The University of Oklahoma (Norman campus)
Regular session - November 11, 2002 - 3:30 p.m. - Jacobson Faculty Hall 102
office: Jacobson Faculty Hall 206   phone: 325-6789   FAX: 325-6782
e-mail:   web site:


The Faculty Senate was called to order by Professor Ed Cline, Chair.


PRESENT:       Abraham, Beach, Bozorgi, Bradford, Brady, Cline, Devenport, Ferreira, Fincke, Frech, Gensler, Gottesman, Havlicek, Henderson, Huseman, Kauffman, Knapp, London, Magid, Maiden, McInerney, Milton, Newman, Pender, Ransom, Robertson, Rodriguez, Rupp-Serrano, Russell, Scherman, Sievers, Striz, Taylor, Thulasiraman, Wheeler, Wieder, Willinger, Wyckoff

Provost's office representative:  Mergler
ISA representatives:  Lauterbach
UOSA representatives:  Haigh, McFayden


ABSENT:         Baldwin, Carnevale, Cuccia, Davis, Dhall, Hanson, Hart, Hartel, Lee, Madland, Morrissey, Tarhule, Vale, Whitely






Status of issues for 2002-03

Nepotism policy

Remarks by Athletic Director Joe Castiglione

Senate Chair's Report:

Student retention

President Boren's letter concerning the budget

Computer policies

Research compliance policy

Computer policies






The Senate Journal for the regular session of October 14, 2002 was approved.





The status of issues brought to the Faculty Senate for 2002-03 is attached (Appendix I).  Prof. Cline noted that the issues of research compliance, student retention, and computer policies were nearing completion.  A task force will be formed to review revisions in the regents policy manual (see 10/02 Senate Journal) and will be composed of three faculty from the HSC and four from the Norman campus.  Prof. Cline pointed out that the revisions could generate some changes in the Faculty Handbook, such as the matter of renewable term faculty.  Research issues, such as start-up funding and contracting for laboratory renovations, are under discussion by the Senate Executive Committee.


President Boren approved the revisions in the nepotism policy approved by the Faculty Senate at its October 14, 2002 meeting (see 10/02 Senate Journal).





Athletic Director Joe Castiglione distributed a few copies of the Athletic Department annual report and student athlete handbook (available by e-mailing Mr. Castiglione).  He said all the OU coaches want to raise the bar each year athletically and academically and do things with class and integrity.  Mr. Castiglione said it was his first opportunity to address the Faculty Senate.  He has met with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee every year, and he meets with the HSC Faculty Senate once a year. 


He commented that academic support and the quality of academic life for student athletes are priorities.  Referring to the annual report of graduation rates, he pointed out that student athletes continue to perform better and better in the classroom.  The cumulative GPA for nearly 500 students is 2.96.  Over 80 percent of the student athletes graduate who remain here throughout their years of eligibility.  A large percentage of those who do not have taken a professional opportunity.  However, the Athletic Department works hard to get those students back to campus to finish their degrees.  The graduation rate usually averages 46-49 percent; this year’s rate was significantly lower.  It is reflective of a tumultuous time in athletics here.  Most of the freshmen who came that particular year did not stay here, and that was generally attributable to the changes in coaches.  Next year’s rates will significantly exceed the student body graduation rate, mostly because of more stability in coaches.  The rate will go from 36 percent to 74 percent in one year.  Another small downturn will occur after that, then the rate will be back on track. 


The Athletic Department is very concerned about a particular change in NCAA initial eligibility rules.  The NCAA voted to increase continuing eligibility standards but in essence lowered the initial eligibility standards.  In other words, it will be easier to get in but harder to stay in.  The NCAA will allow its members to ignore test scores, and it increased the number of core courses.  Mr. Castiglione said he was concerned that secondary schools will be pressed to give high profile high school student athletes certain grades in core courses, and that will lead to grade inflation. 


The cost of intercollegiate athletics continues to go up.  It is vitally important to the athletic director and to his staff to be fiscally responsible.  When he arrived, the athletic budget was $26 million; however, the revenue picture was only $22.5 million.  For the third straight fiscal year, the Athletic Department has balanced its budget, which is now $36 million.  No tax dollars go to the Athletic Department.  All operations and projects are privately funded.  In the 1990s, the department had accrued a great deal of debt, around $12 million, which the university had carried.  Mr. Castiglione worked with the university administration to establish a repayment plan.  He wants to get to a point where the Athletic Department is cash flowing and handling its entire fiscal operation.  Last year, the department was scheduled to pay back $100,000 but actually paid $647,000.  He would like to get the debt repaid as soon as possible.  The repayments are scheduled to increase over time.  Athletics is just one part of the overall mission of the university.  The department will continue to strengthen or create partnerships with academic units, such as the programs with the library, College of Business, and College of Engineering. 


Mr. Castiglione said the department has an exciting vision for intercollegiate athletics at OU.  Its mission statement is “Inspiring champions today.  Preparing leaders for tomorrow.”  The department wants student athletes to feel that they can be champions in anything they attempt while they are on campus and to be champions in the classroom and in life.  The capital campaign goal of $100 million was surpassed in two years and is still going.  The Athletic Department mission is what is making great things happen.  The department has had incredible support from the people on campus.  Many of the coaches and student athletes are stepping forward to represent this university in the way they should.


Prof. Magid asked how long it would take to repay the loan.  Mr. Castiglione said the $12 million would be repaid over 20 years, and the payments would increase.  It is a graduated payment plan because it was developed when the Athletic Department was getting itself in position financially.  The department is no longer depending on the university to cash flow operation and now has a formal way to repay the campus.  Prof. Magid asked about the source of the loan money.  Mr. Castiglione said the money came from general operating dollars generated by auxiliary operations, not from state appropriated funds. 


When asked about the current status and future plans for Title IX compliance, Mr. Castiglione said the university had been following a gender equity plan since the 1990s.  The institution is allowed to meet one of the three prongs allowed under Title IX, and that is a sports program that reflects the interests and abilities of students on this campus.  Another prong is a formula for showing continuing progress in sports sponsorship.  More and more campuses are moving toward proportionality since most of the court cases have been argued over that point.  Right now, we are in compliance, and it is monitored throughout the year. 


Prof. Watts asked for more information about the recent ruling on eligibility.  Mr. Castiglione said he supports the philosophy behind academic reform.  The concern centers around the fact that graduation rates have not risen as hoped since the NCAA increased the initial eligibility standard.  A disincentive clause would impose some sort of penalty on schools that do not have appropriate graduation rates.  One issue being discussed is the calculation of graduation rates.  Often times a student’s athletic participation or lack thereof leads him to transfer somewhere else, and the original school never gets credit if he graduates.  Dr. Gerald Gurney, Associate Athletic Director of Academic Affairs, added that the NCAA reform program would open the front door by permitting a student with a low SAT score to be admitted if he had a high grade point average.  However, with the changes on continuing eligibility, a student would have to pass a larger percentage of degree requirements each year—40 percent after two years, 60 percent after three years, and 80 percent to be eligible for a fifth year of eligibility.  Beginning with fall 2003, there will be significant changes in eligibility rules. 


Prof. Henderson noted that a growing number of student athletes are pursuing post-baccalaureate degrees, and that seldom shows up anywhere.  Mr. Castiglione said that was correct, but professional opportunities are more numerous than they have ever been in the U.S. and overseas.  Some may come back and graduate but outside the window for which the department gets the credit.


Prof. Knapp asked about the number of coaches and assistant or associate athletic directors.  Mr. Castiglione said there were 16 head coaches, seven assistant/associate athletic directors, and generally two assistant coaches for each sport.  The department has a total of 188 employees.  He pointed out that the Athletic Department owns and operates three residence halls and dining halls, which adds quite a few employees. 


Mr. Castiglione said he appreciated the opportunity to speak to the Faculty Senate.  He said he thought the Athletic Department mission reflected what Oklahomans want for their athletic program.  He promised that the commitment to integrity is strong.





Prof. Cline reported that President Boren’s mother passed away last Thursday and told the group where memorial contributions could be made. 


Last year a task force was formed to study student retention.  The task force was composed of three faculty members:  Roger Harrison, chair, Mike McInerney, and Jack Kasulis.  Their report was distributed at the meeting (Appendix II).  One positive aspect is the steady increase in graduation rates between 1990 and 1995.  The task force made four recommendations.  The report has been forwarded to the president's task force and to the Norman campus deans.  Prof. Cline thanked the task force for its work on this important issue and said any questions could be e-mailed to him.


Copies of President Boren's letter about the budget crisis was distributed at the meeting (see Issues).  Prof. Cline said the letter presented a strong case for tuition deregulation and, in particular, why we need tuition increases in excess of the currently mandated seven percent.  Last year, the average tuition increase in the Big 12 was 14 percent; OU’s was 7 percent.  If we continue to have increases at seven percent a year, we will dig a deeper hole for ourselves relative to the schools in the Big 12.  He encouraged the faculty to circulate the letter.  The OU regents approved the fee increases, which will add some revenue, but it does not come close to solving the problem. 


Two computer policies, Information Systems Security and Acceptable Use of Information Resources, will be considered by the Faculty Senate at this meeting.  Other less critical policies will be proposed later on.  Both of the proposed policies have undergone extensive revision and may be further revised.  These policies are critical enough that they need to be put in place as soon as possible as interim policies.  If any problems are found later, the Faculty Senate can address them.  He asked the senators to circulate the policies widely and to get feedback.  Further discussion will take place at the next meeting. 





A research compliance policy was approved by the OU regents 1/9/02 -- (Compliance Program).  Prof. Cline explained that the proposed revisions discussed last month ( were a result of a collaboration between Chief Counsel Joe Harroz, Compliance Director Cori Loomis, and a task force chaired by Prof. Mike McInerney. 


Prof. Wieder asked about the actions the Senate was being asked to take.  Prof. McInerney said an interim policy was approved by the regents in order to comply with federal regulations.  Prof. Cline added that the document the Senate approved would go to the regents for action.  Prof. Wieder said he did not know how the Senate was competent to make judgments about some of the areas, such as billing and coding practices and the policies concerning gifts and self-referrals.  Mr. Harroz said the document was legally adequate.  The question was whether it was acceptable to the Faculty Senate.  Ms. Loomis noted that the task force appointed by the Faculty Senate had people with expertise in each of the areas.  Furthermore, she talked to the HSC Faculty Senate about the billing and coding issues.  Prof. McInerney said the task force had representatives from the Tulsa medical school and HSC. 


Ms. Loomis summarized some corrections that had been made in the document:

1.02 should read: It was revised on December 3, 2002 [replaces "2003"].
Reason for change:  typo.

6.08.3 should read: … in accordance with all applicable laws and institutional policies.
Reason for change:  "laws" inadvertently deleted from the text given to the Faculty Senate.

Last sentence of 7.03 should read:
Mandatory training and/or counseling will be the preferred corrective action and will be used whenever appropriate.
[Replaces the sentence that read:  For more information regarding correction action, see Section 3.2 of the Faculty Policies and Information contained in the Faculty Handbook.]
Reason for change:  The sentence was deleted because it duplicates language included in the revisions to the Faculty Handbook and may modify the relationship between the university and staff. The Compliance Program applies to both faculty and staff, so we have to be careful not to state things in the Compliance Program that only applies to faculty. 

Section 8.01 should read:
… University officers, department chairs and other management personnel will be involved in the educational process by (i) identifying areas that require training; and (ii) supporting the training process.  The Director of Compliance will be actively involved in the design and implementation of training and educational programs.  A Training Program relating to the areas covered by this Program will be developed and incorporated into this Program by reference the training process.
Reason for change: Some words inadvertently deleted from the text given to the Faculty Senate.

Exhibit B, third sentence now reads:
Such policies reflect [replaces "include"] the University's commitment to adhere to all applicable statues and regulations.
Reason for change: improve readability.


Prof. Wieder asked why this policy had the scope it did.  Prof. McInerney replied that all universities are required to have a comprehensive compliance document to be eligible for federal funding.  Ms. Loomis explained that the six areas were picked because they are high risk areas that have been targets for other universities.  Mr. Harroz said these were the largest areas of exposure for the university.  Ms. Loomis noted that some areas, like athletic compliance, were already being addressed.  Prof. Cline remarked that if we did not have a reasonable policy, the federal government could shut down all research.  Mr. Harroz pointed out that if something happened on one campus, the government could shut down research on all three campuses.  Myriad federal agencies are involved.  Prof. Beach moved to approve the revised policy (Appendix III).  The motion was approved on a voice vote. 





Proposed interim policies on Information Systems Security and Acceptable Use of Information Resources were distributed at the meeting and are available at  See also the comments made in the chair's report.  Prof. Cline said the policies address issues that have come up recently, such as when someone outside the university took control of a computer, and give Information Technology the ability to intervene when something like that happens.  The security document describes when the university would feel free to monitor activities.  Monitoring would involve monitoring large traffic patterns and only rarely would involve reading e-mail.  Mainly, it would be monitoring traffic patterns and whether the traffic is occurring outside.  It sets out situations where the university would monitor activity and accounts.  The disclaimer says "the university assumes no liability for loss or damage to materials or data."  Originally, the statement said "the user assumes all risk of loss or damage to materials or data.”  The acceptable use policy describes what a person should do to behave as a good citizen on the Internet.  It gives examples of what is unacceptable and what enforcement options are available.  The policies have undergone a number of revisions.  The Senate will discuss the documents at the next meeting.





The meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m.  The next regular session of the Senate will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Monday, December 9, 2002, in Jacobson Faculty Hall 102.


Sonya Fallgatter, Administrative Coordinator


Valerie Watts Secretary