Regular session –
office: Jacobson Faculty Hall 206 phone: 325-6789
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org web site: http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/
The Faculty Senate was called to order by Professor Aimee Franklin, Chair.
PRESENT: Ahmed, Apanasov, Asojo, Baer, Blank, Bradshaw, Buckley, Conlon, Deacon, Dial, Eodice, Franklin, Hahn, Jean-Marie, Kent, Kershen, Kimball, Lauer-Flores, Lifschitz, McDonald, Miller, Milton, Morrissey, Moses, Muraleetharan, Palmer, Reeder, Russell, Strauss, Tabb, Taylor, Trafalis, Vehik, Wyckoff, Yi
Provost's office representative: Mergler
ISA representatives: Cook, Hough
Bass, Cox-Fuenzalida, Gan,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Faculty development awards
Process for hiring research faculty
OU-Norman representative to the Faculty Advisory Council to the State Regents
Higher Education Day at the State Capitol
Election, Employment Benefits Committee
Senate Chair's Report:
iThink photo rosters
Benefits: retirement fund record keeper
Crimson and Green sustainability initiative
Posting course materials to learn.ou.edu
Digital tenure dossier review
Dr. Lee Williams, Dean of the
Prof. Milton asked whether
post docs would be able to take the training without charge. Dean Williams said the idea was post docs and
undergraduates could be accommodated if they wanted to take the training. Individuals have asked why the training
needed to last two days. A substantive
training that actually works needs a certain level of repetition to get the
ideas across. One of the options was to
provide one hour of credit, but the fees would cost a minimum of $275. Prof. Muraleetharan asked about the assessment. Dean Williams said the group that developed the
model developed assessment metrics that were accepted by the NIH. It is like the individual is taking a test in
that s/he responds to scenarios. Prof. Palmer
said she would like to look at a sample curriculum. Dean Williams said he could send the manual
and/or provide a bibliography of the articles.
Dean Williams’ second topic was the graduate assistant tuition waiver. Currently, for half-time graduate assistantships, the University pays seven hours of resident and nine hours of nonresident tuition waivers for fall and spring and four hours in the summer. Feedback from departments indicates that the current waiver is not competitive. Dean Williams is proposing to uncap the waiver, and the University would pay for the entire enrollment for the student for that semester. Faculty would then be able to work with their students to plan an appropriate rate of progress toward a degree. However, the waiver would be capped at the number of hours required for the degree and limited to a certain number of semesters. Students would be expected to make appropriate progress toward completion of their degree. He is working on the details and hopes to have it approved in time for the recruiting cycle, early next semester.
Prof. Bradshaw asked for clarification on how many hours the University would pay for. Dean Williams said the University would commit to the number of hours a student needed to complete a degree. He is still working out details regarding grant payments and a phase in. Answering a question from Prof. Apanasov, Dean Williams said there was the issue of recruiting good students but also the academic issue of faculty advising students and designing their course sequence and progress so they take the appropriate number of hours. Prof. Palmer asked whether courses that are not discipline specific would be paid for. Dean Williams said the tuition would be paid if the courses were part of the degree program. Prof. Baer asked if there would be a provision for students who want to do a graduate certificate or a minor to receive extra hours toward the degree. Dean Williams said the hours would be covered if the certificate was toward a degree, but he did not know yet whether the hours would be paid if the graduate certificate was separate from the degree.
Prof. Milton noted that Physics
and Astronomy students are required to take nine hours until they become Ph.D.
candidates and then they take six, so ideally it takes 6.5 years to graduate. Most do not become degree candidates, though,
until the third year, and the average time for a Ph.D. is seven years. Dean Williams responded that if the degree
program is 100 hours in practice, the department may need to change the requirement
to 100 hours instead of 90. Prof. Muraleetharan
pointed out that a Ph.D. through the
Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier, Vice President for Research, began by sharing some good news. After the first four months of fiscal year 2010, the amount of new awards in the research area was running 60 percent above where we were at last year. We are $23 million ahead or two-thirds of the way toward our total in new awards. Only $10 million is stimulus money. Faculty members are aggressively developing proposals and having success in funding. Indirect cost recovery is already up $700,000 this year. We have a record high number of new awards -- 338 -- versus 253 last year.
In August, a research visiting
team came to all three campuses. Martin
Jischke, former faculty member and interim president, joined the visiting team
and was very helpful. The team looked at
processes and structure rather than programs.
It was chaired by Rita Caldwell, former director of the National Science
Foundation. The team did an analysis of
how we facilitate research, our communication across campuses, how we are set
up as far as technology, and so on. They
produced a report for the President that had a number of excellent
recommendations that Vice President Droegemeier and the Research Cabinet are evaluating. The recommendations run the gamut from hiring
clusters of faculty to better engaging the continuing education college, having
more cross-campus collaboration, improving our relations with private industry,
and improving the support of faculty who are seeking external funding. A strategic planning activity – Aspire 2020 –
will start in spring. It will be a
decadal plan for research, which will challenge us to think about where we want
to be and how we can get there. The plan
will have three fundamental pillars: 1) High
expectations, in the sense that we want to challenge ourselves to think bigger
than we are. We want to go after larger
opportunities and set high expectations in quality proposals. Vice President Droegemeier has found that
pre-submission reviews have been important to improving the quality of the
proposals. The administration wants to
help faculty achieve what they came here to do.
2) Full participation across the entire institution, which means everybody
getting involved. Places like the Department
of Homeland Security are funding fundamental basic scholarship in areas such as
art, history, English, and history of science, so there are a lot of opportunities. Full participation also means accountability
from chairs, deans, and faculty. The visiting
team asked who was championing research in the state. There is a vacuum out there that OU can fill. What he means by research is scholarship
across every discipline. 3) Broad
incentives and rewards. People who make
substantial achievements in scholarly and creative activities should be rewarded
and incentivized across all disciplines of scholarship. From that will flow several goals, for
example, going after more national centers.
Vice President Droegemeier is creating a faculty proposal development
center and hiring a new director to help faculty develop the content of proposals. The center will be located on the second
Prof. Muraleetharan asked if the report from blue ribbon panel could be shared with the faculty. Vice President Droegemeier said Dr. Paul Risser, chair of the Research Cabinet, and the deans are looking at the report to formulate potential actions. The plan is to bring some initial thoughts to faculty for reaction and conversation. Prof. Muraleetharan asked when the planning would start. Vice President Droegemeier said the planning will start in mid to late January. He will put out a survey in mid January to learn how faculty members view the environment in which they work and live. In addition, he has formulated ten specific goals. We have a good idea of what we need to do as an institution. The question is how we are going to do it. About two years ago, a Vice President for Research advisory committee was started, composed of faculty and deans from all the colleges, who are heavily involved with policy. It is through that committee that the planning process will be brought to the faculty. He will spend some time over the break to put the process together. There will be multiple opportunities and ways for faculty to be involved. Prof. Franklin said further questions could be emailed to her, and she would forward them to Dean Williams or Vice President Droegemeier.
The Faculty Senate Journal
for the regular session of
The Faculty Senate is sad to report the death in November of retired faculty member Paul Brinker (Economics).
The Faculty Senate sent out the call for proposals for the Ed Cline faculty development awards on November 20. Proposals are due to the Faculty Senate office on February 1. Up to $2500 is awarded. Further information is available at http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/facdev.htm.
President Boren approved the change in the process for hiring research faculty (see 11/09 senate journal).
The regents approved a change in section 3.27.2 of the Faculty Handbook – Intellectual Property Policy – that allows the Office of Technology Development to convene the Patent Committee on an as-needed basis, rather than three times per year. It is rare to need the intervention of the Patent Committee in the majority of disputes over the issue of inventor ownership. Typically, these issues are resolved through mediation.
Faculty Senate Chair-Elect LeRoy Blank was selected as the OU-Norman Campus representative to the Faculty Advisory Council (FAC) to the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. Anecdotal information on how cutbacks have affected specific students (for example, delayed graduation), should be sent to Prof. Blank so he can report it to the FAC.
Higher Education Day at the
State Capitol is scheduled for Tuesday,
The Faculty Senate approved the Committee on Committees’ nomination of Scott Moses (Industrial Engineering) to complete the 2008-12 term of Debra Bemben (Health & Exercise Science) on the Employment Benefits Committee.
Information about the photo roster feature in the new oZONE system can be found at learn.ou.edu or ozone.ou.edu. The rosters will be available for the December Intersession and spring semester by going to “The Book” under the Faculty and Staff Academic Services channel on the Faculty and Staff tab in oZONE (see oZONE alert, volume 25). Prof. Franklin thanked Provost Mergler for arranging to replace the iThink rosters in the old system with a photo roster option in the new system (see 11/09 Faculty Senate Journal).
An AAUP-OK meeting was held on campus on December 5. The next state AAUP meeting will be March 27. More information is available from Ken Fischer or Michael Kent or at http://okaaup.kellimcbride.com/.
On November 11, members of the senate Executive Committee met with Vice President Nick Hathaway, Human Resources representatives and others to discuss the financial record keeper proposal. This pertains to the retirement accounts, primarily the 403b, as required by the IRS, but it also will cover the 457 accounts. The request for proposal is not quite finalized because the administration is trying to expand the number of offerings that will be available. We will go from a number of vendors and virtually unlimited number of investment choices to choices that are representative of certain types of investment opportunities, in other words, major classes of funds that people like to invest in. There will be an exchange-traded fund and one with a set retirement age. A third option will be a brokerage window for the more sophisticated investor. The amount of use will determine the charge for the third option. The primary benefit is that individuals who use multiple vendors will have one consolidated statement, and the record keeper will make sure investors comply with IRS regulations.
Faculty, staff and students have an opportunity to pledge to support sustainability at OU through the Crimson and Green initiative. For every pledge, OU will contribute $2 toward our recycling program (see http://www.ou.edu/sustainability/yourcommitment.html). More than 1,000 students, faculty, and staff have already made a commitment.
Many states in the
Background: In 2005, the Student Congress passed a resolution
requesting the posting of course syllabi and current grade information on
learn.ou.edu. After discussion, the
Faculty Senate approved a resolution stating: “Faculty Senate encourages faculty to make undergraduate course syllabi
available online.” On Tuesday,
Nearly 5 years later, we are a campus that has long-term experience with learn.ou.edu, encourages green initiatives, and employs alternate course delivery formats (especially with the advent of absences caused by H1N1). In addition, there is an emphasis on improving graduation rates and time to graduation and increasing retention rates.
Prof. Franklin said she had asked
senators last month to gather input about this issue from their colleagues. The Faculty Senate
The Faculty Senate encourages faculty to use the University’s online course management system to distribute syllabi and other course materials or links to course materials.
The motion closely parallels the UOSA Student Congress resolution but maintains flexibility. If instructors have materials already posted on a site outside of Learn, they could put links inside Learn and students would have one central access point.
Prof. Eodice reported that
after the last meeting, she had been contacted by faculty who did not realize
there was so much support available, not just technological but people support. She said she wondered if the language should
be stronger. It is no cost to faculty
except the upfront time to upload materials.
Prof. Muraleetharan asked
what would be gained by just requiring the syllabus. Prof. Strauss replied that some instructors
still are not aware of the course management system, and the motion would
encourage them to use it or use it more.
Prof. Miller said putting their syllabus up would require instructors to
use it once at least. Prof. Franklin asked
Prof. Eodice if she would be in favor of language that says, “The Faculty
Senate requires faculty to post syllabi on the University’s online course
management system and encourages the posting of other course materials or links
to course materials.” Prof. Eodice said
she would. Prof. Bradshaw asked whether
the Faculty Senate had the power to require that. Prof. Franklin said it would be an amendment
to the Faculty Handbook. Provost Mergler
asked what level of approval was required for the course syllabi section. Prof. Franklin suggested that the friendly
amendment be tabled, she will check on the proper authority, and an amendment will
be brought back to the next meeting. Prof.
Conlon said she thought faculty members were required to provide a paper copy
of the syllabus the first week of class.
If the syllabus is posted online, she would not want students to say it
was not clear or they did not receive a copy.
Prof. Eodice said there also are issues with hard copies. She said she thought it would be a good move
to demonstrate to students that faculty members are in the 21st century. The technology is available and faculty should
take advantage of it. Prof.
Background: Each year roughly 40-45 tenure dossiers are reviewed by the Campus Tenure Committee. Added to this are 10-15 promotion dossiers reviewed administratively. Currently departments prepare paper dossiers for internal and external review. Seven complete copies of the candidate’s dossier are required for internal review. External review dossiers, normally smaller, are estimated to require 6-12 paper copies of the candidate’s dossier. In 2009, the review for Honors and Awards was streamlined to require paperless submission for most dossiers. Best practices research of Big 12 schools and schools recognized in a recent Chronicle article suggests that technology has advanced to the point where creating electronic dossiers is more efficient and that secure submissions and reviews of digital dossiers can be assured. Digital submission could allow electronic access for reviewers at any setting they choose and would greatly reduce the amount of paper used, enhancing green campus initiatives.
The Faculty Senate Executive Committee and the Campus Tenure Committee endorse movement to electronic tenure and promotion dossiers submission and review, provided the proper security provisions and adequate central administrative support are in place.
Prof. Franklin explained that adequate central administrative support translates to no extra work would be required for the faculty or the department over and above the amount of work involved in preparing a paper dossier. It is expected it would be less work. Prof. Franklin asked if the senators had received any questions, concerns, or comments from their colleagues about moving to digital tenure review. She noted that the Provost had started a work group to explore some of the ramifications and system requirements in anticipation of the senate’s favorable support.
Prof. Miller asked when it would be possible to turn in grades on D2L. Prof. Franklin said grades could be posted electronically in spring 2010, but they might have to be uploaded manually. The administration is still working on making a seamless transition from D2L to the registration office.
The motion of Faculty Senate
The meeting adjourned at 4:45
p.m. The next regular session of the
Faculty Senate will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Monday,
Sonya Fallgatter, Administrative Coordinator
Amy Bradshaw, Faculty Secretary