March 27, 2002
PRESENT:  Young, Sherwood, McDermott for Engel, Kommers, Linker,
          Leech, Taylor for Benham, Erickson for Howard, Stewart,
          Ross, Nehrir, Bradley for Lefcort, Weaver, Locke, Lansverk,
          Bandyopadhyay for Levy, Bogar, Jelinski, McKinsey for Pratt,
          Lynch, Butterfield.

ABSENT:   Hatfield, Morrill, White, Anderson, Peed, Chem Engr, Jones,
          Mooney, McClure, Henson, Idzerda, Fisher, Lynes-Hayes,
          Kempcke, Griffith, Carlstrom.

The meeting was called to order at 4:10 PM by Chair John Sherwood.  A
quorum was present.  The minutes of the March 20, 2002, meeting were
approved as distributed.

Chair's report - John Sherwood.
     - UPBAC met yesterday.  Most of the discussion centered around
     proposals regarding Information Technology.
          - Operations and infrastructure will be separated for budget
          - It is proposed the student fee instituted to help pay for
          Banner remain in place and be used for infrastructure and
          support in student computer labs.
          - An Information Technology Advisory Committee is proposed.
     - The faculty pay plan approved at last week's Faculty Council
     meeting was forwarded to UPBAC.
     - The equal rights resolution approved by Faculty Council last
     week was sent to the Commissioner of Higher Education, Regents,
     and President Gamble.
     - At its March 21 meeting, UGC Steering Committee discussed the
     policy regarding research faculty paid out of grants (included
     under the "Policies and Procedures" material e-mailed from the
     President's Office).  It is recommended all language referring to
     tenurable faculty be removed from the policy, because the Faculty
     Handbook already contains language concerning compensation for
     tenurable faculty.
     - At its March 21 meeting, UGC Steering Committee agreed to
     sending a statement to faculty and professionals that a provision
     exists for employees who do not want to sign the Vehicle Use
     Agreement.  In discussion with President Gamble, Chair Sherwood
     and Chair Elect Howard were told that what is needed from all
     employees is a statement that they've read the policy and
     understand it.  A statement that an employee does not want to
     sign the agreement because of privacy concerns may be attached if
     the policy is not signed.

Nominations for University-wide Committees for 2002-03.
     - A list of faculty vacancies on university-wide committees was
     distributed and discussed.  The list will be e-mailed to Faculty
     Council representatives to distribute within their departments.
          - A Council Liaison to the New Core Committee should be
          added to the list.
          - Jim Linker volunteered to serve as Council Liaison to the
          Undergraduate Studies Committee.
          - Shannon Taylor volunteered to serve as Council Liaison to
          the Core Curriculum Committee.

Faculty Affairs Committee Report - Marvin Lansverk.
     - An Ombudsman proposal is being discussed by Faculty Affairs.
          - Survey results have been tallied from the ombudsman
          survey.  Of 557 surveys sent to faculty, 135 were returned.
          About one-half of the respondents knew of the conciliation
          process.  Of those who have used the conciliation process,
          about half were satisfied with the results and about half
          were not satisfied with the results.
          - Most respondents would like to try the ombudsman process.
          - In a meeting of the President, Provost, Faculty Council
          Chair and Chair Elect, and the Faculty Affairs Committee
          Chair, the conclusion reached was that the Ombudsman should
          report to the Provost.  This protects the President's role
          if the case goes to grievance.  Also, a large proportion of
          the concerns heard by the Ombudsman will probably be in the
          area of academic affairs.
          - Professionals appear to have as great of interest in the
          Ombudsman process as faculty.
     - The Faculty Affairs Committee has been discussing post-tenure
          - AAUP's policy on post-tenure review, adopted in 1983, has
          been discussed.  It can be found at

          - After discussing the AAUP statement and other
          universities' post-tenure policies, three guidelines become
               - Post-tenure review should not be used to make it
               easier to terminate faculty.
               - Post-tenure review should not shift the burden of
               proof for termination from the institution to the
               - Post-tenure review should not be used to limit
               academic and creative freedom.
          - There is doubt as to whether post-tenure review of all
          faculty is cost- and time-effective.
          - Post-tenure review should be designed to identify and
          remediate problems.
          - The University of Montana has a post-tenure review policy.
          It appears that the regents are looking for consistency
          among the units in pre-tenure and post-tenure review.
          - The Board of Regents strategic plan contains language that
          all units will have a post-tenure review policy.  Faculty
          Council is discussing the issue now so a policy that best
          fits MSU and the faculty here can be developed.  All MSU
          faculty currently prepare annual reviews, so it's not
          entirely clear what the Regents had in mind with their
          statement that every three years the universities will
          report on pre-tenure and post-tenure review.
          - It was pointed out that the Faculty Handbook lists reasons
          for dismissal of tenured faculty and that a method to review
          post-tenure faculty already exists, although it is not a
          routine review.
          - Would there be a positive side to post-tenure review?  If
          faculty receive excellent ratings, will there be a reward
          for excellent performance?

The meeting adjourned at 5:00 PM.

Joann Amend, Secretary         John Sherwood, Chair