Minutes - March 31
Governance Restructuring Committee
March 31, 2008
All committee members were present.
The group took up specific feedback and issues that resulted from the presentation of the draft revised bylaws to Faculty Senate on March 27. The first of these was the issue of representation of departments. This is not an issue within the proposed proportional system for UGC nor was it an issue in the tentative proposals for Graduate Council. It is an issue regarding Faculty Senate. There were objections to allocating the School of Business two representatives based on their disciplinary differences (Accounting, Business Administration), particularly since Business has emphasized that those two disciplines are not departments, but Jones commented that the groups often meet separately as well as together. Math and Computer Science is one department with one representative, even though there are three disciplines in the department (math, statistics, computer science). After considerable discussion, the committee decided that the fair thing to do was to allocate one representative on Faculty Senate. Pauls moved and Miner seconded a motion to change the draft to allocate one representative to the School of Business. Motion carried with one objection (Jones) and no abstentions. The group noted that if the groups from accounting and business administration in the School were to become official departments, then each (as a department) should have a representative on Faculty Senate.
The second issue was the need for department chair representation on Faculty Senate (no specific allocation was made in the March 27 draft). Some had suggested that a department chair should be appointed to attend Faculty Senate meetings if no department chairs were elected as representatives of their respective departments. However, others pointed out that being a representative of one’s department would be different than representing the interests of all chairs. After much discussion, Jones moved and Pauls seconded that the draft should be changed to add a department head to Faculty Senate in a nonvoting position as an invited guest. This chair would be appointed by the Provost.
The third issue the group addressed was the wording that any member of Faculty Senate must have a .33 direct teaching load. Pauls moved, Miner seconded that the word “direct” be dropped in order to accommodate those possible representatives for whom internships and other “indirect” teaching responsibilities exist and that the .33 specification be retained, with an exemption for faculty-status librarians. Motion carried unanimously.
The fourth issue the group addressed was the composition of Executive Committee. Neitzke moved, Pauls seconded that the Executive Committee should include: the President and President pro tempore of Faculty Senate, the chair of Undergraduate Council, the chair of Graduate Council, the Provost, the Dean of Graduate Studies, and the president of Student Senate. Motion carried unanimously.
The group also addressed a few issues that did not lead to changes in the draft document. One person had suggested that we refer to the MAFS document on compensation for Faculty Senate executive officers. Since Faculty Senate has not yet itself addressed that document, it was felt to be premature to add those provisions to the draft.
Two other procedural concerns were noted. The first involved writing up the procedures so that terms would be staggered on the new Faculty Senate. The second involved the process of bylaws approval for Undergraduate Council and Graduate Council. The charge of the committee specifically includes recommendations for the structure of Undergraduate Council and Graduate Council. The committee strongly feels that proportional representation is needed on UGC. The suggestion was made from faculty that the membership on Graduate Council be framed in terms of “any department in which graduate courses are offered” rather than the current graduate “program” wording. Bulen and Miner will take that back to Graduate Council before any further discussion takes place on that subject. The draft recommendations about Undergraduate Council and Graduate Council will be included in the material posted for faculty comment.
The changes that the committee has approved will be incorporated into a revised draft document. The document will then be sent to committee members for final reading before being posted on the Website. Once the document has been posted on the Website, an email will be sent to all faculty encouraging their comments for a period of 10-14 days. At that point, the committee will meet to consider any final changes before making a final recommendation to Faculty Senate at its April 24 meeting.