The
Regular session – February 9, 2009 – 3:30 p.m. – Jacobson Faculty Hall 102
office: Jacobson Faculty Hall 206
phone: 325-6789
e-mail: facsen@ou.edu web site:
http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/
The Faculty Senate was called
to order by Professor Cecelia Brown, Chair.
PRESENT: Ahmed,
Apanasov, Asojo, Atiquzzaman, Bass, M. Bemben, Blank, Bradshaw, Brown, Brule, Buckley,
Conlon, Eodice, Forman, Franklin, Graham, Grasse, Greene, Hahn, Hawthorne, Kent,
Kershen, Lifschitz, Livesey, McDonald, Miller, Milton, Moses, Muraleetharan, Rambo,
Reeder, Rogers, Russell, Striz, Tan, Trafalis, Vehik, Verma, Vitt, Weaver,
Wyckoff, Yi
Provost's office representative: Mergler
ISA representatives: Bondy, Cook
ABSENT: Basic,
D. Bemben,
________________________________________________________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Announcements:
Darwin 2009
Employment Benefits Committee membership
New senators
Committee nominations
The Big Event
RecycleMania
Export Controls
Final Exam Preparation Period/Pre-finals week
Senate Chair's Report:
Announcements of special offers for athletic events
Open access fees
Stimulus package
Canceled classes
Concealed weapons bills
Submitting grades online
Graduate applications
Student evaluations of teaching
Budget
________________________________________________________________________________
The Faculty Senate Journal
for the regular session of December 8, 2008 was approved.
Several OU departments are sponsoring a series of
events throughout 2009, called “
President Boren approved the
change in the charge of the Employment Benefits Committee, approved by the
Senate at its December 8 meeting, which broadens the
The following faculty members
were elected to the Faculty Senate as of February 2009:
Susan Hahn (University Libraries), completing the
2008-11 term of Janet Croft (University Libraries), representing the Library.
Han Yi (Accounting), completing the 2006-09 term of M.
Chris Knapp (Accounting), representing the
The call for volunteers for
councils, committees and boards was sent to faculty, chairs/directors and deans
on February 9. Nominations are due to
the Faculty Senate office by March 11.
Mr. Shane Hampton, a member
of the Big Event Executive Staff, explained that the Big Event is student-run
community service effort. Volunteer
applications are available at bigevent.ou.edu and are due February 20. The tenth annual Big Event will be held on
March 28. Mr. Hampton encouraged faculty
to volunteer as individuals or in groups.
He said the faculty could also suggest potential job sites. A fundraiser will be held on February 12 at Panera
Bread; 10 percent of the proceeds will go to the Big Event.
Ms. Mechelle
Gibson (Provost Office) said the campus had signed up to participate in
RecycleMania, which came about because we are a signatory to the
Ms. Gretta Rowold, Export
Control Officer & Facility Security Officer, discussed some of the
responsibilities of her office. One
concern is international travel to countries that are subject to very comprehensive
sanctions. The list changes, but
currently the five countries are
Another concern is dual use
research, which is research in any subject matter that has a primary civilian
or commercial application but could be used in weapons or military development
as well. Basically any hard science or
technology could fit in that category.
Even fundamental research could be targeted for collection in other
countries. She asked the faculty to
report to her office if they notice anything amiss in a request at an
international conference. That kind of
information is submitted to a central data base, which will help to tailor
specific information for researchers in a particular field or for a particular
destination.
The Export Controls office
can provide clean laptops with basic operating systems for faculty to check out
when they travel overseas. Laptops are
portable deposits of information that can be targeted for theft or compromised,
or they can be lost. The clean laptops
have no sensitive information, no protective FERPA records, and no prohibited
information. MACs also are available. There is no legal process required, even as a
When individuals are bringing
their own equipment back into the
Prof. Muraleetharan asked how
students who come to OU from the five countries are treated. Ms. Rowold said those situations are handled through
the Visa office and are monitored twice a year.
Prof. Muraleetharan asked what responsibility he had for what a student
is doing. Ms. Rowold said OU regularly
checks with the federal agencies to make sure there are no policy shifts and
also contacts the students periodically to see that they are studying what they
said they would. It all hinges on the
Visa.
Prof. Apanasov inquired about
customs problems when faculty members return to the
Prof.
Prof. Brown explained that
the student association had proposed some revisions in the pre-finals week
policy to the Faculty Senate last September.
The Senate Executive Committee worked with the students to develop a new
proposal (attached). The current policy is in section 4.10 of the
Faculty Handbook (http://www.ou.edu/provost/ouncfhb.pdf)
and is available on the Senate web page at http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/prefin01.htm.
Prof.
Prof. Apanasov said the big
change was going from 10 percent to 5 percent in the last week. Prof. Brown said that was the main change,
but the policy also was revised to make it easier to read and to extend the
date it can be revisited. Prof. Vitt said
it was the responsibility of faculty to have a syllabus that outlined what went
on in a course. He said he did not see how
we would gain anything by passing a new set of restrictive rules. Students can decide whether they want to take
a course based on the syllabus, and students should not dictate to faculty the
design or grading structure of a course.
Prof. Brown replied that one of the students’ complaints is that some
instructors do not provide a syllabus.
Prof. Bradshaw said it would make more sense to require faculty to have clearer
syllabi. Provost Mergler commented that
a policy on course syllabi is contained in the Faculty Handbook. Prof.
Prof. Muraleetharan asked
about the logic behind the change to 5 percent.
Prof. Brown said it was modeled after OSU’s policy. Responding to other questions, Prof. Brown said
the basic difference between the current and proposed policies was the change
from 10 to 5 percent; that is to say, 5 percent or less of the course grade
could be given in the last week. Other
changes were to make it read better and change the date it can be revisited. As a pedagogical activity, Prof.
Addressing the purpose of the
drop from 10 to 5 percent, Mr. Frank Wood, chair of the Student Congress
Academic Affairs Committee, said a lot of tests, labs and homework go on during
the last week. What the students were trying
to do was lower the worth of assignments in that week to allow students to
focus on studying for finals in the next week and in that very week. Prof. Miller said he thought this would encourage
students to procrastinate. Prof.
Prof. Rambo asked why the
30-day notification had been removed from the proposal. Prof. Brown and Mr. Wood answered that the
old document was hard to understand. It
was an attempt to simplify the language.
Prof. Livesey commented that some of the problems may be with adjunct
faculty. He asked how the policy is communicated
to those faculty members and whether department chairs would need to look at
every faculty member’s syllabus. Provost
Mergler said she sends an email at the beginning of the academic year to all
new instructional faculty and graduate teaching assistants with all the
policies from the Faculty Handbook that deal with faculty-to-student instructional
issues. Each campus has somewhat
different instructional policies that have evolved over time. Prof. Vitt noted that if faculty members have
a syllabus and it lays out the structure of the course, students do not have to
take the course if they do not want an exam in the last week. That is a lot easier than having more and
more policies that restrict what everybody can do. Provost Mergler said she was aware that we
cannot deal with all the information coming our way. There has been a transition in the past 10
years in where to go for accurate information.
She pointed out that there are some classes that students must take in
order to make progress towards their degree.
From the students’ point of view, some boundaries set at the University
level are reassuring. We are no heavier
in policies than other public research universities. Prof. Vitt said he still did not see the
advantage of having another policy if the faculty is required to have a
syllabus.
Prof. Buckley said he did not
understand yet why the proposal was important to students. Mr. Wood said the limit was intended to help
students do better on finals. The more
times students can go over the material, the more they will retain and carry into
the next class. Prof. Brown reminded the
senators that a pre-finals week policy currently is in the Faculty
Handbook.
Prof. Blank suggested that a
phrase be added at the end of procedure a), which says, “stated in the initial
course syllabus or at least 30 days before activation.” That would allow somebody to make a change in
the middle of the semester that they thought was appropriate, but they would have
to do it 30 days ahead. As it currently
reads, any exception would have to be done in the syllabus on the very first
day of class. The exception still would
have to have prior approval of the chair of the department. Mr. Wood said he thought it would be
acceptable to change the syllabus mid-stride, but the students would want to limit
the assignment to 5 percent.
Prof. Vitt said he wondered
what percent of courses on this campus had 5 percent of the work due in the
last week. Prof. Vehik said she has 20
percent due at the end of the semester in the form of a term paper, but the
students know about it. Prof. Vitt said that
is true in most capstone courses because they have some sort of term paper due
in the last week. Prof. Blank said he
was just trying to put in an exception that would allow people some adjustment
in the middle of the semester if they needed it. Prof. Brown said she could accept that as a friendly
amendment. Prof. Blank asked whether procedural
point a), which says must “have prior approval by the chair of the department,”
meant prior approval before the issuance of the syllabus or before the event. Prof. Brown said it meant the syllabus. Mr. Wood added that the language was the same
as the current policy. Prof. Traflis said
he has a final project due on the last day in his graduate course, which meets
once a week. Prof. Brown said that would
be allowed. Prof. Bradshaw remarked that
there were many exemptions. Prof. Brown
said the Senate would vote on the proposal at the next meeting.
“This semester we have been sending emails to the faculty
senate members about special offers for faculty for athletic events and asking
you to get the word out to your constituents. This is in response to a request made by
several senators to know more about such special offers because there is no one
good centralized way to get the word out to faculty. Any ideas about other easy and cost effective
ways and means to do this would be most appreciated.
“The Vice President for Research has a fund to cover
the costs of reprints and page charges for scholarly publications up to $250
for faculty members once a year. He has
agreed to expand the use of the funds to pay for open access fees. It is the same application process and same
dollar amount and is limited to one request per fiscal year.
“In the Senate Executive Committee’s monthly meeting
with President Boren, he suggested that we write Senator Tom Coburn,
encouraging him, as individuals, to support the stimulus package that is being
considered by the U.S. Senate. The
package will be beneficial to higher education and OU, particularly our
operating budget.
“The campus closures two
weeks ago in response to the ice storm caused disruptions across campus in lost
classes, labs, and rehearsals. The
Faculty Senate Executive Committee spoke with Provost Mergler and the President,
and the decision to close is made based on many factors, with safety of
students, staff, and faculty being the primary concern. However, realizing that several courses
experienced substantial losses in time and content and that it is likely to
happen again in the future, the Executive Committee is seeking suggestions and
guidance about how to make up for the lost time now and in the future. Currently we are looking to see what other Big
12 campuses do in these circumstances. If
anyone in the Senate would like to volunteer to help us in this endeavor,
please contact the Senate office.”
Prof. Kershen said the issue
was more than how to make up classes.
The whole decision about the circumstances under which classes should be
canceled should be considered. He said
he thought the decision to cancel was done too quickly. It is difficult to lose three days. We seem to be having more cancellations in
recent years. Prof. Forman said he echoed
that thinking. Prof.
Prof. Brown reported that
both the Oklahoma House and Senate have bills, HB 1083 and SB 1101, that have
been introduced to authorize certain persons, including faculty, to carry
handguns on college property. President
Boren hopes the bills will not get out of committee. However, Prof. Brown wanted the Faculty
Senate to be aware. Last year, the
Faculty Senate voted by email during Spring Break on a resolution opposing the
legislation. Faculty may contact their
legislators as private citizens and encourage them to vote against the
legislation. Prof. Rambo asked if the
Senate should start working on another resolution. Prof. Brown the Senate could dust off the one
from last year. Prof. Apanasov urged the
Senate leadership to provide information from both sides, not just the negatives. Prof. Miller said the Faculty Senate could
suggest so many restrictions that it would be nearly impossible for anyone to
qualify to carry concealed weapons.
Prof. Milton asked about the
status of entering grades online. Provost
Mergler explained that the new Banner software eventually will allow faculty to
submit grades through the web. The new
system will make the student records system web based. Currently, applications are double-processed through
new and old systems. The financial aid
system will go live soon. In the fall,
the rest of the system will come online.
Brad Burnett, who is coordinating the project, could provide an
update. It is a massive project, and a
lot of people are doing double jobs. Prof.
Milton asked whether the system also would allow submission of student
evaluations of faculty. Provost Mergler said
that was a different system. New
scanning hardware was purchased, but it still needs to be fine tuned. She said the faculty should consider that an
online evaluation system would reduce substantially the number of students who would
respond.
Prof. Muraleetharan said he
had heard there was a backlog in processing graduate applications. Provost Mergler said we are about 7
applications less than last year. The
admissions staff is trying to recover from the flood when the pipes burst, and
they are double-processing applications in both systems. Prof. Muraleetharan said the concern was that
a student could not be hired because his application had not been processed
yet. Provost Mergler said the best
strategy would be to minimize the special requests. The staff is working on Saturdays, and an
additional person has been hired to assist with the volume.
Prof. Rogers said she and
some of her colleagues had received more student evaluation responses than the number
of students enrolled in the classes. Provost
Mergler said the new system is better in many ways because each form has a code
for the course number. Any forms with a
question are re-scanned. The colleges
are trying to verify the accuracy of the data.
Sending the written comments to faculty has been delayed, but the more
important component of the annual faculty evaluation process is the comparative
data. Prof. Bradshaw said she had not
received enough forms for her cross-listed course and had to make copies. Provost Mergler said in theory, one is
printed for every student enrolled in a course, and it has a bar code that
attributes the information to the correct course and instructor. Questions may be directed to Robert Kelly in
the provost office.
Prof. Livesey said there was
a lot of anxiety about the budget, particularly among junior faculty. He asked if the administration could alleviate
some anxiety by being more forthcoming about potential cuts. Provost Mergler replied that a memo was sent to
the deans, and they should be communicating with departments soon about
reductions. Prof. Livesey noted that most
of the budget in his unit is salaries. Provost
Mergler said the circumstances are different from college to college. Prof. M. Bemben said the faculty and staff in
his unit are concerned about the possibility of furloughs. Provost Mergler agreed that it is a time of
high anxiety for everyone. She hopes the
stimulus package will jump start the economy.
Our circumstances at OU and in
The meeting adjourned at 4:55
p.m. The next regular session of the
Faculty Senate will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Monday, March 9, 2009, in
Jacobson Faculty Hall 102.
____________________________________
Sonya Fallgatter, Administrative Coordinator
____________________________________
Paula Conlon, Faculty Secretary