invitation; and that is not an issue, but I do have some questions for you Ann. Let me make sure I have your position accurately understood -- that inviting the President of a single bargaining unit -- the FA -- could jeopardize the integrity of the search?
Admin: Yes, it is possible the proposed activity could do that. It is important to our bargaining unit relations that one unit is not favored over the others. Well, this is an administrative search, and the President determined how he wanted to proceed through the consultation process -- he moved the parts of the position along through the FA, and the position was looked at, discussed, and approved. He put the position through the Affirmative Action and Social Equity Search Committee whose membership he worked with the FA to establish -- there are 7 FA members and 6 non-faculty members -- more or less, we attempted to mirror the university community to the extent we could. The representation issue is out there. When 7 faculty members are approved to sit on a committee, the roles and methods of how the position is going to be filled have been discussed, understood, and agreed upon; and by modifying the original decision, it constitutes an intervention, and having the FA President there is, in fact, a change in the overall represented capacity we agreed upon.
FA: I want to write down a list of people. Do you want me to go to names now and go back?
FA: Are you going to raise an issue and then we’ll respond? Either way, it doesn’t matter to me.
FA: I’ll take one whole issue at a time. Then I’ll go to you.
FA: You are the acting Affirmative Action Officer and you were appointed by Pres Saigo, but that appointment had no input from the Faculty Association, so we don’t have any idea if you’re tremendously qualified or not. Therefore, when you talk about bringing in a person who could jeopardize the search committee, what strikes us is not bringing in a person could do the same thing. If you have an interim Affirmative Action Officer who is also the Assistant to the President saying a committee cannot meet with outside people, then the question is if the committee has questions and if they don’t feel comfortable with an issue, then who can they ask – the Provost, the President, and other bargaining reps?
FA: My sense is it appears the President has the right to make an appointment. As a courtesy, he brought it to the IFO and the Administration’s Meet and Confer for a job description and appointed a search committee; and, therefore, my question is if the President has this prerogative, then why do we have a search committee? I would think the contract requires the President to consult about important matters.
Admin: I don’t want to confirm the contract. President Saigo did consult with you. He consulted on how the position was arrived at and a lot of discussion took place; and then he consulted on how the position was filled.
Admin: And we spent a lot of time revising the job description.
Admin: We felt we reached an agreement with what was going to happen. My feeling and things I’ve heard seemed to go back to presumably the faculty members on the committee are having a hard time with the posted description; and as much as their concern is noted, those are not issues the search committee should be battling through – they should be finished with. So the requirement of a degree, if that is an issue of FA, this should have been raised a lot earlier.
FA: I don’t know if that is what the issue here is. For the position of Provost and V.P. of Academic Affairs, the search was failed by President Saigo with no faculty consultation. When we formed a new committee for Michael’s position, there were 19 members, 10 of whom were faculty; and we did have the FA President come in and talk to us, so we knew and understood where we could go for information other than having somebody come in from MSUAASF as we’ve done in the past. We’re not talking about a job description issue, we’re talking about faculty rights – we’ve done this before.
Admin: I have a question of having a forum to address issues of faculty concerns -- why the FA President would come to a meeting. Issues dealing with faculty should not take place in a search committee meeting with other non-faculty members there. Use of the word “precedent” is probably not the choice of words that is most appropriate; but when you abrogate a rule with past practice, then you may be creating a past-practice kind of situation, but here there is not a rule. He has decided how the position is going to be filled.
FA: That’s not my point. I need clarification of what the intent was of the FA President -- that’s why I was bringing up past practice. The last time this happened, someone came in and did not mess with the committee’s purpose, but came to provide clarification of something.
Admin: I want to say if we don’t know what the issues are, then it’s up to faculty members to determine the issues amongst themselves and not make the search committee meetings their battlefield.
FA: The committee has a right, and we understand things that violate the process (i.e., the confidentiality of applicants); but given that, the committee has a right -- any university-wide committee – to have whomever they deem appropriate. You’re in disagreement?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Who has the right to deicide?
Admin: It depends on the instance. It was the intention of the President for 13 people to get together, or he would have appointed an ex-officio to the committee. Also, if there were issues regarding the budget and they could not understand something, they could invite university personnel with that expertise. However, the fact that a person is there in their capacity as a bargaining rep is an impermissible addition to the committee that wasn’t contemplated.
FA: As your role as the interim Affirmative Action Director and with your role as the Special Assistant to the President, do you get to decide who the appropriate people are?
Admin: That’s a question that hasn’t been tested. I view the situation by looking at what is going on in the search; and if this happens, I find it suspect. Thankfully, the situation has not happened as yet. I have to sign off -- the Affirmative Action and Social Equity Search Committee can invite anyone, and I could not stop them; but the consequences of their actions would create liabilities, and I would have to call names. Who am I to make that call? That’s in the purview of the Affirmative Action Officer’s responsibilities. The hiring manager can decide that he or she does not want the search to go on. I would not, myself, fail a search because someone directs me to – unless there was a reason, or I would attribute the failed search to the person directing me to fail it.
FA: If we have questions about the integrity of the search?
Admin: You may consult with a lady by the name of Delores Fridge. Tracy Bowe can answer 1B1 issues.
FA: Having been a person who heard this, I fear we’ve turned a simple request around. From my understanding, they wanted to figure out what the lines were, and the invitation was for her to give clarification – the committee invited her.
Admin: It’s rude to hog the committees’ time that can best be done outside the committee.
FA: If the chair gives the invitation, it’s perfectly fine. I think we have spent an hour discussing the nature of what has happened. The real issue is if you had allowed the FA President to come to the meeting……
Admin: That information was brought out twice.
FA: I don’t think the issue is that -- there are other issues in the committee.
Admin: My personal opinion is if those faculty members have issues and concerns, they need to bring them to you. By taking their issues through the appropriate channels, then you as FA President have the access to bring them forward. However, I am at a loss as to what the issues are. I’ve answered a series of 24 questions in writing, and no one has told me my answers were unsatisfactory or needed follow up. The provision of laws and regulations is not my job -- I don’t do this.
Admin: Was this an invitation from the entire committee or from the faculty from the committee?
FA: If the committee invites someone…….
FA: If you step in and decide if it’s appropriate, you are giving the impression of messing with that committee. You have to think about the consequences of this. I’m not interested in your responses. You need to think about the consequences if you step in and say “I get to decide if they want to bring someone in.” This is a committee’s decision.
Admin: I didn’t know -- I serve as the ex-officio on the committee. Two administrators were not aware of the invitation and did not ask the search committee chair as well as some non-FA membership of the committee, so it wasn’t a unanimous request. I need to be careful I don’t say who can come and who can’t; but I will say when someone should not come who could project bias into the process-- I won’t sign off on it. Search committees invite whomever they wish; but the Affirmative Action Officer doesn’t have to sign off on the search afterwards.
FA: Isn’t this veto power?
Admin: If the meeting had occurred, I would have considered it an impropriety. I would have to think about it. The fact of the matter is for this search, the persons visiting the committee render a susceptible appearance of impropriety and could be a serious issue if the search would go forward.
FA: I have an email going to the entire committee talking about my invitation, and everybody on the committee was notified.
Admin: The statement that says the presence of a single bargaining unit President to the exclusion of the other units also creates labor relations rep issues, particularly since I understand not all members of the search committee were made aware such an invitation had been made.
Admin: There was a lag in e-mail this week, so I didn’t have it until today – I don’t know if I was copied. The other two administrators did not receive it when I made inquiries. I had been copied on everything else the committee did. I had no real knowledge of the proposed visit until I received notice from the President. This is the first time to my knowledge I wasn’t copied (since I’m ex officio). The management should not be in the business of showing partiality of one bargaining unit to another; and to permit this kind of a situation, to me, is an indication of partiality that other bargaining units could raise. If the whole concern of the FA is that sentence – it has been written and conveyed to the President, because I advise him.
FA: So what it looks like is Administration is saying what may or may not be a concern for bargaining units.
Admin: The intent of the memo was to advise the President that as Hiring Manager, there appeared to be a situation brewing with one of the searches, appearing to be problematic. Someone had been invited to attend, and that person’s status is strictly representative to one bargaining unit on campus. The other thing is, in terms of this position, there may be other faculty who might be foolish enough to apply for this position. We won’t know who the applicants are until April 16. The appearance of one bargaining unit President there could or might prejudice the candidacy of someone not on that bargaining unit, or their candidacy could be doomed or affected because their President wasn’t there.
FA: Why do you assume exclusion?
Admin: I asked Hedy, and she said other units haven’t been invited. If the rest of them were invited, I’d still have the same issue. The structure of how this position was going to be filled was predetermined, and after the fact, the tune is being changed. If in the beginning, the faculty association on the committee wanted to appoint the FA President, that would be okay.
FA: I should close by making an official statement that we and the IFO find this problematic; and we will look into having some discussions about this.
5. COSS Notice of Vacancy (FA)
FA: It is going to be hard to squeeze this in. We needed to have a search for a Dean in the COSS. A search committee convened in February and was provided with a draft job description. The committee made amendments and submitted the job description to the Provost for the Chronicle. In the job description and ad, the committee used the words “earned tenure” as one of the qualifications of the person who would be hired as Dean, and this appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Ed. Since then, we were notified the job on the Chronicle website has been changed, and “earned tenure” has been removed. Who made the changes in the ad and why?
Admin: First of all, the job description is not what was sent to communicate the Notice of Vacancy to the committee. The job description exists and is at MnSCU and cannot be changed by the search committee. I need to preface this by saying these two positions we’re taking about – the Affirmative Action Social Equity Officer and this Dean search position are the first two external searches for administrative positions that I’ve been involved with here. One of the things that happened in the process is that the ad written by the search committee was a rather extensive document; and we ran it the way it was written. I was under the impression that the search committee wrote the ad. It didn’t say anything about “earned tenure,” and I thought that was the way it should be. The job description does not say that. There is a contradiction in the two ads – one earlier version specified 10 years’ experience, and the search committee reduced it and said “earned tenure.” The job description said nothing about earned tenure; so that because of those things, I agreed to take out “earned tenure” as it shouldn’t have been allowed in the ad in the first place. If I had been more cognizant of the processes, we wouldn’t have allowed this.
FA: Why were these changes made without the search committee’s knowledge?
Admin: That’s true – they were. I’d rather call it an oversight than an accident.
FA: Are there specific job descriptions for Deans?
Admin: Yes.
FA: I’d like to know -- does MnSCU have a file of job descriptions?
Admin: No
Admin: I am the repository of the entire file of Dean job descriptions. As of 2002, I have them all, and they’re all different – all have been approved by MnSCU and most have similar block language; but each and every one is different.
FA: So there is one on file for the Dean of COSS at SCSU?
Admin: Yes.
FA: So, it’s possible another college could have a Dean with the qualification of “earned tenure.”
Admin: Yes.
FA: Can a search committee use the phrase “earned tenure” as a criterion for ranking its candidates?
Admin: We don’t rank the candidates we evaluate. If it’s not specified, it can’t be anything new or different than what is in the position description.
FA: A position description, by nature, would describe the duties and qualifications of the position -- it’s not a generic one.
Admin: In my experience, there are actually two documents: one is a generic check list and there is a document specifying the exact qualifications and duties of the specific Deans and is unique to each position and one that has been approved by MnSCU – that is set on that search; and then the screening form comes from the Notice of Vacancy and has to be based on the job description.
FA: The concern is why wasn’t the position description given to the search committee?
We were given a draft of a Notice of Vacancy.
FA: In the absence of a position description, then a draft NOV was modified.
Admin: I don’t think anyone is trying to blame the committee.
FA: We’re not accepting blame!
FA: The FA at SCSU does not accept the fact a committee cannot rank candidates, and our current hiring manual says we can. I
Admin: We need an Affirmative Action Officer to do that!
FA: We don’t accept that we can’t.
Admin: I sent over all kinds of other information including a draft Notice of Vacancy based on the current position description – they were included in the draft.
FA: We need a copy – every member – of the job description.
Admin: Are we done? Let me know if you make another point.
FA: Besides sending over a position description, is there some way to give the search committee what they can and can’t change – they should know what they cannot change.
Admin: In the job description, there are pieces you can change; and the qualifications are the part you cannot change.
Admin: Periodically, a Dean will review the job description, and where it says I can spend 12%, they’ll change to 20%; but the qualifications part cannot change. Substantive change would need to go back to MnSCU.
Admin: An example would be old language that would remove “retention” and it would be a change no one would get worked up about.
FA: Could a committee, upon receiving a job description we thought might need to be changed, go back through the process, taking it back to MnSCU and have the qualifications changed?
Admin: That would be up to the hiring manager.
Admin: If I had been aware, then it wouldn’t have gone through.
FA: Committees need to have a better job description.
Admin: We’ll be more careful. There are three interim Deans – the status of the search for the Dean of COB is we received a petition from the members of the search committee asking if we could postpone the search until next fall because they couldn’t find good candidates. I asked the college to give its opinion, and I received documents from chairs and their departments supportive of postponing the search.
In regard to the COSE, I received a recommendation from the Taskforce on Restructuring that we have a separate discussion regarding dividing some of it up, and I asked the interim Dean to conduct it and will wait until it’s concluded to decide how to fill the position.
The COSS search is proceeding.
For the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, we don’t know if we’ve gotten it back from MnSCU – a search committee is appointed. We don’t have the benchmarking on it yet, and they’ve had it for more than a month. We need to find out why.
6. Technology Committees (Admin)
Admin: The Technology Committee requested committee members. They’ve sent requests, and they went to Senate. This item is still on the Senate agenda.
7. Summer Contracts (FA)
FA: With regard to summer contracts, people are being asked in January to commit to spending their summers here. They are subject to having their contracts cancelled in May, and it’s too late for them to get any other summer job. From college to college, there is no consistency with classes. In my college, if you’re only teaching one class, you’re subject to getting cut off. We ask that some sort of more equitable way of dealing with contracts be developed. We don’t think what is happening is equitable.
Admin: Let us look into this.
Meeting adjourned at 5:00 PM.