2008-2009  Meetings  Agendas  Minutes  Senators  Committees

The Senate recognized Senator Robert Miller, Senate secretary. Senator Miller introduced Dreidre Adams, senior secretary for Dr. Marsden, who will be assisting him in recording the minutes. He thanked Dr. Marsden for this support.

Senator Davis introduced Dr. Stephen Byrn as the new Admissions Director for Eastern Kentucky University. Dr. Byrn began as Admissions Director March 6, 2000.

Report from the President: Senator Kustra

Senator Kustra began with a discussion of office hours at Eastern Kentucky University. He stressed how critical it is to be available to our students and the general public, and to have administrative offices open until 5:00 p.m. "Five p.m. is generally the time when offices shut down in the rest of the world. . . . I could set the atomic clock by a good number of our employees darting for the parking lot at 4:29 on any given afternoon. My interest is in dealing with certain administrative offices, where I think it is absolutely critical that we be there for people as long as there are normal business hours operating in Eastern Standard Time." To ensure that academic offices remain open until 5:00 p.m., staff should utilize flex time and student workers. Dr. Marsden will be holding meetings this week with non-faculty contract and staff employees regarding office hours.

Senator Kustra gave an up-to-date report on the budget: "This is absolutely the most critical thing I will do all year. Getting our funding back to anticipated levels is absolutely critical. The House approved a plan for higher education which gives Eastern a 2.7 percent increase in the first year of the new biennium and a 3.7 percent increase in the second year of the biennium. The original budget called for a 2.4 percent increase in the first biennium and 2.4 percent in the second biennium. Some universities were singled out with larger increases--Northern Kentucky University received a 10 percent increase, Western, which is often compared to EKU, received 4.9 percent increase, Morehead a 3.1 percent increase, while UK, U of L, EKU and Murray were all given 2.4 percent increase.

The reason for the differences in the budget allocation is what we all know as "Benchmark Budgeting". Gordon Davies explained last year how Kentucky institutions of higher learning were now going to be measured by some other set of standards other than our own sister institutions. We did not anticipate that this approach would find us ending up at the lowest percentage increase, while someone else moved up to a ten-percent increase. The calculations that were used to determine our budget increase, instead of being an average of our benchmark institutions' funding per student levels, were based on a particular institution that came closest to the 55^th percentile- - which for EKU ended up being the University of California at Sacramento. Western Kentucky University, which got 4.9 percent, was fortunate enough to get Eastern Illinois University. We ended up in the 2.4 crowd.

It is my belief that the benchmark funding was a device by which to reward universities the CPE feels must move forward. There is a strong commitment in this state today to fund Northern Kentucky, not just as a university, but as a region. Policymakers recognize that northern Kentucky is the "great growth area" of the state, and their thinking is that with all of this economic development occurring, northern Kentucky should have the large increases. Northern Kentucky University will no doubt continue to grow just because it is the northern Kentucky region and just because it is located across from Cincinnati. On the other hand, one can make a fairly compelling argument for the fact that if the I-75 corridor is going to grow, we will need more help in a region that is behind, and is clearly in need of resources, clearly in need of new and creative ideas on how to reorient the major mission of the economy in Eastern Kentucky. And here we are--universities such as EKU and Morehead State University--two schools about which I could make the case that they should have been singled out for more funding based on the fact that ours are the greatest challenges. Examine the regions across the state and you find that our region is the one losing population most dramatically, ours is the region under the greatest pressure to enroll more college students. It's going to take recruitment and retention dollars to do that. It's going to take a variety of special programs, and I don't think that's the time when you give a university such as Eastern the 2.4 percent increase.

With all that said, then, I appeared before the Senate Committee on Appropriations and Revenue and at this point I chose to break ranks with my friends on the CPE staff. I chose to differ with them on their analysis of how the money should be distributed, and I argued strongly for EKU to receive a larger portion of the budget. The presidents of Murray, UK and Morehead agreed with me that there simply was not equity in the funding.

I will quote to you two lines from an article from the Courier Journal regarding where EKU stands in priority in the eyes of the CPE staff. The first quote states, "the institutions' presidents busied themselves with an effort to ensure no school got a special advantage. As a result, nobody got enough to make a real difference in terms of quality." The second quote from Gordon Davies saying, "that is exactly the wrong kind of argument to make. With that approach you end up with an equally funded mediocre system of colleges." My response is that we are first of all being charged with mediocrity and secondly, being dealt a hand that guarantees mediocrity in the future years. I not going to accept either one of those things; I didn't accept this job to sit back and let that happen. So I tried to make a compelling case in that committee, and we were heard--we were heard in the Senate committee, we were heard in the House committee, and most of all we were heard in the governor's office. And it was in the governor's office and in the House committee where there was a meeting of the minds. It was decided it wasn't fair to give the universities a 2.4 percent increase when in fact the governor's own state agencies were being given 2.7 percent increases in the first year and 3.7 percent increases in the second year. And so what we did as a bare minimum request was to simply ask that we-all our employees-be treated like all the other state agencies in the Commonwealth. And we won on that one. We are now going to be treated exactly as the other state agencies-2.7 percent the first year and 3.7 percent the second year. That means an increase of additional funding of over $1 million dollars. We will come back to you next month around this time to show you the dramatic difference this $1 million dollars will make. The difference will be shown in faculty salaries and many program interests.

Previously the increases in the base funding were all given to the universities to decide for themselves. And if you had a particularly bad year in the cost of living index, you could go ahead and focus on faculty salaries. If you wanted to focus on staff salaries in the next year, you could do that. If you wanted to put it into recruitment and retention, you could do that. The change today is that the difference between 2.7 percent in the base increase and the 14 percent is in the trust funds. These trust funds are in areas like recruitment and retention, the action agenda for Kentucky, the model colleges of education, and the $1 million dollar fund for faculty development. Some presidents seem to be saying, we'll take it in the trust funds. Other presidents seem to be saying, we don't need to take it in the trust funds because we can make these decisions taking account of our own special needs. For example, we have a consultant study that suggests we are about $1.2 million behind in compensating our staff on this campus. I need flexibility to deal with that. The trust funds do not allow for flexibility and the use of those monies for salaries.

As of today, I think we can declare victory. Let's be cautious, however, because the budget still has to go through the Senate. The Senate seemed fairly optimistic and sympathetic to the concerns we had over what we thought was a system that was not equitable. It helped to have strong voices in the House, the Senate, and the Governor's Office, voices such as Representative Harry Moberly and Senator Ed Worley. I cannot tell how valuable they were in getting us to where we are today. It also helps to have presidents stand together, and it was clear in the Senate Committee on Appropriations and Revenue that we did just that.

The budget process is as follows: (1) the Senate will receive the budget and act on it, (2) the budget will go into a conference committee at the end of this month and in late March or early April we will know what the funding will be, and (3) the Governor will receive the budget, act on it and return it to the legislature. Sometime in mid-April, we will have the final numbers on what the budget will be for the next biennium.

Again, that's a progress report that is a bit more optimistic than the last time I spoke to you, but the hour is still young, and I don't know whether I would count out unforeseen circumstances, but I do feel pretty good about where EKU stands today.

Report from the Provost: Senator Marsden
Senator Marsden deferred his remarks to new business.

Report of the Executive Committee and Senator Chair: Senator Murray

Senator Flanagan reported that Senate member Marietta Patrick passed away this weekend. The Senate appreciates the valued assets that she brought to this particular body, which helped us get through our deliberations.

Senator Flanagan announced that the Faculty Senate Executive Committee met on both February 14 & 28 and has been invited to attend an unveiling and discussion of the findings of the Ad Hoc Committee on General Education. The meeting will be held March 8th at 3:30 p.m. in the Ferrell Room of the Combs Building in conjunction with the Department Chairs Association meeting. The two groups will get together and give us a preview of things to come. Dr. Gary Kuhnhenn will place a detailed description of the General Education product on the web shortly after some of the meetings.

Dr. Marsden informed the Senate that Bob Edwards of NPR has declined as May commencement speaker. Dr. Kustra's office reported that David Dick, who is the former correspondent for CBS and whose son is the head anchor at Channel 27, has accepted the offer to speak at the May Commencement. Mr. Dick's credentials were passed around for review.

Ground work for granting on a case by case basis of EKU degrees for our students who have departed early to go on to professional school, graduate and become meritorious has been discussed. At this particular time, no action or decision has been made.

Dr. Marsden revisited the IDEA questionnaire and the quantitative information moratorium. The background of that decision and the logic behind it was presented to him. He recognized that this was going to mean that he was in full compliance with the fact that it will executed as planned in the Fall 2000 for a 3 year moratorium.

The Faculty/Staff Handbook will be separated into two publications, the Faculty Handbook and the Staff Handbook. Minor editorial changes may be made in the process, but the Executive Committee was assured that no substantive changes will be made without consultation.

The proposition that all new department chairs have to be granted tenure upon assuming their duties was presented. This potential policy is aimed at removing the problem of having untenured people making tenured decisions on faculty in their unit. At this time, no action has been taken.

Report of the Faculty Regent: Senator M. Thompson

Senator Thompson reported that the Board will be together at Spring Break at the National Governing Board Conference in New Orleans.

The Board will be meeting the last Friday of the month. Senator Thompson will let you know the exact location. The April meeting usually focuses heavily on the budget.

The Board members have been calling Senator Thompson, and some have been disturbed and angry about the CPE recommendations regarding the distribution of money and particularly about program review-the timing of that announcement about program review and the way the release was worded. Several are asking what they can do and what they should do.

Senator Thompson invites faculty to let her know what your concerns are what issues you may want to discuss this period of significant change at our University. If you have meetings you would like to invite her to, please contact her. Faculty can also arrange meetings in the faculty lounge to converse with her.

Report from the COSFL Representative: Senator Harley

Senator Harley announced no report at this time.

Report from the Student Senate: Mr. Pace
Mr. Pace not present. No report.

Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities:

Senator Steinbach - no report.

Reports from Ad Hoc Committees:
Senator Flanagan reminded committee members that annual reports are due in April and reports should be given in writing to the secretary to be added to minutes.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

NEW BUSINESS
Senator Spears made a motion that the Senate establish an ad hoc committee to study the creation of shared faculty positions. This position would allow for two faculty members to share one faculty line. Senator Anderson seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion passed. The chair will appoint an ad hoc committee.

Senator Marsden congratulated students from the Department of Technology who took first place in National Robotics Competition in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Among their competitors were former winners from the Air Force Academy and Duke University. One of the honors is that the EKU flag will fly in the Challenger Mission next August. "I'm going to challenge our President Kustra to ask the commander of the Challenger to return the flag to our campus."

Dr. Marsden reported the results of the Promotion and Tenure Committee. There were a total 68 applicants. There were specifically 34 tenure applications and 45 promotion applications. Of the 34 tenure applications, 30 were approved with one pending. Of the 45 promotion applications, 36 were approved with one pending. There were 3 tenure applications denied, of the 3, 2 appealed and were denied; 1 did not appeal. There were 8 promotion applications denied, of the 8, 3 appealed and were approved, 3 appealed and were denied, 2 did not appeal. Dr. Marsden differed on two cases, and of the two, he reversed his decision on one appeal.

Dr. Marsden circulated a document for information only which emerged from the Academic Affairs Committee regarding revisions in the admissions criteria. There are two scheduled open forums. The first is on March 7 from 4:00 - 5:30 p.m. and the second, March 10 from 10:30 - 1:00 p.m. These sessions are held prior to bringing the final document to the April Senate meeting.

Dr. Marsden announced that three task force committees have been created specifically to deal with topics of immediate concern. The first is a task force which consists of six individuals from across the University to look at statistics courses and a potential duplication of statistics courses.; The second is a task force for the possible creation of an Associate Degree in Liberal Studies. He said we are looking at that as a possibility, but we are fully aware of the political difficulties of getting such a big program through. Nonetheless, the Student Success Council believes that having a two-year degree program that will help ladder our students towards success is an important consideration, and so we are proceeding with the planning process. Third, we have established the Faculty Development Task Force to address issues regarding the enhancement of professional development for faculty. All of these task forces should report back by the end of the academic year.

Dr. Marsden circulated a draft of an Academic Program Review Process document that has been developed by Dr. Libby Wachtel in her role as associate vice president. "Program review is a topic of considerable discussion. Our process should be collaborative, deliberative and should involve the entire community. Please look it over and provide feedback to Dr. Wachtel at your earliest opportunity."

Senator Flanagan announced that materials from the Council on Academic Affairs were submitted to the Faculty Senate for Approval. Dr. Marsden made the motion to approve the report from Academic Affairs dated February 28, 2000. Senator Falkenberg made a motion to separate from the whole--two approvals for the programs and to consider the enrollment management proposal separately. Senator Janssen seconded the motion. Motion passed.

The two degree programs: New Program-M.S. in Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Senator Flanagan opened the floor for discussion on any other issue that was handed out in the Council on Academic Affairs report. Senator Falkenberg had questions regarding Banner discrepancies: "Should these discrepancies not be returned to the faculty rather than be a acted on by the Senate?" Dr. Rita Davis explained that they should go back to the department but if they have not been sent, it may mean that the matter has been cleared up by the Council on Academic Affairs. Concerning the dismissal policy: "Does it deny the student the right of asking for an appeal?" Dr. Marsden explained that the intent of the policy is to give the student an opportunity to take time off, regroup and reconsider their options. It only applies to those who are in serious difficulty. It is an ethical issue of not giving them false hope, thereby wasting their time and money.

Senator Falkenberg moved to postpone action on information and corrections on Banner until April. Motion was seconded by Senator Janssen. Motion passed.

Senator Falkenberg spoke against the motion on student dismissal. After clarifications prompted by Senator Strong's question about the process, given by Dr. Davis and Dr. Marsden, and many further questions about the clarifications, the motion passed by majority vote.

President Kustra and Dr. Marsden have asked the Faculty Senate to compile a list of 10 to 12 regionally successful people for their consideration from which to select commencement speakers. Please email to Senator Flanagan any names to add to this list and provide a short biography of each person.

Dr. Marsden reported that the Faculty Senate Executive Committee did endorse Mr. David Dick as the May commencement speaker.

Senator O'Connor asked for a list of task force members to be announced. Dr. Marsden will have the task force list announced.

ADJOURNMENT
Dr. Marsden moved to adjourn at 4:55 p.m.