Minutes of FSEC Meeting – September 29, 2004
I. Attending: Ted Benditt, Pete Anderson, John Smith, Pat Greenup, Tim Kraft, Gary Sapp, Beverly Mulvihill, Bill Ogard, Jeff Engler, Mike Wyss and Stephanie Belcher
II. Minutes of FSEC for July 28, 2004 and FSEC for August 25, 2004:
The minutes were approved as distributed.
UAB Faculty Senate Meeting Agenda
October 12, 2004
7:30 - 9:30 A. M.
Possible topics for presentations at future Senate meetings: Dave Corliss to review SACS status. The action by the Senate concerning the COI policy needs to be clarified before the October 12, 2004. James Lowery will be consulted by Secretary Greenup. Stephanie Belcher will obtain copies of the Direction Student Handbook for distribution at the Senate meeting on October 12, 2004.
President Garrison had requested that the meeting be rescheduled for October 6, 2004 at 9am. Few of the members of the FSEC could attend at this time. The discussion focused on canceling the meeting. Chair Benditt will communicate with President Garrison about the next FSEC meeting.
NOTE – Addendum on 10-2-04 --- The FSEC meeting may be rescheduled for October 14, 2004 at 9 am. Final decision about the new date is pending.
NOTE: The agenda item concerning job descriptions for deans,
department chairs, and VP- student affairs will be placed on the next
Secretary Greenup presented the following Timeline and reviewed the steps that need to occur in the coming week. The process is scheduled for faculty to receive IDEA mailings by October 22, 2004.
DRAFT – DRAFT – DRAFT
September 25, 2004
I. Senate received the updated BlazerID listing from Human Resources by September 13 and this accounted for 2 of the 37 letters sent by Senate to those faculty members who needed BlazerID.
II. September 14, 2004 – Amy Gross with IDEA called and asked what are the plans for Senate administering the President and Acting Provost evaluations. We have indicated that we are planning for week of October 18, 2004 for the distribution to faculty.
III. By September 30, 2004 – Senate Chair and FAC Chair prepare an article for the UAB Reporter. This article must be submitted to Reporter on Monday October 4 by 10am, in order to appear in the October 11, 2004 following week issue.
IV. By October 1, 2004 Chair Benditt will notify the APC that the evaluation process is planned for October 18 – November 5, 2004.
V. By October 1, 2004 – Office Associate send the completed forms to IDEA for administering President and Acting Provost feedback process.
VI. By October 4, 2004 – an article will be published in the Synopsis (article was submitted by Pete Anderson on August 27, 2004)
VII. By October 6, 2004 – Senate Chair letter (email letter as a PDF attachment message- see draft attached]) to be sent to all faculty with BlazerID to encourage participation and explain process. The President and Provost will be sent copies of this message as an FYI.
VIII. By October 8, 2004 – IDEA will send AIF to President and Acting Provost and their designated contact if identified. The IDEA will copy the Senate office that the AIF sent and indicate the date for submission.
IX. By October 12, 2004 – Secretary/Office Associate sends the “FIRST ALERT message to faculty” [see draft attached] by academic units. All communications to faculty will be posted on the Senate web page. The President and Provost will be sent copies of this message as an FYI.
X. By October 18, 2004 – SECOND ALERT Message [see attached draft] from Senate Chair to all faculty members by academic unit. This message notifies faculty that IDEA will send electronic questionnaire within 48-72 hours. ATTACHED TO THIS EMAIL MESSAGE WILL BE THE JOB DESCRIPTIONS FOR PRESIDENT AND PROVOST. The President and Provost will be sent copies as an FYI.
XI. By October 18, 2004 – a reminder message [submitted August 27, 2004] will appear in the Synopsis
XII. By October 22, 2004 – IDEA will send the two separate evaluation forms to all faculty members with BlazerID. November 5, 2004 will be the last day for submission of completed forms. Faculty will receive reminders until they complete or the last date is past.
XIII. By October 26, 2004 – Secretary Greenup will send message [see attached draft] to senators to encourage colleague participation and to warn – NOT to forward IDEA email message.
XIV. By October 27, 2004 – Senate to receive the current response rates from IDEA. If the rates are not approaching 65% then the Senators will need to communicate with their colleagues and encourage participation.
XV. By October 29, 2004 – Senators will have been sent a reminder by Secretary Greenup encouraging talking with colleagues and the importance of having a > 65% response rate for the President and Acting Provost. This may require a second reminder to faculty by academic unit from Senate office.
XVI. By November 5, 2004 – IDEA completes data collection.
XVII. By November 19, 2004 – Senate will receive reports from IDEA. Paper reports to be sent to Office Associate by UPS.
XVIII. By November 30, 2004 – Senate officers and FAC Chair will have reviewed the IDEA reports and determine the final steps in the process of reports distribution.
XIX. By December 1, 2004 – reports will be delivered to President and Acting Provost using the Senate tracking/log system. A cover-letter from Chair Benditt will be sent to President and Acting Provost addressing the two week period for review of the reports.
a. The paper reports would be scanned and converted to PDF files. These PDF reports would be stored on CDs (2 copies – one for Secretary and FAC Chair or designee)
b. The tables and comments summary will be hand-delivered to the President in an envelope with a cover-letter from the Senate Chair, the envelope will be marked “confidential and only to be opened by.” This delivery of the package must be documented in the Senate tracking log. The cover letter must clearly state that two weeks is the timeline for review and to submit any concerns to the Chair of the Faculty before the date established that the reports are to be forwarded to faculty. See the letter sent in 2003 to President with the delivery of the Dean reports. See the 2003 in the notebook maintained by Secretary. This letter will need to be revised to address the change in administrators evaluated.
c. The tables and comments summary will be hand-delivered to the Provost in an envelope with a cover letter from the Senate Chair, the envelope will be marked “confidential and only to be opened by.” This delivery of the package must be documented in the Senate tracking log. The cover-letter must clearly state that two weeks is the timeline for review and to submit any concerns to the Chair of the Faculty before the date established that the reports are to be forwarded to faculty members. See the 2003 letter in the notebook maintained by the Secretary.
XX. By December 15, 2004, Senate will receive response from President and Acting Provost. Assuming no major problems with reports, then…
XXI. By December 20, 2004 – THIRD ALERT message [see attached draft] is sent to faculty indicating that the IDEA summary tables will be distributed within the week. The President and Acting Provost will be copied as an FYI.
XXII. By December 22, 2004 – the Chair’s letter [see attached draft], the summary table reports for the President and for the Acting Provost will be distributed to faculty by academic units. The President and Acting Provost will be copied as an FYI.
NOTE: The “sender” of the Chair’s letter and the summary tables is to copy the Chair, FAC Chair, Chair-elect, Secretary, and Stephanie Belcher for each message sent to each academic unit. The date must clearly appear on each message to document when the messages were sent. The Secretary and Stephanie Belcher must print the message sent to each academic unit. The email messages related to the distribution MUST be retained by all Senate recipients until February 20, 2005. Each PDF file must be checked after attached to each message and before sent to the faculty in a specific unit.
· For each email message to Faculty in each academic unit, the Senate Chair, Secretary, FAC Chair, Office Associate must be copied. MUST INCLUDE DATE SENT (need to document that files are attached and readable before sending)
· The Secretary and the Office Associate must print each of these messages to have paper documentation. Note: There is potential problem if the sender’s computer/Outlook does not print with the symbols for files on the printed version of the message. Need documentation of the faculty listing/unit and the files sent and the date the files were sent. There should be two persons checking these materials before they are distributed to avoid “accusations” by Faculty, if there are problems on the receiver end for the messages.
· The BlazerID list for each unit must be checked to be sure that the dean’s names are included in the lists.
· Dr. Scripa and any other identified academic administrators who are not listed with their academic unit should be copied on the Engineering faculty. Senate must identify any other academic administrator faculty with primary faculty appointments in specific units. These Faculty members may not listed in the BlazerID listing given to the Senate for the distribution of emails to Faculty.
· When the Senate “sender” of these reports to faculty/unit has completed the distribution to all units, then the sender should notify via email the Chair, Chair-elect, Past-Chair, FAC Chair (to be prepared for any Faculty feedback or reactions) that the units have been sent the summary tables and the Chair cover-letter.
· The sender must print the “undeliverable” messages – KEEP this data but do not resend. We can resend if a faculty member specifically indicates that they did not receive and he/she request the summary tables.
XXIII. By December 22, 2004,
· The Senate must prepare a copy of the Acting Provost summary reports [tables and comments] to be delivered to the President. The Acting Provost must be notified of this action. A cover-letter from the Senate Chair must be included.
· At this time, the Senate (cover-letter from Chair) must prepare a copy of the President’s summary reports [tables and comments] to be delivered to the Chancellor. The President must be notified of this action. This package must be tracked in the Senate log and should be sent by UPS. The Senate must follow up with the Chancellor’s Office to assure the receipt of the package. (If a decision is made to send electronically, then documentation that the materials were received must be established.)
XXIV. By January 11, 2005, the Chair and FAC Chair will report the response rates to the Senate.
XXV. By January 11, 2005
· January 2005 ----Senate [Chair and FAC Chair, Secretary] follows up with IDEA related to fees and payment. All documentation is maintained in the Senate office and the Secretary has records to place in the notebook for the IDEA process.
· January 2005 -----FSEC, Senators and FAC evaluate the overall process and report officially to the Senate. This final report should be presented to the President and Provost and the Chair of Senate should share the information with the APC.
XXVI. By February 18, 2005 the Senate will have completed a review of the process to determine the opportunities for improvements in the future administrations of administrator evaluations.
XXVII. By May 2005 – The Secretary must compile all records (all correspondence of any type) in a notebook by the Secretary and recommendations for changes/improvements for the next cycle should be clearly documented before May 31 or the end of the terms of office for persons involved in this process. The IDEA process should be documented in a notebook along with a chronology to support the development of the proposal for the next cycle of administrator evaluations conducted by the Senate.
Prepared by Secretary Greenup – September 25, 2004.
Action Items for IDEA Process:
· Chair Benditt will forward timeline to President and Provost and will request who or if they wish to appoint a designee to receive the IDEA message for AIF completion.
· Stephanie Belcher will contact Amy Gross/IDEA to obtain the date due for the completed AIF by President and Provost.
· FAC Chair Sapp, Chair Benditt, and Secretary will complete the preparation of an article to be sent to the Reporter for publication in the October 11, 2004 issue. The article must be at the Reporter office on October 4, 2004 by 10 am.
· Secretary Greenup will work with Chair Benditt to revise and prepare the communications to go to faculty during the IDEA process.
· Stephanie Belcher will complete the required IDEA forms to be sent to IDEA.
· Stephanie Belcher will prepare the BlazerID listing to be forwarded to IDEA.
· Stephanie Belcher will communicate with Tammy in IT to determine if the Senate can have a reminder note posted on the UAB homepage during the time of the IDEA process.
· Stephanie Belcher will post a notice on the Senate web site about the IDEA process and the timeline.
· Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA) – Chair Benditt presented the request to UAB Faculty Senate to join the COIA group. After discussion, the FSEC decided that no action is necessary at this time. The objectives of the COIA are not considered as beneficial to the athletic issues on the UAB campus. Chair Benditt will follow up with COIA and inform them of the FSEC decision.
· FPPC Recommendations
On September 24th the FPPC unanimously passed the following resolutions for review by the UAB Faculty Senate:
1. The FPPC requests that the UAB Faculty Senate request the Provost to implement a plan to insure "that all UAB academic catalogues (undergraduate, graduate, school) include a section on 'non-academic misconduct.'"
It is clear from our deliberations that such policies are often not contained in these documents, thus leading potential misunderstanding concerning the governing policy for both students and faculty members.
2. The FPPC requests that the UAB Faculty Senate request the Provost to implement a plan "to increase the awareness of and ease of access to Direction (the UAB student handbook) and that this plan target all students, faculty members and staff."
It is clear from our deliberations that many faculty and students (especially those in graduate and professional schools) are not aware of this resource, and even for those who are aware of its existence, on-line access is difficult.
NOTE: The FSEC placed these two recommendations on the agenda for the October 12, 2004 Senate meeting.
· Chair Benditt discussed the process for distribution of documents to Senators. The Provost version with the FSEC recommended changes will be distributed to Senators before the November Senate meeting.
· Chair Benditt will prepare a cover letter to go to Senators explaining the FSEC alternate language for some sections of the Provost version of Section 2.0 and Appendix A, B and C. The FSEC changes will be summarized for the Senators. Chair Benditt will explain the process at the October Senate meeting.
· Discussion of Appendix C, Section II, line 33 – change the 14 days to 30 days.
· Discussion of Appendix B, change the 14 days to 30 days.
· Discussion of Appendix A – no changes recommended.
· Follow up actions – Chair Benditt will meet with Provost Capilouto to discuss the FSEC alternative language to inform the Provost of the concerns of the FSEC; Chair Benditt will forward the final revisions for alternative language to Secretary Greenup for producing the versions of the documents to be distributed to the Senators.
· Question about promotion to the rank of professor:
The following issue has been raised regarding promotion to the rank of professor (tenured).
According to §2.6.10 (Provost version, p.22), “The procedure for review and decision for faculty promotions shall follow the process outlined in section 2.6.8.” §2.6.8 (Provost version, p.20) has to do with Review for Award of Tenure.
According to §220.127.116.11, “The recommendation of the departmental committee [if there is one], together with the recommendation of the department chair, shall be forwarded . . . .”
The problem that has been raised is this: On the one hand, only faculty at or above the rank for which someone is being considered may vote. But on the other hand, sometimes a department chair is an associate professor making a recommendation about a promotion to full professor.
Should there be a different way of handling such situations?
After discussion by the FSEC, the decision to take no action or recommend any changes to the Provost version of the Section 2.0 pertaining to this topic.
· SACS process and how to link to administrator evaluation process of Senate
· Review of performance for academic administrators in Provost office.
· Senate budget – funding required for performing an IDEA process for department chairs
· Survey of Department current review activities – Chair Benditt, FAC Chair Sapp, Chair-elect Anderson are conducting a survey of current practices for department chair evaluation by faculty in each of the units.
· Current Status of Senate requests to the Provost – Secretary Greenup will present this report at October FSEC meeting.
· Secretary Greenup sent a request to Chairs of Standing Committees (C&R, FAC, and Finance) to update the FSEC on the status of committees’ work on the Phase I topics/concerns presented by Senators during 2003.
Refer to end of each section of these minutes for the action items and who will be following up on the actions.
· Items 1-6 were completed.
· Item # 7 is ongoing – this is the survey of departments to determine the current activities for evaluation of department chairs. Chair Benditt, FAC Chair Sapp and Chair-elect Anderson are preparing this survey.
· Items 8-11 have been completed.
· Agenda for meeting
· DRAFT minutes of September Senate meeting
· IDEA Timeline
· Development of UAB-wide policies process
· FPPC – 2 recommendations to Senate
· FPPC – COI policy
· Appendix A – Senate and Provost versions
· Appendix B – Senate and Provost versions
· Appendix C – Senate and Provost versions
The FSEC meeting adjourned at 1:40 p.m.
Minutes prepared by Secretary Greenup, October 2, 2004.