Faculty Senate Meeting
December 13, 2005
Location: Penthouse CR1
7:30 – 9:30 a.m.
Officers Present: Dr. Peter Anderson (Chair), Dr. Joe March (Chair-Elect), Dr. Theodore Benditt (Past Chair), Dr. Pat Greenup (Secretary)
Ex-Officio Senators: President Carol Garrison, Provost Eli Capilouto
Senators Present: Dr. Pamela Autry, Dr. Shannon Bailey,
Alternates Present: Dr. John Baddley, Dr. Jennifer Braswell, Ms. Jennifer Long, Dr. Sonya Mitchell, Dr. William Ogard, Ms. Sondra Pfeiffer, Dr. Lucas Pozzo Miller, Dr. Erica Pryor, Dr. Rex Wright
Guests: Mr. Terry Tatum, Dr. Karen Shader, Dr. Rose Scripa, Mr. Gary Mans
Parliamentarian: Dr. Telfair absent with notification
Chair Peter Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:35 a.m. A quorum was present.
There were no press members
attending the meeting. All visitors were form the
The distributed minutes were approved with corrections to attendees’ names.
Chair Peter Anderson updated Senators: (1) faculty development opportunities
supported by Provost Eli Capilouto’s office appreciated by faculty and encourage
faculty to participate in future offerings; the Teaching Portfolio mentoring
workshop completed December 9 and the Master Teacher Workshop is schedule
for December 15-16; (2) Provost Capilouto is appointing a committee to continue
the study of library space and planning; (3) the Chancellor approved Section 2.0,
Appendices A, B and C and the new section 7.5.1 are now posted for the online
handbook at these links: http://main.uab.edu/show.asp?durki=29493 and
http://www.uab.edu/fsenate/home.html at the Faculty Resources icon; (4) the
IDEA Department Chair evaluations have been distributed to chairs and the dean
and full time regular faculty for the respective chair; (5) Higher Education Day is
March 2, 2006 and faculty are encouraged to participate; (6) planning is ongoing
for the new math lab facility as a component of the QEP implementation.
5. President Report: President Carol Garrison encouraged faculty participation with
the Higher Education Day events, announced that UAB has received official
SACS approval and that UAB has been invited to present the QEP at a summer
institute; expressed appreciation to group that prepared the Ford Foundation Grant
and the receipt of a $100,000 grant to support QEP implementation; encouraged
faculty to participate in the December 17, 2005 graduation events to support
graduating students and thanked the faculty for a successful fall semester.
6. Presentation: Dr. Karen Shader, Director of Instructional Technology presented
“Instructional Technology and Blended Learning at UAB” describing the current
and projected services associated with the implementation of the Vista WebCT and
the timeline for introduction of training and services for faculty, staff and students.
This presentation can be accessed from the Senate page and pull down
presentations link at http://uab.edu/fsenate/home.html and additional information
for Instructional Technology is available at http://www.uab.edu/itit ; faculty are
encouraged to submit questions and suggestions as to instructional technology
related services to Dr. Shader at 975-6552 or firstname.lastname@example.org
7. Standing Committee Reports:
A. Curriculum & Research Committee Senator and Chair Jeff Engler updated Senate on student ratings methods with the IDEA pilot study that has been completed and the IDEA results will be reviewed in faculty focus groups in January and the ongoing review of student rating current practices in the academic units; the committee is continuing the review process and will be developing recommendations in the spring term.
The following written report was submitted by Chair Engler.
Curriculum and Research Committee December 1, 2005
UAB Faculty Senate
Minutes for meeting
Present: Roger Gilchrist, Kathleen Martin, Jonathan Harwell, Lucas Pozzo-Miller, Shannon Bailey, Chris Coffey, Tondra Loder, Jeff Engler (chair)
The meeting was convened at 9 am.
The committee reviewed the interim results of the pilot study
During the discussion, several points/questions were raised about the survey instrument:
1. Is it possible to omit questions not related to the course goals outlined by the faculty member?
2. On-line evaluations were thought to be more
desirable, but it was not clear how to assure a high response rate or to assure
a statistically valid sample (as opposed to a small self-selected sample). Suggestions included delaying publication of
final grades or delaying the ability to take the final exam until the survey is
completed. What level of participation
is statistically desirable? The
3. Some upper division courses also include beginning masters or doctoral students. Is it possible to separate the evaluations of undergraduate from graduate students in the same section?
4. Could students receive training in how to do evaluations?
5. To what extent are comparisons of ratings from other universities useful? How would we identify “peer” courses to which to compare?
6. Does whether the course is required or
elective reflect in the student evaluation?
In the coming weeks, the committee will focus on the following questions:
1. What forms do different schools currently use for obtaining student ratings of faculty teaching?
2. What criteria does each school use in evaluating faculty teaching beyond student ratings?
3. Over what time frame (how many years?) should student evaluations be used as part of a broad analysis of faculty teaching?
4. How does the grade earned in the class influence the evaluation?
5. Once the results of the pilot study have been
returned from the
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 am.
B. Faculty Affairs Committee Senator and Chair Mark Lockhart reported that the development of a proposal for periodic career review for all faculty members is ongoing and that the administrator evaluation process for the next three years is being completed.
C. Governance & Operations Committee Senator and Chair Jennifer Long
Requested feedback from Senators as to the email distribution process
within departments and academic units; this information is needed to
implement the Senate liaison communication network.
D. Finance Committee – Senator Ted Bos reported that the subcommittee on
faculty salary and SUG averages is continuing preparation of information
for the Senate; Senator Steve Mennemeyer reported that the committee is
continuing review of the Viva ratings and methods for determination of
customer satisfaction; a survey of the faculty related to health benefits is
being prepared for distribution in spring term.
Written report submitted by Chair Warren Martin:
Campus Planning Committee:
Meeting cancelled due to lack of need.
Finance Committee: The subcommittee dealing with Faculty Salary and SUG average met and discussed ways to share such information with the faculty. Files of the data have been received and will be reviewed and posted on the Senate Web site in the future. Chris Kung, Ted Bos, Bill Ogard and Ban Heng have all contributed to this effort.
Fringe Benefit Committee: No meeting. A substantial question was raised by Stephen Mennemeyer of the ratings of Viva found in US World & News report. Specifically Viva was not included in all of the categories for ratings since they did not wish to share all of their information. Furthermore, their Medicare Managed Care rating of 111 out of 131 with four stars in Access to Care and Overall Member Satisfaction and one star in Prevention and Treatment. More information was sought from Viva and some information was provided by Brad Rollow –the President of Viva- about the ratings in the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting with President Garrison and Provost Capilouto. Brad expressed his desire to serve the UAB community and to continue to strive to do a great job. Part of low rating was due to a lack of desire to pay for accreditation (with accreditation Viva would have moved to 63). However, part of the rating was due to the scores on various outside measures that Viva was actively addressing.
It seems important from the Faculty perspective to continue to determine the faculty feelings about the process. As a result, we are considering using some of the same questions in our faculty survey that the outside agencies use to evaluate Viva quality. We need to spend more time studying the issues and being careful to consider the position of Viva. Brad Rollow is willing to talk to the Faculty Senate.
In our conversations Brad mentioned one significant variable—the use of a standard co-pay for emergence room visits. The cost of an ER visit is much higher than a office visit especially at a Level 1 Trauma Center like UAB. With many people going directly to the emergence room rather than having a primary physician our overall costs are much higher. With the pressures on health care expenses, this issue needs more consideration.
E. Faculty Policies and Procedures Committee- Past Chair Ted Benditt
presented an overview of the minutes of the October 14 and November 18
meetings of the FPPC; the topics before this committee include: (1) family
friendly policies; (2) student ownership of intellectual property and distance
learning rules; (3) faculty handbook review cycle in the future for the online
document; and the revision of the Operating Rules for the committee. The
FPPC minutes are posted on the Senate web page.
8. University-wide committee reports: No reports presented.
9. New Business/Open Forum: No new items were presented.
11. Review of Action Items from December 13, 2005 Senate Meeting
with requests for software to be integrated into the
B. Provost Capilouto encouraged participants of the Master Teacher Workshop and the Teaching Portfolio workshop to share information with colleagues and to support future development of professional learning community with focus on faculty development.
C. Participants of the IDEA pilot study for student ratings will be invited to focus groups discussions by the Curriculum & Research Committee starting in January to follow up with the findings of the pilot survey. Participants are encouraged to share feedback with the committee as a resource for future recommendations development by the Senate.
D. The Faculty Affairs Committee will submit a report to the Executive Committee describing the plan for IDEA administrator evaluation process for 2006. A proposal for periodic career review is being prepared for presentation to the Executive Committee and the Senate.
E. Senators were requested to review the Senate Liaison data for email distribution information within academic units and report to Jennifer Long as to the accuracy of the information.
F. The Finance Committee will be conducting two surveys during spring term.
12. Review of Actions from November 8, 2005 Senate Meeting
A. Standing Committee reports will be presented at the December meeting.
B. University-wide committee reports will be presented at the December meeting.
E. Secretary Greenup will request that the HEP web link be added to the Faculty & Staff Resources link on the Senate page.
G. Chair Anderson and the Executive Committee will follow up on the next steps and further development of the library review and planning process.
H. Office Associate Stephanie Belcher will obtain the two presentations for posting on the Senate page under Presentation pull down.
13. Materials distributed electronically prior to meeting
14. Materials distributed at the meeting
The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 a.m.
Secretary Pat Greenup prepared this expanded DRAFT of the minutes on December 17, 2005. After approval at the January Senate meeting these minutes will appear on the Senate page. http://www.uab.edu/fsenate/home.html