April 21, 2021 Minutes

Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes

April 21, 2021

3:10pm – 4:30pm

         I.            Approval of FS Minutes from April 7, 2021

a.       Tomas Gedeon moves to approve. Andrew Hill seconds. None opposed. No abstentions. Approved. 

       II.            Information Updates: 

a.       Retention and Graduation Relative to Strategic Plan (Chris Fastnow, Director of Planning and Analysis)

i.      Overall rates from the Fall Institutional Report: https://www.montana.edu/opa/Fall%20Institutional%20Report%2020201104.pdf 

A.      Top, orange line: First time, full time students-a subset

B.      Yellow line: All new undergraduates. Includes FTFT and FTPT students.

C.      Brown line: 6-year grad rates (FTFTF)

I.            About 50% more than 10 years ago

D.      Green line: 4-year grad rates (FTFTF)

I.            Eight semester timeline

II.            Almost three times as many as compared to 10 years ago

E.       Looking for Opportunity/Equity Gaps

ii.      Strategic Plan metrics with attention to equity gaps:

A.      Retention

https://tableau.mus.edu/#/site/bozeman/views/StrategicPlanCPMetricsOverview/Metric1_1_6Retention?:iid=2  

B.      Increase retention rates for students in the categories on the chart

C.      First generation students Would like to see that go up

D.      Veterans’ benefits-increasingly small cohort. Would like that to go up as well. 

E.       Adult learners-25 and older. Generally going in the right direction. 

F.       Disability accommodation. Haven’t been able to track that long. Will continue to watch that. 

G.      Underrepresented race/ethnicity. Broken out for each minoritized group. Want to see this go up. 

iii.      Graduation

https://tableau.mus.edu/#/site/bozeman/views/StrategicPlanCPMetricsOverview/Metric1_1_6Graduation?:iid=2  

A.       FTFT and FTPT and transfers. Not quite to our 60% target just yet.

B.      First generation. We are going in the right direction. 

C.      Veterans. Similar to the last chart.

D.      Adult Learners.

E.       Disability-do not have the data yet.

F.       Underrepresented race/ethnicities

 iv.      How were these benchmarks/targets fixed? 

A.      2018 Strategic Plan creation process. 

B.      We are underperforming compared to other institutions like ours. 

C.      These are targets we want to keep shooting for.

D.      Realize some of these are stretch, but we want to try. 

v.      What have we done that has moved the needle so far?

A.      Data shows a theme of connection to the university, and also that the university is a place they see themselves in the future. 

I.            If students don’t have/see the connection, it will be harder for them to overcome situations/shortcomings.

II.            Community support plays a part.

III.            Individual dreams about what they can do, play a part. 

vi.      What can we do?

A.      We can influence students’ connection to the university. Show them the “why” to why they are here.

B.      My have physical or mental challenges, or their family member(s) might. 

C.      Freshmen 15. Students who would have finished anyway, are finishing faster. 

I.            Asking students to take 15 credits isn’t enough. 

II.            We have more consistent advising. 

III.            Courses are easier to find and register for. 

D.      Connections to faculty are very important to student success. 

E.       Build connections, help students articulate “why”.

F.       Use date to inform where our interventions might do the most good. 

G.      Example: Nursing curriculum change. 

I.            Looked at how long it was taking students to get through the program and realized it was a long time. 

II.            Changed up curriculum so they could get through faster. 

H.      Hilleman Scholars

I.            Students who might need a different approach. 

II.            Help students get passed their barriers. 

vii.      Questions: 

A.      Rob Maher: Regarding the individual narratives vs. statistics, do each of the bars in the charts comprise enough students (e.g., thousands) that a handful of students either way doesn't represent more than 0.1% ?

I.            Students are in the 100’s

II.            Some of our individual groups are small.

III.            Rob Maher: One student could matter. One student could move the needle. 

B.      John Neumeier:

I.            2019 Chronicle of Higher Education did an article on grad rates at US colleges.

a. Five of Montana’s, including MSU, were in the poorest category. 

b. MSU is in the lowest 7% in graduation rates.

c. Has OCHE thought about this? It makes the cost of education so high. Cost to get out of MSU with a degree is very high. 

d. What discussions are going on to help this?

i.            Planning Council recommends some priority goals with a short time focus. 

A.      Strategic investment proposals aligned with those goals have been funded. 

ii.            We are seeing movement. Agree, we should be laser focused on doing better. 

iii.            Movement in the four-year rate is a testament to things changing. 

iv.            Our faculty have the capacity to engage with students and make change. 

v.            Faculty moral: Especially TT Faculty has the potential to make an impact on student retention. 

A.      John Neumeier: Students affect our moral too. 

B.      Don’t remember ever talking about retention in any departmental meetings. 

viii.      Chronicle of Higher Ed Almanac Data comparing MT to US - Edhttps://tableau.mus.edu/t/bozeman/views/CHEAlmanac-MTUS/TableofContents?:showAppBanner=false&:display_count=n&:showVizHome=n&:origin=viz_share_link       

ix.      https://tableau.mus.edu/t/bozeman/views/CHEAlmanac-MTUS/TableofContents?:showAppBanner=false&:display_count=n&:showVizHome=n&:origin=viz_share_link 

     III.            Undergraduate Courses and Programs Second Reading

a.       Courses

i.      BIOH 104 : Basic Human Biology w/lab (3/30/2021)

ii.      EBME 301 : Engineering Analysis of Physiological Systems (3/30/3021)

iii.      EBME 480 : Biomedical Engineering Design (3/31/2021)

iv.      WRIT 300 : Rhetorical Theory in Writing Studies (3/31/2021)

v.      WRIT 310 : Researched Writing (3/31/2021)

vi.      HSTR 365 : The History of the Ancient Near East (3/31/2021)

b.       Programs

i.      Move the Child Development option out of the Early Childhood Education & Child Services degree (ECCD-BS) and into the Human Development & Family Science (HDFS-BS) degree.

ii.      Retitle the Early Childhood Education & Child Services B.S. degree to the Early Childhood Education: P-3 B.S degree

    IV.            Graduate Courses and Programs Second Reading

a.      MB 510: Immunology (4/5/2021)

      V.            Undergraduate Courses and Programs First Reading

a.       Courses

i.      ACT 245 : Introduction to Bike Maintenance (4/13/2021)

ii.      ACT 246 : Introduction to Mountaineering (4/13/2021)

iii.      CRWR 310 : Intermediate Fiction Workshop (4/19/2021)

iv.      CRWR 311 : Intermediate Poetry Workshop (4/19/2021)

v.      CRWR 312 : Intermediate Nonfiction Workshop (4/19/2021)

vi.      CRWR 410 : Advanced Fiction Workshop (4/16/2021)

vii.      CRWR 411 : Advanced Poetry Workshop (4/19/2021)

viii.      CRWR 412 : Advanced Nonfiction Workshop (4/19/2021)

b.       Programs

i.      ANUR-BS : Accelerated Bachelor of Science in Nursing (4/13/2021)

ii.      NURS-BS : Bachelor of Science in Nursing (4/13/2021)

    VI.            Graduate Courses and Programs First Reading

a.       Programs

i.      CERT: Professional Certificate in Geospatial Science and Analysis (4/19/2021)

ii.      MS : MS in Materials Science (4/19/2021)

   VII.            Policies from JAGS (Joint Academic Governance Steering Committee)

a.       Policies up for Revision

i.      Grievance Procedures 3/10/2021

A.      We did not receive any comments from Faculty Senators

B.      Ed Dratz moves to approve. Tomas Gedeon seconds. 

C.      Thing it’s much better than it used to be. Input was considered and it was adjusted. 

D.      Poll: 30 in favor. None opposed. One abstention. 

ii.      Annual Review 4/15/2021

A.      We did receive comments on this. We tried to address the concerns that you had. Jennifer Glad, Legal Counsel, helped us with that. 

I.            Regarding approval by the college RPT committee. 

a. Dept head conducts the review, if disputed it is supposed to go to the dean. If put on a PIP, not meeting the PIP would trigger the RPT review. 

i.            Bob Mokwa: The departments have the opportunity to address the review in the departmental role and scope document. Some departments use committees to do this. It can be very beneficial to have that input. 

ii.            John Neumeier: Second paragraph in the introduction. 

A.      Jennifer Glad: It is not inconsistent. Helps with transparency. Having that language in there will help them understand the scope and bound, and what the impact is. 

B.      A little redundancy can be a good thing. Reinforces.

iii.            Laura Black: When unit supervisor doesn’t provide reviews in a timely manner, what is the recourse? 

A.      Jennifer Glad: Because this is a faculty handbook, this was not added. If a manager fails to perform, there are options the university has to deal with that. They do have their own performance expectations. 

B.      Bob Mokwa: We do track that information. We make sure they are conducted thoroughly. Deans, in general, take it seriously. 

C.      Laura Black: It would be helpful if you looped around for those who are missing reviews. 

iii.      Performance Review Post-Tenure4/15/2021

iv.      “Tenure track faculty are governed by the faculty handbook and accompanying policies and procedures.”

v.      Non-tenure track faculty at MSU are governed by the collective bargaining agreement.*

vi.      Please share the draft policies with your faculty for their input.

vii.      Comments: 

A.      John Thompson: Point 2 b- We had proposed taking out number 3 because in reality it is only two years. It was clear that some kind of wording needed to go into the section about how long a faculty member is a PIP. As it is now, it sounds like it’s three years. 

I.            Laura Black: Stumbled over this wording as well. 

II.            Jennifer Glad: In reading it, number 2 and 3 are essentially the same. 

B.      John Thompson: Confidentiality?

I.            Understand that faculty can get support through the process. 

II.            Jennifer Glad: We did make a change so that there is consistency. Wording did make it sound like there was a different confidentiality clause than other documents. 

C.      Can we get an idea of how long the “period” could last?

I.            Brandon Scott: Section four of the annual review policy it says that a PIP cannot last more than two years. 

D.      Ryan Anderson: Is the faculty member able to bring in things that happened before the PIP?

I.            At each stage of the RPT process, the faculty member has an opportunity to respond. 

II.            Both sides would have a say through this process. 

III.            Feel it limits risks in research. 

a. Would that be part of your departmental role and scope.

b. Brandon Scott: Community based research takes a lot of time. Driving to these locations, doesn’t give as much time for service, etc. We wrote that into our dept. role and scope because of that. If it’s an issue in your field, it should be in your role and scope. 

E.       Please send us any comments.

   VIII.            Public Comment

a.       None.

     IX.            Executive Session: Discuss Chair-Elect Position

a.       Senators entered executive session. 

      X.            We are meeting next week, on the April 28th. 

     XI.            Adjourn

a.       Meeting was adjourned at 4:35