The
Regular session – October 9, 2006 – 3:30 p.m. – Jacobson Faculty Hall 102
office: Jacobson Faculty Hall 206
phone: 325-6789
e-mail:
The Faculty Senate was called
to order by Professor Roger Frech, Chair.
PRESENT: Albert,
D. Bemben, M, Bemben, Benson, Biggerstaff, Blank, Bradford, Brown, Croft, Draheim,
Elisens, Fincke, Forman, Frech, Gade, Ge, Greene, Gutierrez, James, Keppel, Knapp,
Kolar, Kutner, Lester, Livesey, Magnusson, Marcus-Mendoza, Miranda, Rambo,
Riggs, Roche, Scamehorn, Schwarzkopf, Skeeters, Strawn, Thulasiraman, Trytten, Vitt,
Warnken, Wyckoff
Provost's office representative: Mergler
ISA representatives: Cook
ABSENT: Badhwar,
Basic, Brule, Civan, Cramer,
________________________________________________________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Announcements:
2006-07 Campus Departmental Review Panel
Faculty development awards
State of
Senate Chair's Report:
Pamphlet
Plaques honoring retirees
Library serials
Health insurance
Election, councils/committees/boards
Resolution of appreciation, faculty enrichment grant
Statement on evolution
________________________________________________________________________________
The Faculty Senate Journal
for the regular session of September 11, 2006 was approved.
The following faculty will
serve on the 2006-07 Campus Departmental Review Panel: Nancy Barry (Music), Noel Brady
(Mathematics), Fred Carr (Meteorology), Pat Daugherty (Marketing), Scott Greene
(Geography), and Irene Karpiak (Educational Leadership & Policy
Studies). The panel will also include
Associate Dean Simin Pulat (Engineering), Associate Dean Meta Carstarphen
(Journalism & Mass Communication), and Graduate Council representative
LeRoy Blank (Chemistry & Biochemistry).
The units to be reviewed are Anthropology, English, Honors, Modern
Languages, Political Science, Psychology, Sociology, African & African-American
Studies, and Film & Video Studies.
The Faculty Senate sent out
the call for proposals for the faculty development awards on September 27. Proposals are due to the Faculty Senate
office on October 31. Up to $2500 is
awarded. Further information is
available at http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/facdev.htm.
Provost Mergler said her
presentation would provide more detail concerning the challenges and
opportunities in meeting the goals the President mentioned in his address to
the Faculty Senate last month. The handouts
she distributed are available from the Senate office. Her first handout was the provost organizational
chart, which, as she said, gets ever bigger and more complicated.
The President has a goal for
maintaining enrollment at about 30,000 students. The size of the student body has an impact on
how we are perceived at the national, state and local level, on our revenue, on
the size of our faculty, and on our academic facilities. To meet this goal, we need to recruit about
3500 direct-from-high school freshmen each year. Projections show declining numbers of high
school graduates over the next decade in adjacent states except
Another issue that is front
and center for the provost is faculty compensation. We hope to be at 90 percent of the average for
the Big 10 and 12 in faculty salaries. The
Employment Benefits Committee forwarded a recommendation concerning health
insurance for next year and also recommended the formation of a blue ribbon
committee to look at the mix of benefits.
We have had an exciting year in recruiting faculty. We have the largest cohort of new regular
faculty (100) ever, which will probably give us a net gain of about 25. The growth will hopefully have an impact on our
student/faculty ratio, areas of enrollment pressures, and strategic research
initiatives. It continues to be important
that we conduct nationally advertised searches.
This fall, 45 percent of new faculty members are females or minorities,
which increases the diversity of our faculty.
Hiring senior level faculty with tenure no longer requires vetting through
the Campus Tenure Committee but does rely on the search committee process to
assess the appropriateness of tenure recommendations.
Our library system is a
member of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Among the 112 university libraries in ARL, OU
has risen from a rank of 92 up to 48, which came about through a ten-year
strategic plan for the library. The
library acquisition budget was increased by $6.5 million through E&G
sources and direct student fees. Because
access to research materials is changing rapidly as electronic technology
evolves, it is timely to review the library with regard to serials acquisition. President Boren asked that we go through a
serials review exercise this fall and is forming a task force to recommend 5-
and 10-year goals for the library system.
Exciting initiatives have
come about in the past year. Dr. Kent
Johnson was hired as director of the Program for Instructional Innovation
(formerly called Instructional Development).
He is charged with assisting faculty in instruction, instructional
technology, imbedding writing into our curriculum, service learning, and
increasing significant learning through innovative pedagogy. Dr. Michele Eodice was hired as director of the
writing center and associate director for instructional innovation and will
work to implement more writing into the curriculum. The two are working closely to provide
additional opportunities to faculty who want to enhance their pedagogy.
This August, all Norman
campus deans joined the provost for a retreat to begin strategic planning. The issues of accountability and compliance will
be impacting the Norman campus and all of public higher education. With the issuing of
Two task forces have been
formed. The one on textbooks is to
ensure access to the most economical and efficient process for obtaining the
best required course materials. With the
many changes in the textbook, publishing, and distribution industries, it is
timely to look at the process. When the
bookstore went to an online ordering system, some of the mechanisms for placing
orders in a timely fashion broke down.
Over 50 percent of instructors had not ordered materials by the
beginning of August, which means students cannot find a used market. A national group is reviewing this and has
had several hearings recently. Legislators
in 19 states have shown interest in how universities provide textbook materials
to students. We need to be proactive and
use best practices from across the county.
The task force has met once and will meet later in the month. The second task force is on the grading scale. We are beginning a four-year process to
migrate our current academic student record system into a new relational
database. Now is the time to make some
key decisions, such as the kind of grading system we will have for the next quarter
century. The task force is looking at the
grading scales currently in use at public research universities. Their recommendation will be presented to the
Norman Faculty Senate and then will be taken to a vote of the entire
faculty. They will also make a
recommendation on how to keep students and faculty informed throughout the
process of building the new system. The
task force is composed of faculty, staff, and students and is chaired by Dr. Joe
Rodgers (Psychology). We are in phase
one, the request for proposals, of the new student information system (OU
SIS). A decision should be brought to the
Faculty Senate in the spring. The OU SIS
project team is headed up by Eddie Huebsch from IT and Brad Burnett, director
of Financial Aid.
The last handout was the provost’s
website. Provost Mergler said she tried
to make it user friendly and make most information just two clicks away.
Prof. Vitt asked whether the
number of
Prof. C. Knapp said the graph
comparing OU salaries to peer institutions seemed inconsistent with the numbers
President Boren presented last month. Provost
Mergler said she prefers to use average salary as a percentage of the aggregate
average salary for our peer group, the Big 10 and 12. Ms. Cheryl Jorgenson, director of
Institutional Research and Reporting, added that only one or two schools in the
Big 12 are comparable to the Big 10 in faculty salaries. The chart the President uses comes from an AAUP
study and includes benefits. Provost Mergler
said both analyses are accurate. However,
she tends to look at the data where we are challenged to do more. The President looks at salaries and benefits,
adjusted for cost of living. The provost
hears from faculty members that in their efforts to recruit, the salary that is
offered makes the most difference. Her
chart is just a slightly different format.
Prof. Forman asked the provost
to comment on retention and graduation and our success in offering courses that
students need. Provost Mergler replied
that the graduation and retention task force meets regularly and looks at what
students need to get graduated in a timely way and whether we are providing the
courses they need. We ask the freshmen what
they have an interested in to determine the courses we need to offer. Currently, there is an increased interest in health-related
careers. We also are trying to eliminate
logjams that would keep students from enrolling in the courses they need and
getting through the system in a timely way.
For example, a hold on enrollment is now triggered when a bursar bill
reaches $250 instead of $50. We need to
have better communication with the HSC so we are aware of forthcoming changes
in the curricular requirements at the HSC, especially in Pharmacy, that impact
our campus. We must be able to predict
and get ready for the changes in student interest.
Prof. Livesey noted that many
units were concerned about the library serials cut or review. Units were asked to identify the journals
they could do without. The natural
inclination is to say we cannot do without any of them. Provost Mergler replied that we have made
significant progress with the library. No
change in acquisitions for FY08 would require $800,000 of additional E&G
funds because of inflation. If the
library received only half the money, what would happen? Many faculty may use electronic resources
now. The library rankings published this
spring were for the 2004-05 academic year.
By spring 2008, we could jump ahead of
Prof. Keppel noted that just
to stay where we are would mean spending more money. Existing journals go up in price, and faculty
would like add new journals. Education secretary
Spellings recently gave a speech on assessment.
Prof. Keppel said we seem to be in good shape to meet what the Education
Department is proposing for higher education.
Provost Mergler said we have many parts of assessment and accountability
that are ongoing. We do not want to get
into the situation that common education has where the government keeps mandating
additional measurements. We always are
looking at best practices. Higher
education will have to define learning outcomes and measure them because there
is a national movement to develop standardized tests that students would have
to take in order to be granted baccalaureate degrees.
The pamphlet, What Do You Know About OU, was
distributed at the meeting. It is a
summary of talking points that faculty might use in discussions with students,
friends, and new faculty recruits.
“Plaques
honoring retirees are now being prepared and distributed after a six-year
hiatus. The responsibility is now in the
office of the Faculty Senate, and we have put in place a procedure that
involves the home department of the retiree and the individual being
honored. The response from the first
group of retirees so honored has been extraordinarily heart-warming. Roy Knapp and Sonya Fallgatter have been the
key initiators of this change, and I thank them for their efforts.
“At
the meeting with the President on October 4, the Executive Committee brought up
some concerns about the confusion surrounding the current library serials
review. The President stated that a
memorandum would be forthcoming to clarify the nature and scope of the present
review. Discussion then shifted to the
question: Where do we want the library
to be in the next decade? We had
previously raised this question with Provost Mergler on Monday, October 2, and
all had agreed that a task force be established. The President asked that the task force
address these questions in the context of the entire library system. To paraphrase him, ‘We’ve finished one
decade; now it’s time to start the second.’
It was stressed that faculty must be involved in this process from the
ground up.
“Nick
Kelly (Human Resources) asked that the following be announced: Benefits enrollment is October 30 through
November 10; enrollment materials will be mailed the week of October 23. On-line enrollment is available this year. The annual benefits fair is Thursday, October
26, in the Union ballroom.
Changes for 2007: Deductible increase from $300 to $500 for
individual, from $600 to $1000 for family; out-of-pocket maximum increase from
$2000 to $3000 for individual, from $4000 to $6000 for family; no changes in
prescriptions.
“There
have been several very recent developments related to health care benefits and the
question of health insurance. The Senate
Executive Committee has identified several concerns about some of the many
issues surrounding the rising costs of health insurance. The primary concerns are the process by which
recommendations are developed and the nature of the information on which those
recommendations are based. On September
22, Robert Dauffenbach (Chair of the Faculty Welfare Committee), Fran Ayres (a
member of both the Faculty Welfare Committee and the Employment Benefits
Committee), and I met with Julius Hilburn (Director of Human Resources) and
Nick Kelly (Assistant Director of Human Resources) to discuss in some detail
our concerns. Mr. Hilburn then raised
some of those issues with the Employment Benefits Committee at its next
meeting. These concerns were further discussed
at great length by the Executive Committee on October 2. On October 4, the Executive Committee met
with President Boren, and we continued our conversations with him about health
benefits issues.
“Where
are we now? President Boren has mandated
a ‘Blue Ribbon’ study panel with a very broad charge. This panel was recommended to him by the
Employment Benefits Committee in a September 5 letter. The focus is now on the formation of the
panel, which will include faculty from both the Norman and HSC campuses as well
as staff representation. The HSC Faculty
Senate has been contacted with a request to provide names of individuals who
might serve on the panel. The Executive
Committee will recommend to the President the faculty to be appointed. We are currently soliciting suggestions for
individuals to serve on the committee, formally through the Faculty Welfare
Committee, the Employment Benefits Committee, and informally through this
request to you. The Staff Senate will
also be requested to recommend names.”
[Although
not reported at the meeting, Prof. Frech wishes to acknowledge the death of the
following faculty retiree: George
Kalbfleisch (Physics & Astronomy), September 12.]
The Faculty Senate approved
the following Committee on Committees’ nominations to fill vacancies on university
and campus councils, committees and boards.
Campus Disciplinary Council –
2006-08 term of Keith Gaddie: Liesa
Richter (Law)
Campus Tenure
Committee – 2005-08 term of Scott
Gronlund: Calvin Byre (Univ. Libraries)
Faculty Appeals Board – 2004-08
term of Christine Ormsbee: Irene Karpiak
(Educ. Lead. & Pol. St.)
Parking
Violation Appeals Committee – 2006-09
term, not filled in May: Linda McKinney
(Instr. Lead. & Acad. Curr.)
Research Council [other] – 2005-08 term of Peter
Gross: Fred Beard (Journalism & Mass
Comm.)
Rita Lottinville Prize for Freshmen Committee – 2006-09 term, not filled in May: Ellen Greene (Classics)
ROTC Advisory Committee –
2004-07 term of Joseph Sullivan, as of 1/07: Al Schwarzkopf (Mgt. Info. Systems)
ROTC Advisory Committee –
2006-09 term of Christina Kulp: Cheryl
McCain (Univ. Libraries)
Student Code Revision Committee
– 2005-07 term of Jeffrey Wilhite, as of 1/07: Jay Shorten (Univ. Libraries)
Prof. Frech said the
motivation for the resolution was to thank someone who had done something nice. The Senate approved the following resolution
on a voice vote: “The Faculty Senate expresses its deep appreciation to the OU
Foundation for the recently announced Faculty Enrichment Grant. We also express our thanks to the various
donors for their generosity and to President Boren for his work in bringing
this grant to fruition.”
Prof. Frech explained that
three statements had been distributed:
Prof. C. Knapp said he
planned to vote against the Zoology statement because in his view, it was
blatantly political and irresponsible. He
did not think it was appropriate for the Zoology department to co-opt the
masthead of the University. The
department has the right to attempt to influence public policy, but this
statement goes beyond that into the political domain. It also contains conjecture, is egocentric,
and in many respects, condescending. When
the time comes, he will ask for a roll call vote so he can distance himself
from the proposal.
Prof. Fincke asked what was
political in the statement. It addresses
an issue in biology that is being misrepresented. Prof. C. Knapp said he was disappointed by references
at last month’s meeting to the gullible public and the suggestion that one of
our state representatives was pandering to the public. He said he did not think it was appropriate in
this forum to make disparaging remarks. He
said he thought Prof. Fincke had said many people would take it as a political
statement. Prof. Fincke replied that she
never said it would be taken as a political statement. It is not meant to be a political
statement. Prof. C. Knapp said he viewed
certain terms as pejorative and inflammatory and found the term, “supernatural,”
offensive. He thought it was going to be
taken out. He had suggested the
alternative term, “theological explanations,” to the Executive Committee.
Prof. Schwarzkopf said he had
a background in mathematics and physics and had spent recent years talking to
legislators. He fully endorses the idea
that science and theology should not be mixed in a classroom setting unless the
differences are being discussed. We
could make the point that science should be science without having to worry
about the motivation of somebody who does not understand the difference. The Zoology and Biology departments have a
right to make statements about their sciences in the languages that they think
appropriate in their environment. However,
in the environment of a general senate, he would prefer the statement crafted
by the Executive Committee. He moved to receive
with thanks the report from the Zoology department and endorse as a Senate the
statement proposed by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee. He said he believed the senators should get
more input from their constituents, though, and vote on the Executive Committee
version next time.
Prof. Fincke said she thought
the Executive Committee statement should be amended to read, “modified from the
OU Department of Zoology statement on evolution.” She said she would like to make a motion that
the Faculty Senate support the OU Department of Zoology statement on evolution
and vote up or down on it at this session.
Prof. Benson pointed out that all Zoology was asking right now was for the
Senate to support its statement, not that it be the Senate’s statement. If the Senate wants to come up with its own statement,
it can do that. He said, “I think we
should support our departments. This was
voted on unanimously by the Department of Zoology.” Prof. Skeeters asked what was objectionable specifically
in the Zoology statement that the Executive Committee thought it had to
change. Prof. Schwarzkopf said he wanted
a general statement using scientific arguments with as few references as
possible to intelligent design. Prof. Frech
said the Executive Committee version would be re-titled to acknowledge the
modification of the Zoology version. Prof.
Schwarzkopf said he would like to be able to sit down with legislators and tell
them that anything that goes under scientific curriculum ought to be evaluated
on the basis of something and say as little as possible about the
alternative. Prof. Benson noted that
intelligent design was being put forward as a scientific theory.
Professors Frech and Forman
clarified that two motions were on the floor, but Prof. Schwarzkopf’s had not
been seconded. Prof. Gade said he
supported what Zoology was trying to do and agreed with what the statement said,
but he believed the revision went backwards.
We have to think about the way others might accept it. The statement the Executive Committee tried
to craft is a statement of science as science.
Prof. Bradford said he knew it was not Prof. Fincke’s fault, but the
timing made it a political statement because it was coming out right before the
general election. He said he did not see
the harm in waiting a month until after the election. Prof. Fincke responded that she tried to
bring it up last spring. She said it was
not a political statement; it was a statement about science, and she did not
see how the statement was offensive.
Prof. Forman called the question on the motion. Prof Fincke repeated the motion: The
Faculty Senate supports the OU Department of Zoology statement on evolution.
Prof. Kutner moved that it be
tabled. Prof. Frech explained that a
motion to table was not debatable or discussable. It cannot be used to kill legislation but to postpone
the vote until the next meeting. The motion
to table failed, with 14 in favor and 18 opposed. Prof. Brown asked for clarification of the
motion. Prof. Fincke said the motion was
the Senate supports the statement on evolution of 9/27/2006, which was voted
positively by all Zoology faculty. Prof.
C. Knapp asked for a roll call vote and agreed to have just the “no” votes
recorded. The Senate approved the
motion, 27 in favor, 4 opposed (Blank, Gade, C. Knapp, Kolar), and 2
abstentions. Prof. Strawn commented that
his abstention was because of his employment with the U.S. Air Force.
Prof. Schwarzkopf moved that
the Faculty Senate adopt the statement proposed by the Executive
Committee. Prof. Frech said it would be modified
to say it was taken from the Zoology statement.
Prof. Schwarzkopf moved to table the motion. Prof. Forman offered to make the motion to
table since Prof. Schwarzkopf had made the original motion. Prof. Benson suggested that the Senate accept
it as a friendly amendment. The motion
to table was approved 22 to 10.
The meeting adjourned at 5:05
p.m. The next regular session of the
Faculty Senate will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Monday, November 13, 2006, in
Jacobson Faculty Hall 102.
____________________________________
Sonya Fallgatter, Administrative Coordinator
____________________________________
Cecelia Brown, Secretary