Index of Topics –  March 9, 2009

          EXHIBIT A:  Approved  4/6/09

Candidates for 2009-2011 Faculty Senate – Announced

 

University Planning Council Charge – Discussed

 

Administrative Review Process – Discussed

 

 

WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

Regular Meeting – March 9, 2009

 

Call to Order

Matthew Liao-Troth, 2008-2009 Faculty Senate President, called the Senate to order at 4:04 pm.  Liao-Troth welcomed twenty-six (26) Senators, two (2) ex officio members, the Legislative Liaison (1), three guests (3), and the recorder (1) for a total of thirty-three (33) people.  (see attached roster).  

 

Items from the Senate President:

Approval of Senate Minutes.  

Senators accepted Senate minutes of February 23, 2009 as written.

President Liao-Troth announced:

·       Ten-minute DVDs have been prepared with examples of teaching and research for the March 18th “Faculty Serving Washington” Day.

·       Two Forums remain with Paul Bauer, CFPA Dean Candidate on Thursday, March 12 at 4 pm in FH3 (Open), and on Friday, March 13th at 2 pm in OM465 (Senate and UFWW).

 

Items from the Administration 

§    President Shepard commended Western graduates of whom 30% are admitted to the UW School of Medicine in contrast to only 15% from the University of Washington.

§    Shepard pointed out that no decisions have been made in the budget proposals that will be posted to the web this week.  The proposals, the results of several months work, must include the process that was used to arrive at the percentages and openly show how particular proposals follow logically from previous analyses. 

§    Shepard announced that the open meetings to be held on March 18th and 19th (and which will be webcast) will be a listening opportunity prior to attempting a budgetary process for the university as a whole. Shepard added that the real work is done initially in finding alternatives and developing what the principles will be.

§    Provost Murphy announced that he has completed the promotion and tenure cycle for this year, and was privileged to be reminded of the excellence of this faculty.

§    Steve Vanderstaay, Vice Provost Undergraduate Education, reported that he is reviewing pilot programs to be used for teaching evaluations. 

 

Items from Associated Students

Andrea Goddard, Associated Students Vice President-Academics reported that the AS Board is currently considering increasing the Student Technology fee from $17 to $25.

 

Items from UFWW 

Bill Lyne, President UFWW, reported that: 

·    UFWW and the CFR are working to ensure that faculty are appointed to legislative boards.  These boards are expected to effect large systematic changes in the State of Washington in the coming years.

·    Lyne and WEA are focused on ensuring that the rules governing distribution of the federal stimulus money are adhered to with regard to Higher Education. 

·     Faculty can expect to see calls for nominations for UFWW officers in the upcoming election cycle.

 

Constituent Concerns 

Liao-Troth reported that despite setbacks due to illness the Special Merit Committee will be meeting twice in the upcoming week to complete its work.

Agenda Items: 

Standing Committee Minutes – Reading and Acceptance (Exhibit B)

STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES – Reading and Acceptance (Exhibit B)

Committee

Date

Action and Commentary

Academic Coordinating Commission

2/17/09

Accepted.  Combining GER Cte, CATL and WAG

Academic Technology Committee

2/11/09

Accepted.  STF; budget scenarios; printing costs

University Planning Council

2/11/09

Accepted. LEAP, VSA, FYWG:  Steve VanderStaay

 

APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS  (updated)–Tracy Coskie, Appointments Officer

The following faculty has been nominated to represent their areas in the Senate elections:

Area A: Spencer Anthony-Cahill, Chemistry; Branko Curgis, Mathematics;

David Hartenstine, Mathematics; Chris Suczek, Geology,

Area B:  Mick Cunningham, Sociology; 2 additional faculty required

Area C:  Kristin Denham, English; Thomas Downing, Philosophy; Daniel Rangel-Guerrero, MC&L;

Ryan Wasserman, Philosophy; Michiko Yusa, M&CL 

Area D:  Erin Hazard, Art

Area E:  Shawn Knabb, Economics

Area F:   John Feodorov, Fairhaven

Area H:  Joanne Carney, Elementary Ed; Bridget Kelley, Special Ed

 

DISCUSSION 

University Planning Council – Draft Charge

·       Senators discussed a draft revision of the charge to the University Planning Council which proposes an expanded role in the budget, and includes Vice Presidents and more faculty as voting members.

·       Chair Downing explained that the need for increased transparency in budget processes and insistence on the faculty’s role in planning are both reasons for the expansion. With Vice Presidents, especially of Business and Finance, included, there should finally be feedback and data which has not always been that accessible or forthcoming.  A decision as to whether administrators who attend get voting rights on a faculty committee is still to be decided, as well as defining whether this committee will take an active role or simply be advisory.

·       President Shepard supports giving such a committee with both faculty and administrators a try.  He suggested that as a general principal there is much better decision-making when both administrators and faculty are together in the room.  Provost Murphy agreed that it would be stronger to have faculty and vice presidents at the table at the same time both at the beginning and at the end of the budget processes.

·       Steve VanderStaay added that he thinks the committee charge should include not just review of strategic plan but also review of success as we strive toward these goals such as progress toward recruiting and retaining the students that we want.  He suggested that at present we are not that good at sharing data already in existence, and that there is much information that we could learn from that data.  His office would love to share with faculty what data shows; that information would make us much more grounded in our progress toward specific goals. 

·       Senators suggested the importance of fair representation from all the colleges, and definition of how representatives from the colleges are chosen.  Smaller colleges may be challenged in finding representatives to serve on so many university and faculty committees.

·       Matthew Liao-Troth conducted a straw poll by which Senators favored this new charge as the direction in which faculty would like to proceed.  Liao-Troth will bring this back to the Senate Executive for editorial comment plans to bring an action item at the next meeting. 

Administrative Review – Draft of Process from Green Bay

·       Senators discussed an administrative review process adopted from the University of Wisconsin at Green Bay which is supported by President Shepard.  Shepard would like to schedule his own review at six months into his term.  The Board of Trustees will do what is known as a “360” evaluation (feedback sought from subordinates, peers and supervisors) for Shepard, and Senators can also do a review from the faculty side to see if this format will work.

·       Liao-Troth reminded Senators of a motion to create an administrative review adopted in the Senate minutes of April 4, 2006.  This document suggested reviewing 15 positions.  Three of the colleges, however, could not provide representatives for the committee, and some who could serve then retired before the committee was formed.

·       In a review the summary report of the committee would be available to anyone, but the confidential details would be limited to the committee itself.  The primary purpose is to provide feedback to the person so he can see how his performance is going.  The composition of the committee is not specified in the Green Bay draft; that is an area to be decided upon by Western faculty. 

·       The Senate motion of 2006 recommended a rotating cycle of administrators to be reviewed every 5 years.  There are questions about who would do the institutional research and data collection.. The Board brings in outside consultants for its review processes.

·       In response to some faculty reluctance to begin such a process, Shepard reported that any kind of performance appraisal can be challenging.  But this has to be seen as most successful in it purpose of helping people improve in their job; it is not mean to be a criticism, and is not tied to reward.  Shepard commented about what he learned from previous reviews:  “I learned a lot of stuff.  We were dropping the ball on some things. At another place it was obvious that I needed to replace a person.  We want to have this process in place before problems show up, and then you can fix it before it happens.”

·       Some faculty were concerned that they could be identified through their responses, especially when they identified gender.  Shepard suggested that revealing gender may indicate that perhaps the person surveyed does not realize that he is affecting males or females differently.

·       Another Senator commented that “360s” are a phenomenal way to learn the occasions where what you are doing is wonderful, and where you can also get information on how you can improve. This is a very useful tool to attempt to do an even better job. 

·       Others suggested that this will be a lot of work for the reviewers.  We might want to end up with one small committee per person being evaluated.  Writing up the comprehensive report might be quite time consuming.  The timeline ought to be set up and followed.  At the same time the persons who would be affected have not seen this yet, and there are some things to work through.  Shepard replied that there are online ways to streamline a lot of this. Summaries can be brief, and best handled face to face in a meeting, where a person can be told that is what we think these things mean; that requires less effort that a written report. 

·       There are also questions related to composition and oversight.  A clear description of how all personnel will be included in the applicable questionnaire is required. Liao-Troth will discuss with the Executive in preparation for continued Senate discussion in Spring Quarter.


 

 

Adjournment: 

Senators adjourned at 5:47 pm

Rose Marie Norton-Nader, Recorder, 3-9-2009

 

                                                                                                _______________________

                                                                                                Chuck Lambert, Secretary

 

 

Roster of the 2008-2009 Faculty Senate

 

 

Senators 2008-2009

 

 

 

 

 

09

1

Anderson, Roger, ACC Senator

  A

P

 

Senate President 2008-2009

 

09

2

Anthony-Cahill, Spencer, ACC Senator

  A

P

 

Matthew Liao-Troth

 

10

3

Buck, Stefanie

G

P

 

Past President (not Senator)

 

09

4

Coskie, Tracy, Appts & Elects Exec

H

P
 

Jeff Newcomer

 

09

5

  Cunningham, Mick

  B

P
 

Ex Officio

 

10

6

  Derrington, Mary Lynne

H

P

1

Bruce Shepard, University President

P

09

7

  Downing, Thomas, UPC Chair, Exec nv

C

P

2

Dennis Murphy, Provost

P

09

8

  Fewings, David

E

    P

3

Roger Gilman, Rep., Provost’s Council

--

09

9

  Friday, Chris, History  (1 yr term)

At Lg

    --

 

 

 

09

10

  Friesen, John, At Large, Exec

D

    P

 

Past President, LegisLiaison. and ASVP

 

10

11

  Gleeson, Madge

D

--

1

Jeff Newcomer, Past President, Exec

P

10

12

  Gilbertson, David

E

P

2

   John Purdy, Legislative Liaison

--

09

13

  Gogrof-Voorhees, Andrea

C

    P

3

  Andrea Goddard, ASVP Academics

P

10

14

  Hearne, James

A

P

 

 

 

09

15

  Helms, Ron, Library Senator (2 yr)

B

P

 

Guests

 

10

16

  Lambert, Chuck, Secretary, Exec

H   

--

 

Steve VanderStaay, VPUE

P

09

17

  Larner, Daniel, VP & Parliament ,Exec

F

    P

 

Paula Gilman, Executive Director, Budget

P

09

18

  Larson, Nikki

A

P

 

 

 

09

19

  Liao-Troth, Matthew, Senate Pres, Exec

E

P

 

Recorder:

 

09

20

  Lyne, William, UFWW Pres., Exec nv

C

P

 

Rose Marie Norton-Nader

P

10

21

  Marshall, Robert

C

    P

 

Senators Present

26

10

22

  Meyer, David

D

    P

 

Absent or Excused

(4)

10

23

  Pearce, Scott, Senator to UPC

C

    P

 

Ex Officio

2

09

24

  Reedy, Christopher

A

    P

 

Legislative Liaison, Past President. Guests

4

10

25

  Springer, Mark

E

P

 

Recorder

1

10

26

  Stout, Karen

  C

--

 

 

 

09

27

  Suczek, Chris

A

P

 

 

 

09

28

  Vulic, Kathryn

C

P

 

TOTAL PRESENT

33

10

29

  Wang, Grace

G

P

 

DATE:  March 3, 2009

 

10

30

  Wright, Diana

C

P

 

 

 

Article III.  Faculty Senate:  The Faculty Senate is empowered to speak and act for the Faculty in University affairs with particular responsibility in the areas of curriculum, academic programs, Faculty salary, Faculty status, scholarly activities, and all matters relating to the welfare of Faculty, the education of students, and the academic mission of the University. The Faculty Senate is limited to 30 voting members elected by the Faculty, and the President of the University, the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs of the University, and a college dean appointed by the Provost serving as Provost's Council representative as ex officio non-voting members.    (Faculty Handbook, page 55)