January 16, 2019 Minutes

Faculty Senate Minutes

January 16th, 2019

SUB 233

3:10- 4:30 pm

I. Call to Order

a. Meeting was called to order at 3:10pm

II. Approval of the December 12, 2018 meeting minutes

a. Correction: motion to approve the honorary degree was made by Kevin McPhee and not Kevin Amende

b. Jim Meyer moves to approve. Ed Dratz seconds. Approved

III.  Start of semester address to Faculty Senate by President Cruzado

a. Regents Professors

b. Carnegie Classification

c. Helena, MT Legislature

d. Graduation Rages

e. Romney Renovation

IV. Welcome to New Senators!

a. Faculty Senate “role and scope”

1. Old and New Business: Proposals to Faculty Senate on which approval is requested by the body

2. JAGS, CPC, Graduate Council, items heading to BOR and some Registrar items come to the senate for approval/endorsement

3. Academic Proposals that come to the Senate:

A. New Programs and Program Changes

B. New courses

C. Honorary and Posthumous degrees

D. Academic Policies-Internship Policy

4. Non-Curricular Items: Policies

A. Procedures and standards of the Faculty Handbook

B. Those pertaining to faculty development, quality of educational resources and optimal learning environments.

5. Flow of Business

A. New Business: First Reading and Q&A Session

B. Senators have two weeks to discuss with colleagues in their unit: Updates suggested or issues raised.

C. Old Business: Updates presented > motion to approve > debate by senators > end of debate > vote on motion

D. Exceptions: Academic course proposals

i. Presented in Senate as new business

ii. Comments solicited to members of Faculty Senate Steering Committee

iii. Discussion and vote by Faculty Senate Steering Committee on the following Tuesday

6. FS Executive Steering Committee

A. Abbie Richards

B. Eric Austin

C. Michael Brody

D. Susan Dana

E. Brendan Mumey

F. Leila Sterman

G. Carl Yeoman

b. Roberts rules of order

c. Agenda structure and general order of business

d. If senators want to bring something to FS how do they go about it? It is submitted and reviewed by the steering committee. If they feel it is a good fit, they will bring it forward for review.

V. \Old Business

FYI: Courses approved at Steering Committee

1. M 021: Co-Requisite Support for M121Q College Algebra

2. GEO 585: Minerology for Science Teachers

3. MSSE 518: Master Teaching Strategies for Science Teachers

4. NASX 542: Research Praxis in Native American Studies

a. Update on Amended Workload Policy Status (approved by Senate 12/12/18)

1. Minor change made to add the word “primary” to the term “academic unit”

2. Amendment presented at JAGS and MSU Legal was OK with it – pending Provost’s final approval

b. Workload Policy Guidelines

1. Most recent version is the Dec 10, 2018 version-available on the Faculty Senate Website

2. Last semester: language changed in the beginning of the document

A. “The guidelines are not policy.  They are guidelines to be used internally in developing the actual plans.  They represent guidance on the interpretation of the policy requirements.”  

B. “A workload plan should provide role assignments that encourage and incentivize faculty performance.  The university supports the university-wide development of workload plans to enhance workplace equity and productivity, thereby enhancing scholarship and learning on campus.”

C. “While recognizing that faculty Percentages of Effort (POE) necessarily differ across academic units, disciplines, and even individual contracts, the unit workload plans should allow faculty across campus to make different, but equally valuable, contributions based upon their interests and skills, and the needs of the department.”

D. “The Workload Policy and these Guidelines are meant to create a common understanding of workload so that faculty who are fully engaged make contributions identified as important within their units and across the university.”

E. Other parts, relatively unchanged

3. Are there any deal breakers within the document?

A. Engineering doesn’t like the example of workload (% of teaching). Even though this is just an example, it is confusing and could be more realistic to what an actual workload would look like. Many senators agree. Perhaps we should just take the example out?

B. Will wait until next meeting to try and vote. Getting closer.

4. Is there something that is still missing?

A. Any other suggestions from departments, JAGS is meeting a week from today and they would like to get your suggestions the day before that in order to be presented.

5. Moving Forward:

A. Abbie compile’s changes

B. JAGS discussion of changes Jan 23

C. Bring back to Faculty Senate Jan 30 for possible vote

VI. New Business

a. New Courses

1. BCH 446 co-convened with BCH 546

2. EENV courses are part of the fairly new Environmental Engineering program

3. EQUS 498: Equine Internship-Restrictive electives to keep it to those who are in the major

A. Is it common for Internships to have such little information? Yes, generally they are vague because each internship will be different.

B. PSCI 339 was offered twice as a special topics course. Summer online only. High demand for the course.

4. ECIV 526: Geotechnical Aspects of Earthquake Engineering

5. EDCI 543: Introduction to Curriculum Design and Assessment

6. Course Renaming: EDCI 553: Diversity, Special Needs and Classroom Management

b. New Program - Certificate in Arabic

1. Rationale:

A. Coursework (4 Arabic language courses) exists at MSU

B. Currently no minor in Arabic exists

C. Provide a credential to students who complete all four courses

D. Will motivate students to continue in the program

2. Initiative came from the students, not from faculty. Would like to have something on their transcript to show that they are taking Arabic courses-otherwise it would not show up.

3. Is there a number of credits minimum for a certificate?

c. Program Changes – Master of Arts in Teaching

1. Background:

A. Approved in Faculty Senate March 2018

B. Approved by Board of Regents September 2018

C. Designed for those with a non-teaching bachelor’s degree to achieve initial licensure to teach in Montana’s public elementary or secondary schools

2. Changes

A. Course sequencing to reflect the timing and span of “in-school” experience

B. Source substitutions to accommodate 36 credit limit and demands for licensure.

C. Course renaming of EDCI 553 to reflect course content and current terminology in the field

3. Online program except for a residency done over the summer

4. Education: Working with Math to accommodate the need for more math in this curriculum.

5. Longer period of supervised work during teaching

VII. Informational Items & University Updates

a. Relationship Taskforce

1. Added Nicolas Yunes (Assoc. Prof. in Physics)

2. Listening sessions held with faculty, staff and students

3. Discussions with faculty at other institutions

4. Current step: draft policy changes that align with what we have heard from the MSU community

5. Once we have a draft to show we will get a lot more feedback

b. University Council – Policies under review

1. Changes to the Facilities Use Manual amendments

2. New Policy: Web Accessibility Policy

3. Comment period through January 30, 2019

                http://www.montana.edu/legalcounsel  Click on “Proposed Policies”

4. What about a website on another server? If it is linked to your work at MSU it should be ADA accessible also.

c. Cell Biology and Neuroscience

1.  Articles in the Chronicle

2. As Faculty Senate leadership, Chair and Chair-Elect are very aware of what is going on and have been involved in conversations in meetings with leadership, CBN faculty, administration, etc.

3. Have given this much thought. At this time feel that a prolonged discussion in the FS meeting forum would not be productive. Want to be clear that they are committee to this and want to ensure transparency. Committed to protecting and enhancing the practice of shared governance. We are all residing in the same house. Many will have questions and maybe some serious concerns. Want to do that in a way that maintains balance in the FS body. In an effort to do that, do not see a meeting in 90 being the answer and solution. Please send comments and concerns to:

[email protected] 

[email protected] 

The goal is to keep the communication open and go forward in a productive way. Want to see a positive outcome for faculty and the students that we teach.

A. Comments:

i. Will we hear from the CBN people at this meeting? We can. This is not a policy that we will approve or vote on and that is what the meeting is for. We can use the public comment section for comments.

ii. Can we ask the people from CBN to come to the meeting to answer questions? If we ask one person will that one person be one sided, or should we ask for a group to come?

iii. Don’t really understand what is going on, but would like to know more. It is important. Would like to hear more and not just 5 minutes worth of comment at the end of the meeting.

iv. CBN rep for FS says they are all united within the department.

v. Newspaper said that 11 faculty members that signed a particular letter. How many did NOT sign the letter? All faculty are united on this.

VIII.  Public Comment

a. Steve Stowers, Cell Biology & Neuroscience

b. Valerie Copie, Chemistry/Biochemistry

c. Michael Reidy, History and Philosophy

d. Renee Reijo-Pera, VP for Research & Economic Development

e. Tomas Gedeon, Mathematical Sciences

f. Michael Brody, Education

g. Provost Mokwa, Executive VP for Academic Affairs and Provost

h. Frances Lefcort, Cell Biology & Neuroscience

IX.  Adjournment

a. Michael Brody moves to approve. James Meyer seconds. Meeting is adjourned at 4:43pm.

Next Faculty Senate meeting is 3:10-4:30pm on January 30, 2019 in SUB 233

A downloadable PDF of this information can be found here.