Meet and Confer Notes
2/24/2005
Faculty Association: Judy Kilborn, Annette Schoenberger, Theresia Fisher, Judy Kilborn, Tracy Ore, Frankie Condon, Steve Hornstein, Susan Motin, Bill Langen, Fred Hill, P.N. Subba
Administration: Roy Saigo, Michael Spitzer, Anne Zemek de Domionguez, Lin Holder, Larry Chambers, Diana Burlison, Kristi Tornquist, Roland Specht-Jarvis
Patty Dyslin, note taker
The meeting was called to order at 3:10 p.m.
Acceptance of Meet and Confer Notes: February 3, 2005 - Accepted
1. Internal Audit (FA) (4/22/04)
FA: Annette and I are working on it and we will have our questions and comments very soon.
Admin: Soon?
FA: We actually had a meeting… (laughter)
2. Summer School Low Enrollment Classes (FA) (11/4/04)
FA: The committee is meeting tomorrow at 1:30.
3. Revision of Curriculum Process (Admin) (11/4/04)
FA: We haven’t heard anything from the UCC. The executive committee has decided to try to spend some time thinking about how we can get off square-one on this.
Admin: If there is anything we can do to help you with this, let us know.
4. Student Program Completion (Admin) (1/20/05)
Admin: We talked about that a little bit and essentially what it entails is to try and have discussion with the faculty about things that we can do to improve our students’ ability complete their degrees a in timely way. I think perhaps we might want to consider some kind of task force to address some of the issues there and figure out some ways that we can move students so that they do complete their degree and stay at the university until they complete their degree. That would be a helpful thing to accomplish.
FA: I want to put out there that John Gardner is coming as the keynote speaker for the faculty forum day and will be having a conversation with Mark Nook and I to talk about trying to bring in Vince Tinto as the keynote speaker for the faculty workshop day in August. Both of them are national figures in student learning and student retention; and both are very action-oriented. They’re interested in coming and having workshops with people from across the university to work on these issues. I think that out of those two visits, we might get some community-wide clarity on how to proceed.
Admin: You and I, and most people around the table, at one time or another, act as consultants. I’ve always felt that it’s exciting for a few days then it’s dropped off the face of the earth. I’d like to see if you would pursue that further and say ‘Alright, how would you come in and talk about the issue, raise sensitivity, and raise the right questions; and then a year from now, where can you see us being as far as achieving those goals, but in between, can you come once or twice a semester to have a continuing workshop?’ Because what happens, frankly, is that everybody agrees the ideas are great and we’ll make a report and then shelve it, and pretty soon, a year from now, we’re no better off. It takes monitoring and encouragement if we’re serious about it. I always hear great feedback. But as an institution, how do we, as a group, move it from here to there is the thing I’m interested in.
FA: I think both of those two are very interested in building sustainable institutional changes.
Admin: Maybe next time you can come and report back.
FA: They’re not going to drop in and then become unavailable. We can have a conversation about that and figure out how to have that conversation with the faculty.
FA: The faculty association has an admissions and retention committee. I had a conversation with them about this topic and they have actually started talking about it so we may not need a task force. We may be able to use that group. And we might be able to actually have that group meet with the two people separately when they’re here.
Admin: I believe that John Gardner’s plan is to add workshops to the last day.
FA: Yeah, but if we could have a separate meeting with him… because I know they were talking about bringing something to the senate – a couple of things, ideas they have. I just remembered that.
Admin: That would be another way to address the issue in a more concerted and continuous way.
Admin: Any other comments on this topic?
5. Weekly Schedule: 2 hours free for committee work (FA) (12/16/04)
FA: Faculty already has a copy of this.
FA: Before you go on, can you both speak up?
FA: The provost and I worked out a schedule. We took what Lin gave us yesterday afternoon. I actually thought about it and showed it to the provost and he made his comments and I worked out a schedule. Now the faculty understood that what the senate told us to do was that this group would come up with something and they would agree to it. So what I’d like to know is: could we do this? There would be 7:30 a.m. classes on Tuesday and Thursday. Three credit classes can meet Monday-Wednesday-Friday from 3:00 – 3:50 p.m. and from 4:30 to 5:20 p.m. Labs can meet from 8:00-10:00 a.m., 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m., 1:30 – 3:30 p.m. and 3:30 – 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday and Thursday. Evening classes start at 5:00 p.m. or 6:00 p.m. instead of 5:30 p.m.
Admin: Before we adopt this, I would like to check with Metro Transit to see if their schedules will accommodate this.
FA: ok
Admin: And also, I’d like to check on snow removal issues. We’d have ½ hour less time for that. The last thing I’d like to check on is what time our buildings open. A revised schedule may require a different time for opening the buildings. With different times on Mondays-Wednesdays and Fridays and Tuesdays-Thursdays, this might change some people’s work schedules. I want to check on those three logistical items to make sure it works before adopting.
Admin: Do we have the same number of class sessions?
FA: Yes, that is what I was trying to do when I figured this out – to have the same number of class times.
Admin: What we did is: we changed the Monday-Wednesday-Friday beginning at 3:00 p.m. to 75 minute classes so that we can have Monday-Wednesday classes for 75 minutes. That increases the number of 75 minute classes on the assumption that MWF classes beginning at 3:00 p.m. are very hard to get students to enroll in.
FA: They would start after 5:30 p.m. You could start them at 6:00 p.m. if you want. This also helps us with the faculty association meetings. We have a meeting that starts at 3:15 p.m. – and classes don’t get out until 3:15 so we don’t get started until 3:30 p.m. With the new schedule, we would have a better opportunity to start on time.
FA: Do we have evening classes that run from 5:00 – 7:00 p.m. and 5:00 – 9:00 p.m. on Thursdays?
Admin: We have some issues with when the library opens and a couple things to look at and study with regard to this.
FA: Some of the evening classes, for instance, if you have a graduate program that has evening classes that start at 5:00 p.m. They’re not going to be consistent with undergraduate classes that aren’t done until 5:30 p.m., right?
FA: Not unless they’re 400-500 level courses, then the faculty member could have a conflict.
FA: But the teacher gets to decide what their schedule is. If I’m going to teach a class that starts at 5:00 p.m., I’m not going to teach one that doesn’t get over until 5:30 p.m., I’ll teach at a different time. So we may for some evening classes for some programs and want to allow some to start at 5:00 p.m.
Admin: I think we need to look at this for awhile, study it, and come back to it. We need to talk to students about it also.
FA: At this point this is the schedule we’re working on.
Admin: We’re working on it.
FA: Ok.
Admin: I just want to point out that I’ve been involved in trying to do these kind of weekly schedules at two other institutions and this is the smoothest, by far, of the conversations I’ve ever experienced. It’s usually very contentious and controversial.
6. Status of Affirmative Action Search (FA) (2/3/05)
(Handout was distributed)
Admin: We said at the last meet and confer that we would provide a timeline for that search at this meeting. So that’s what’s being circulated. It says “draft time line.”
FA: Thank you, we will distribute this.
Admin: Do you want to comment on this now, or wait until you have a chance to look at it? Does anyone have any questions?
FA: would you mind talking a little bit about the search firm and their involvement in the search so we get clarity about exactly what they’ll be doing?
Admin: My assumption is that they would publish the announcement, they would receive applications, and they would do the initial screening to see that applicants are meeting minimum qualifications so that the search committee could then review a set of those.
FA: Do we know who the search firm will be?
Admin: No, the proposal is that we send out an RFP to select a search firm.
FA: What’s this “up to 6 faculty names to choose from?
Admin: There were 6 members on the previous search committee for the affirmative action position. If faculty would supply 12 names, we will appoint up to 6 of them.
FA: So if we appoint 6, those would be the six, right? Or are you asking us for 12 names…
Admin: Right.
FA: That’s unusual.
FA: Yeah. We don’t have to agree to this today.
FA : I call for caucus. (Faculty representatives left meeting area to caucus)
(Faculty representatives return to the meeting room)
FA: We have a couple of questions, and one of the questions is: since you have this affirmative action process going on and you have the designated officer one that you’re going to be searching, we’re wondering if you had any inclination to combine the two or have you pretty much decided to keep them separate?
Admin: The EEOC recommendations don’t permit the lead investigator and the affirmative action officer to be the same.
FA: Also, we noticed that this search would go through and hopefully come to conclusion at the end of Fall semester. And they’re assuming that, and want verification that the staffing currently for affirmative action would remain the same is that right?
Admin: No one has spoken to me about that. (laughter)
Admin: Presumably.
Admin: I don’t know if there is any sunset on Jaime.
FA: Yeah, I think there’s a sunset – she’s in a temporary position.
Admin: I can’t remember exactly when she was appointed but the woman who’s the office manager there - there may be some contractual issues.
FA: Jaime is office manager for affirmative action?
FA: I think we’re talking about Ann
Admin: right
FA: We’re worried about the affirmative action office.
Admin: Ann especially, manages those records pretty well.
FA: Yes
FA: There should be someone there who knows records as well who manages them in that office.
FA: And the last point is the association votes on and appoints their members. So if we’ve got 6 faculty members we’ll be giving you six names. We’ll take this back to the senate and see what they have to say.
Admin: Are you ready for the next item?
FA: Yes
Admin: Do you think that’s going to set a precedent to give two or three names for the peer review committee?
FA: That’s not a search committee. Not a search committee.
Admin: The issue is university-wide committees vs. departmental committees isn’t it?
FA: From my point of view it’s not.
Admin: I can’t find language regarding this and search committees in the contract any place.
FA: We appoint our members. We vote on them. If we have 6 people, we will be sending you 6 names.
FA: We usually have our members represent a college so if we have 2 representatives from social sciences, we’ll elect them and we will have our representatives choose between those two, not administration.
Admin: you could elect two people from each college - one would be selected
FA: I guess I don’t understand the rationale for selecting those people.
FA: The peer review committee seems to be different. If a case comes up from one college they you have to pick from another college the people who will review those and it seems to be that it would be rational in that case to go ahead and have a number of people who you select from. But, we do have a precedent on university searches of having 6. In fact, we want to bring 6 names.
Admin: Next item
Admin: I might want to add something if I may and that is, the view that 12, for example, are merely giving the president the power to do something that we don’t want him to do is just a very shortened part of the story. The whole story could also be that some wisdom can be applied at that point which could not be applied prior. Sometimes you cannot avoid people being selected for something, then take some rational approach to make the right choices. So it doesn’t have to be as sinister as it looks at first on paper. I just wanted to add that to the equation because it is not as simple as: the president may select. It is much more sophisticated than that. I just wanted to add that because it’s not as simple as …
FA: Let me clarify, we’re not assuming anything sinister. I just don’t get it – I just don’t get the rationale of someone else other than the faculty deciding. We know affirmative action, we have members who come and say they want to serve on a committee and we provide them with information on what they would do. We as faculty elect those people I don’t see why we would want to add another layer to this. I don’t understand the rationale.
Admin: I’m thinking of the cases where sometimes faculty in the past have been elected and have been overburdened already or not in a condition, because of workload or other reasons, to serve.
FA: I don’t know how anyone in administration would have better access to that information about how busy a particular faculty member is or not.
Admin: I was thinking about that selection as a cooperation between two parties to work together, not as a single-handed, strong-handed choice.
FA: The way I see what you are describing is to have 2 or 3 people in reserve in case someone needs to drop out. The point is about representation and election
Admin: I’m seeing something at the moment in a number of searches where it would have been helpful if the faculty association had appointed a few extra names, because we are having people dropping out of search committees. The position I’ve been wanting to take on searches is that a person is appointed by their bargaining unit, they really can’t sit in on the search committee meetings – especially when they’re privy to personnel information. So if you ad alternates, as in the jury system, if you lost one or two – and think of the likelihood of losing one out of 6. It’s pretty big, for whatever reason; especially with some of the accreditation issues and things going on. So if we had some people in reserve, it would be helpful to everyone because then another individual could come and serve right away. .
FA: Are you asking for 6 names and 6 alternates?
Admin: No, just 12 names to choose from and if you select 12, the president would select 6 and then if one of those 6 can’t serve, then we have six more..
FA: We will be putting forward 6 names and if you need more, we could forward 6 more names. I think that the people close to us know us best. The issue goes back to representation. I understand what you’re saying.
Admin: I said this so that you are not under the impression that this is some kind of sinister plan – it’s a little more elaborate than that.
Admin: I call for a caucus (Admin left the room for caucus – faculty caucused in the meeting room)
Admin: We’ll come back to this.
FA In our relationship together we’ve come thru a lot and we have really overcome significant hurdles and significant differences of opinion. I think we’ve come out of it with a much broader understanding of what it means to look at things from different perspectives. I remember a while ago, Roy, you talking about not drawing a line in the sand. Those words have come back to me a lot. Although we don’t feel that we can support the solution that you have set forth, we are very interested in discussing whatever problems there may be and working together to correct them. We understand a search committees are very important to the university. We want to work with you toward resolution. I don’t know how we can do that, but we want to.
Admin: It says draft. When I put together a search committee, it’s not to include/or exclude anybody. But from my perspective, looking at it from an overall representation point of view, I’d like that freedom to appoint somebody from a larger group. I’d be willing to negotiate and discuss this. It’s an issue I’ve given in on for the past 4 years.
Admin: I would like to speak personally about being a candidate for position that reports to the president. I came here 2.5 years ago and it was a huge search committee. There were about 15-18 people on the search committee. I was going to work for the president in sort of an unusual capacity which involves interaction and exchanges about ideology, temperament – is he an early person or the kind of guy who works late into the night, etc. Even though I was treated very well when I came, the search committee made kind of a goofy impression on me because there wasn’t one person on that committee who knew the president - who knew what kind of guy he was. And I wanted to know about his style. I wanted to know if he lived in St. Cloud. And the thing is, even though I was well-treated and I got the job, the search committee members struck me as being people who didn’t have a clue about what my job was going to be, what I was going to do for the president, and they were so uninformed about the relationship this position was going to have that they couldn’t give me any input or judgment as to whether this would be the kind of job I would be good at here. And that, I think, is one of the real shortcomings of appointing people with other interests. Actually, one member told me that she had never met the president, didn’t know anything about him, she lived in St. Cloud, she’d only been here a year, she didn’t really like St. Cloud much and you know, she was serving on the search committee. So…
Admin: Once again, I appreciate the tone and the offer. We will go from here to there. I don’ t want the faculty senate to come back and say “this is the way it’s going to be…” because, actually, we don’t have that language. When Michael came here, you and I and Judy Foster, this is an on-going thing with a search committee being compiled, and we did come to an agreement, but it was expanding the group to 19 people.
FA: As the person who co-chaired that search, I think it was good that we had all that representation there.
Admin: One perspective you will not have would be from my point of view of how the whole university is involved.
FA: That’s why you have administrators on the committee as well.
Admin: We will talk about this again
7. Partnership Agreements: Consultation is a letter from the department chair to the Dean indicating that the department has seen the proposed budget and the date of the department meeting where it was discussed.
Admin: We had some conversation on consultation and I think I said that I was going to write a clarification of what that meant and I haven’t had a chance to draft that yet. I hope to have it at the next meeting
8. Zmora Agreement and Searches in the COE (FA) (2/3/05 again)
FA: In the Fall we discovered there was a search done that was not in compliance with the Zmora agreement. My understanding was that it would be re-searched for next Fall. And in addition, the people who have planned to share that OCE position, they were hired in searches and it is my understanding that those descriptions did not match the descriptions of what it is they’re doing right now. So we need to do those searches and I haven’t seen anything. Nothing’s come across my computer monitor about those searches. I’m concerned that we’ll get started on those too late and we’ll end up not being able to do a thorough search.
Admin: We’ll do these soon
9. Professional Development Funds (FA) (2/3/05)
FA: Michael, you and I talked about this and you wanted me to wait a week and so I’ve waited a week and so…
Admin: I think what we proposed doing is that for faculty who have engaged in professional development activities that are not covered under the specifics of – I forget what article that is –
FA: Professional study and travel
Admin: Right, there are those limitations on what can be covered. Those faculty should submit a request through their department, to the department chair, and if it’s recommended by the department and the Dean, send it to me and I’ll review those and then reimburse faculty for some of those expenditures.
FA: Ok, so then a faculty member would make a request, the department would support it, the chair would support it, the dean would support it and then it would go to you and you would determine whether to support it. And the funds would come from another place.
Admin: We’re talking about retroactive stuff.
FA: What do you mean?
Admin: The issue you raised had to do with the fact that this had happened in the past. I think for future events of that type, departments do have supplies and equipment dollars and those would be the appropriate places for those expenditures to come from.
FA. You mean, anything in the future from today on?
Admin: Let’s say, the next academic year.
FA: Ok, so starting the next academic year. Everything for next faculty year would go through the departments.
Admin: It sunsets this year.
Admin: The point that you raised was that there was a change based on some regulations and that faculty were not informed of that change. We’re addressing that. In future we’re hoping there will be inflationary increases in the supply and equipment budgets and departments will be able to use those funds to support activities that they believe are relevant to their department.
FA: Actually, we’re hoping that that part of the contract will change.
Admin: If that changes, that’s another matter. In the absence of a change, or while we’re waiting for change, this is the way we’ll address that issue.
FA: So Annette could put announcement to all faculty about this. And then I assume that you’ll be putting that announcement out to the departments, is that correct?
Admin: Yes.
FA: In the past, you could not get paid outside of the fiscal year for expenses incurred in another fiscal year. So we’re talking about expenses incurred before June 30th of this year.
Admin: We are talking about this fiscal year.
Admin: And we would expect that there was not only no encouragement, but information be given to faculty to not enter into this practice now, in the remaining weeks of this academic year because our intent was to reimburse those who in good faith, invested money for their research purpose, and didn’t quite figure out what the legal circumstance was, which didn’t allow it. We’re trying to help you out. It is not secondary financing.
FA: But we have faculty who, because they’ve only known about this starting tomorrow, may not have any options other than to go through this process. Right? So that’s why you’re giving us this whole fiscal year.
Admin: We will act in good faith and they should be reimbursed so that they don’t get stuck with the bill.
FA: Did I also understand you to say that in the future there should be more money in department budgets for this kind of thing?
Admin: That’s the intent.
FA: It astonishes me that an organization can require that somebody do something in order to be promoted and then not provide any help for them to do that thing they are requiring them to do.
Admin: I think this will solve the issue.
FA: Yes, let’s hope so.
Admin: I want to be clear that we’re talking about things that are directly related to the professional development of the faculty member, for example, buying a PDA wouldn’t count but buying cell cultures, if you’re a biologist, to do an experiment that you need to do for your research – that does count.
FA: We would appreciate it if you would let your side know that negotiations regarding this would be desirable.
Admin: Yes. Any further comment on this? Can we take this off the agenda?
FA: Yes.
New Business
1. Grade Changes without notification of faculty (FA) (2/24/05)
FA: It was brought to my attention that faculty are discovering that students are being allowed to withdraw from classes maybe a year after the end of the class or their grades are being changed and the faculty are not being informed. I have three specific examples.
One of them was a student in Biology who sometime after the end of the class, the grade was changed to “W” and the faculty member discovered it by accident when they were asked to review something for the student’s submission to a program. When they asked records and registration, they were told that someone in academic affairs said it was ok to change the grade.
There’s another student, and this was in a math class, where the student was apparently allowed to withdraw late. The faculty member was never involved. The student stayed in class and took the final. When the faculty member administered the grade, they discovered that there was a “W.” When they asked records and registration, they were told that student life and development gave them permission to drop that student from the class.
The students wanted to know what their grades were because if they did not pass the course, they would want to be readmitted.
Faculty have said, and what they are asking, is that we create some kind of verifiable way that faculty are notified when students grades are changed. We have been told in Meet and Confer that faculty are informed, but we’re finding out that they’re not informed. And short of looking at all the courses that you’ve taught in your whole career here, every week, to find out, how do we know? We don’t know how many have happened that nobody’s been told about because most of us don’t go back and look every week to see if our grades have been changed. We need something that’s verifiable that people are being told when their grades are changed.
Admin: There are 2 different sets of circumstances under which grades get changed. One of those has to do with the grade appeal process. And in cases of grade appeals, faculty are, in fact, notified when grades are changed. In fact, I just sent a letter that went to a faculty member this week. Lin, would you talk about the other set of circumstances?
Admin: There is the issue of late withdrawals and then what you might call retroactive withdrawals. There is a process in place for late withdrawals that permits faculty to give a recommendation. If you go back and look at that process, you’ll find that even then, there can be circumstances where the student did not approach the faculty member for a recommendation but could go directly to the dean’s office to request a late withdrawal within the same semester that they’d been in the class. If it’s past the first two weeks of the new term, that would be considered a retroactive withdrawal. Deans’ offices can still handle that through their grade appeal period so that everybody’s still fine knowing that might be done. After that new term has begun and after the appeal process deadline for the students, it does come through academic affairs. So I don’t know about the student life situation. It is true that there are some circumstances in which a student will be withdrawn from a class. And unless you care to go back and look at your previous class information, you probably won’t know. Typically those cases are cases in which the balance is between the student’s privacy and the faculty’s educational need to know. I can tell you honestly that in the 9 years that I’ve been working on this, I have never changed a letter grade without the faculty being notified. I’ve never changed a “C” to a “B.” I have never done that. I’ve given a lot of retroactive withdrawals. The cases for which I do that, are the cases that you need somebody in a job like mine For instance, you have a student who was clinically depressed, perhaps even suicidal during the semester when they were taking your class. You didn’t know why they weren’t coming or why they were behaving the way they were. Then the student gets treatment and the physician treating this student has certified that this student has probably been clinically depressed for two years, that they were incapable, during that semester, of successfully completing their class. I’m not usually in a position where I can violate the student’s privacy. I’ve got medical records in my hand and I cannot go back to you and say that I am changing this to a “W” because the student was depressed to the point where I now have medical documentation. The second common circumstance that I grant retroactive withdrawals for are sexual assaults – more than I would like to tell you about. These are the cases that truly break your heart. It’s often a young woman who was sexually assaulted during the term and taking your class, thought she could cope. When she found she couldn’t cope, wound up sleeping all day every day, terrified to go out of her apartment. Lee LaDue brings this person over, indicates that the student has faced up to the assault and is working to come to terms with it and needs help cleaning up that bad semester when the sexual assault occurred. I will give the student a retroactive withdrawal. I will not let you know those details. I never give out those details to faculty. Sometimes it is a faculty member who tells us that a student is in trouble and needs help. I’m not sure how I can protect the student’s right to privacy and your request. So those are the circumstances when I would not go to faculty. If you found the “W” while reviewing your class records and asked me about it, I would not be able to violate the student’s privacy and tell you the circumstances for the withdrawal. The student’s right to privacy supersedes the faculty’s need to know.
FA: Are you saying that if I came to you, you couldn’t say anything? Not even that there was a retroactive medical withdrawal?
Admin: I might be able to say that.
FA: So could we agree that if it’s something like that, we could just say so in a form.
Admin: I don’t think I can do that.
FA: That’s what I’m asking, if there could be something that could be just a standard notification. I don’t think if somebody told me that a student was given a retroactive medical withdrawal that I would question that because I would know that there would be some privacy issues, but I would be informed.
Admin: Why do you need to know that?
FA: Well, if I look at my grade sheet and there’s a “W.”
Admin: What academic need do you have for that information?
FA: What if I’ve been asked to give a reference for this person or I’ve gotten a cold call. Then I would at least know what to say.
FA: What you have now is that faculty don’t trust you. We have to solve this problem. What we have now is a faculty who think that quite often grades are changed and they’re not told about it.
Admin: You’ve given us only 3 examples.
FA: We don’t know how many events there are because we’re not told. To say there are only three examples – that doesn’t – that’s not good enough.
Admin: If you’re saying that there is a lack of trust…
FA: There’s a lack of trust…
Admin: Wait, let me finish. And if we were to send you a notification that said the student was given a medical withdrawal, that wouldn’t necessarily suspend the lack of trust.
FA: Right, but you need to figure out how you can get that trust back. Right now, faculty do not trust the academic affairs office. They don’t believe anymore that you tell them every time you change a grade.
Admin: We don’t – not for withdrawals.
FA: They don’t believe you tell them every time you change a letter grade.
Admin: I don’t think you can tell me one single time.
FA: It doesn’t matter, that’s not the problem, that’s not the problem. The problem is they don’t trust you anymore on this because they have noticed all these retroactive withdrawals that they’re not told about. And then there’s this other one occurred on…
Admin: One thing we can do is check to see whether FERPA or the data practices act prohibits what we can say and what we can’t say and how far we can go. We’ll let you know.
FA: We need to figure out how we get that trust back. That’s really where we’re at right now.
FA: I just want to reiterate that point. It is about trust. I taught at a university, and there are some professional basketball players who were in my class who cheated on exams and got retroactive withdrawals. I was not consulted or given any say in it. Now I know we’d never do that here, but I don’t know that everyone knows that. I don’t know that everyone knows that we don’t change grades from “C” to “B.”
Admin: It’s never happened.
FA: It may never have happened but people don’t know that because they know that they have a retroactive withdrawal that they didn’t get notified about so how would they know that grade changes aren’t happening. It’s not about accusing you of doing anything. I’m sure you’ve done everything above par and appropriately, but is there a special code that could be put on the grade so that we know this was a retroactive withdrawal – medical.
FA: It’s also happened that a student will withdraw so that they can take class from someone else. They are playing the system a little bit.
Admin: Students can withdraw, as you know, until the mid-term anyway. Retroactive withdrawal requires credible documentation before it is granted.
Admin: Id’ like to make a suggestion and perhaps this might help and that is if Lin can possibly provide summary reports. It came up a few years ago with the e-mail investigations. We could not give individual information, but we could give summary reports. Maybe Lin could give you annual reports summarizing how many of certain types of withdrawals were granted.
Admin: It’s certainly possible. It would be very labor intensive. Right now we’re getting an average of 20-25 student cases a week and I figure we handle about 600-800 a year.
Admin: Is there any other explanation, is it medical or are there several reasons?
Admin: There are several reasons.
FA: I think what we have now is a situation where folklore has taken over. Administration has to control the attribution of grades because the institution could be liable in a lawsuit. That could be variously understood across campus. We have your statements today on the record that you are not changing grades. We need to find a way to bring it to their attention and short-circuit the folklore. We don’t want our side to become cynical about handing out grades.
Admin: You’re absolutely right, this is a contentious issue. And if we find it necessary to change a grade, we will notify the faculty and faculty association. There is an obligation on our part, management’s part, to make sure the ability to change a grade is done when it’s profoundly necessary to do so. The case law surrounding grades is that you have the right and responsibility as a faculty member to evaluate the student and administer a grade. What would be wrong is, if you were forced to change a grade. You would have every right to object to administration taking an action like that. If you find out that something like that happened, you should come directly to us. What we do have the right to do is change the grade ourselves, not that we ever do this, when we have a compelling reason to do so. The usual situation, and this would be very rare, would involve cases of proven sex or race bias on the part of a faculty member. I’ve never had to change a grade for this purpose. That’s good. It means that none of you have every done anything that would require that type of action. Administration must continue to make those kind of changes if and when they occur. The only situation that has ever arisen has been a situation where the faculty member was involved. The situation was, the faculty member was sick and could not meet with us about the necessary grade change. The dean and I worked together and made grade changes where the students were given generic “B’s” with a written statement that when faculty member was well enough, she would evaluate and she could change those grades with no question on our part. This was the only way students in the class could move forward with their studies. That’s the only kind of situation where we’ve done that and only with certain safeguards in place. We can look into the possibility of printing summary reports. It would be impossible to get back to individual faculty.
FA If you ever found out – we are getting the impression that the system is not openly transparent.
FA: A letter grade change, those are harder to see I would have to get out my grade sheet and compare. A “W” is much easier to see than a change from “B” to “A.”
FA: My first impression, if agreed, is that the first step would be to outline the circumstances under which grades are changed or other changes are made. That is the first step.
Admin: There are some personal issues that come sometimes where students are in situations where they should not have been in school and they were. Those changes make sense. But we’re looking to the idea of making some kind of a statement that can go to the faculty senate with some of the general exceptional reasons where these changes can take place. We will look into putting out a summary of actions and broad outline of reasons for withdrawal.
FA: Maybe from now on. It’s really an issue of trust more than anything else.
FA: So beginning next academic year we would plan to have and end of semester report or a report once a year...something like that?
Admin: We’ll look at that.
2. Update of the Affirmative Action Manual (FA) (2/24/05)
FA: We took this to faculty senate. We’d like to work with administration to revise the affirmative action manual. A small group of faculty and administrators could work together after the academic year. The work would be short and intense period of time. We’re asking that faculty be compensated for their labor
Admin: Since first discussing this, we have received a copy the hiring manual from MSU Moorehead and a lot of the material in there seems to be pretty relevant to the things that we’re doing. There are some components of it that would be difficult to implement on this campus because we’re larger and we do more hiring than they do. But I think we could adapt that with relative ease to our circumstances so that we wouldn’t have to start from scratch. We may not need to do what you suggested. In the absence of this reference, we might have to go that route, since we have this outline, we may not have to go to that.
FA: Would it be possible…
Admin: I don’t know where that is now – somebody has it.
FA: It would be nice to see the manual.
FA: Is it on the web?
Admin: I will check this out.
FA: Is ours on the web? It was promised that it would be posted there
Admin: There is a PDF copy that I can send to you.
Admin: It should be on the affirmative action site. You should go through HR with a link.
FA: When you find a copy of the Moorehead plan will you share it with Annette?
Admin: Yes, I can make some copies and distribute them.
3. College of Education Summer School non-instructional allocations (FA) (2/24/05)
FA: I had asked about budget for summer school for the College of Education, particularly the money for instruction and projects – specifically, who is getting what.
Admin: I wasn’t sure I could get this by today because the Dean is out of town. I should have it by our next meeting
FA: The FA is strongly insisting that money goes to courses and classroom instruction in the College of Education as well as other places. We’re asking that if there is extra money in the College of Education that needs to be offered to departments within that college for instruction and courses. If those departments in the College of Education don’t need it, then that money should be offered to other colleges for instruction because that money is for instruction not for non-instruction.
Admin: I need to get the information. After I get it, I can respond.
4. Two Semester Registration (FA) (2/24/05)
FA: We’re asking for update. What is happening with two semester registration? The departments are pretty concerned about how this is going to shake out and the impact on schedules, what happens if a class is cancelled. We just need an update on some of that
Admin: The current situation is that we will do this with incoming freshmen as a pilot program. Some issues surfaced after initial discussions. A lot of those students will be able to take some of their core and gen ed courses and some classes in their majors as part of their first year. That will give us an opportunity to assess where the difficulties are and how to proceed with addressing those thereafter. We’re going to look toward expanding it the following year assuming that things go well. If there are course cancellations, we will have to notify students. But I think one of the things we’re able to do with this is that if we see that there is a need for classes or seats in particular areas in the Spring semester, we will have a whole semester to find a way to meet that need; whereas now, we have a much more limited period of time. So I think that we’ll be able to provide a better schedule for students to plan their classes more efficiently and effectively. In the long run we’ll be able to iron out some of the issues that come up such as: prerequisites, co-requisites and things like that, that this will be helpful to students and faculty in terms of planning out their schedule.
FA: Some departments are concerned because they have no idea of what adjunct money will be available to them for Spring.
Admin: People can look at the prior year and plan accordingly. There will be notification so check the web for updates in class schedule.
FA: This makes me wonder if we need to have a printed schedule
Admin: I’ve wondered that too and I know we could save a substantial amount of money if we do that. But some people like to have that hard copy.
FA: The catalog contains important general education information.
Admin: And students have a reference when they are registering on the screen.
FA: So the schedule being submitted wouldn’t necessarily say who is teaching the class.
Admin: They would make their best effort to submit as much information as they have and update it regularly.
FA: There’s also concern about students who owe money to the university. How will that work because now that they will be able to register for Spring – but then they might not be able to register because they are on hold for money that they owed. Are they going to be removed from the classes at the beginning of the Spring semester?
Admin: I think the way it works, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, when a student registers now, they register before they have to pay.
FA: If they have outstanding parking tickets or owe money for the previous term they can’t register.
Admin: That would work same as Spring and Summer. If students have tickets, we purge them out.
FA: So they actually get taken out of Spring classes if at the end of Fall they owed money, they will be removed from classes.
Admin: MnSCU is working on system-wide procedure that includes a mandatory dropping of students who are not paid up by the end of the semester - we used to do that. We’re really watching that closely and commenting on what we can. It might be out of our control at some point.
Admin: The other piece is academic suspension. We let them register. If they have a successful appeal, they are still registered. Rejected appeals are purged.
FA: What about students who don’t pass prerequisite?
Admin: That’s one of the reason’s we decided to start with freshmen.
5. Short-term Study Abroad Programs (FA) (2/24/05)
FA: We want to frame a discussion on policy and begin by stating that my own experience and I think that of others who worked with the staff and have a great deal of respect for staff’s commitment, competence. I’ve been stunned by competence, attitude and professionalism. So the remarks that we’re going to make now are confined to policy questions.
FA: We want to talk about the motion that senate passed.
FA: Last May the Center for International Studies started implementing requirements that had not come to Meet and Confer and Faculty at all. I asked that they cease being implemented. And I thought I was assured that this would not be implemented . But now we’re finding out that it is. We’re working on what we think they should be, but at the same time CIS continues to enforce requirements that have real implications for curriculum and staffing. Senate says: stop enforcing this, go back to what we were doing before. We are going to have confirmed by the end of this semester some sort of recommendation. We would have had that recommendation to you sooner had you asked us to be a party to it. There are some very serious problems that are now being caused by the fact that we were not consulted.
Admin: What are the curricular issues?
FA: There are departments that are essentially not allowed to decide course sizes, they are not allowed to decide what courses they are offering. There are some other issues that have to do with safety in the sense that they’re requiring that all these courses have at least 18 students – they’re requiring that the budgets be based on that. Some of the places that these courses go to – 18 students is not safe. Some of them have an issue of where the environment can only tolerate about 5 people at a time on a trip so what do I do with the other 13 while I have the other five students – if I’m required to set my budget on 18 students I don’t think I’m going to get any more than 9, and I don’t get more than 9, then my program’s not even going to be considered. But if I was allowed to make the budget on 9 students and charge the students the right amount of money then my program would go. So this argument that: your’s is not economically valuable becomes an economic burden.
Admin: I think there are exceptions to that policy that have to do with program proposals for which - these programs are to at least to pay their own way and if they don’t they can’t afford to operate.
FA: Ok. If you’re required to make a budget based on 18 students, that means you divide the total cost by 18. If you know you’re not going to get any more than 9 – you get 9 – the program won’t pay its way. So the set-up the programs don’t get to pay their way because you’re not allowed to base the cost on what you believe the number of students.
Admin: I don’t see why it wouldn’t be acceptable, if there were specific environmental factors that limited the number of students – to put that as a justification in your proposal.
FA: Then you need to instruct the Center for International Studies that should allow this to happen because they’re not doing it. And if they are doing it I want to see it.
FA: I want to come back to a policy point. We never saw this policy. It was enacted and we didn’t know about it. We didn’t have any time for discussion about such things as these smaller classes that might be offered for good reason. So there’s actually no process set up. What we’re asking for is that we have a chance to go back to previously agreed upon policy and have a larger discussion on this whole idea of overseas travel and short-term study abroad programs. I’d like to also encourage us to think as a larger community: what do we mean by a global education. It seems to me that when you establish a baseline of 18, that talks about a certain sort of global experience and excludes others that might be very financially viable and very educationally sound. And it also assumes that we’ve agreed upon what a global education should be. I think we really need to talk as a university about what is appropriate here.
FA: There are two issues going on. The first one is that the faculty are being asked to submit forms and they’re asked that particular requirements be met. We are saying: how can this be asked when they are not agreed upon it?
Admin: We’ve always had policy that the programs have to be financially viable.
FA: But when program must be devised for 18 students, and I’m not allowed to devise a budget for 9 students, then my program won’t be economically viable. So you set it up so that I not going to meet the requirement.
Admin: We’re talking about programs to begin when?
FA: The ones proposed for this summer and the ones being proposed for next summer are being required to devise budgets for 18 students. They are not being allowed to devise budgets on the number of students they think they are going to get. They’re being required to use 18.
Admin: We certainly can address issues for next summer. This summer is pretty well set so there’s not much that can be changed. We can look into this and iron that process out.
FA: We would like to request that one more chance be given to faculty whose applications have been rejected. Regarding self supporting, it’s academically very important to the business school, maybe my dean will find other money. If there were not 18 participants, programs are cancelled. The one size fits all approach being applied.
Admin: I think we do that.
FA: We need to rethink this about what kinds of programs are academically viable. We have global education in strategic plan. What does that mean? How can that support our academic mission?
FA: It’s not just safety, there are pedagogical reasons as well. There needs to be a reason why a program is a certain size.
FA: Let’s be clear on the motion: That the issue of any source of forms for the short-term study abroad program that have not been through the senate be taken to meet and confer and that FA take the position that they be rescinded immediately until formally approved by going through the governing process. That’s the motion.
FA: The policy was adopted without consulting the faculty and was not approved by the senate. We think that that’s a contractual question. Had policy been brought to this venue, concerns would have been brought up and we would have given our recommendations. When that sequence is followed we build strong collaboration and better policies.
Admin: I would like a written copy of motion and will take it under advisement.
6. How do we deal with issues before they become issues (Admin) (2/24/05)
Admin: I’d like to move this group to another level. I’d like you to think about the possibility that at every other meeting, we deal with one or two issues that are synergistic to the institution. Our current agenda is very specific. I would like this group to work together on some issues that may be something that will move this institution forward. This institution will not ever reach its zenith if we do not work together. We’re never going to be the flagship that we want to be if we waste a lot of our energy on drawing the line in the sand. I want us to use our productive intellect and time to build an institution that can be as smooth and productive and cooperative as we can possibly be within the context of governance and contract. So that’s what I’d like to put forward because I’ve seen the change over time, it’s taken the 4 years since I’ve been here. And sometimes we get caught up, and I appreciate the caucus coming back. We’re reworking the affirmative action manual and having heard complexity of the gen ed program, I reached out to community colleges. The previous administration did not believe in reaching out to 2-year colleges. We must, because the graduation rates at North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Wisconsin, out-state Minnesota and Michigan are down. Other campuses will be recruiting our potential students. Western Washington is here – they are contacting donors and others here in our community. If you can, when you have your meeting, identify 2 or 3 issues, maybe once a month we can spend the 2 or 3 hours discussing where we need to go. Why not use that opportunity to move this institution forward? The other thing is, I’ve met 4 dean candidates and I am very impressed by their resumes. We are fortunate to have these high quality candidates who want to come to St Cloud. I want to thank you again for the positive tone of this meeting.
FA: Are you hearing about failed searches in colleges because of salaries?
Admin: Several cases of that have been reported.
Adjourned 5:05 p.m.