Minutes, NSU Faculty Council, December 3, 2004

NORTHEASTERN STATE UNIVERSITY

Minutes of Faculty Council Meeting
Friday, December 3, 2004
[Approved February 4, 2005]

I. Call to Order

1. The meeting was called to order at 3:02 p.m. by President Wickham in the NET Tower Room.

Council Members in attendance: Terri Baker (Liberal Arts), John Diamantopoulos (Science & Health Professions), Dan Glasgow (Education), Harriett Hobbs (Library), Peggy Kaney (Library), Andre Marquis (Liberal Arts & Education), Rick Matzen (Science & Health Professions), Jeff Miller (Optometry), Latricia Pack (Optometry), Lallie Scott (Liberal Arts), Jon Shapiro (Business & Technology), and John Yeutter (Business & Technology).

Council Officers in attendance: Gary Wickham (President), Andrew Vassar (Vice President), and Chuck Ziehr (Secretary-Treasurer).

Guests in attendance: Harriet Bachner, Vice President Kim Cherry, Vice President James Pate, Dave Roberts, Mike Rogers, and President Larry Williams.

II. Committees and Standing Reports

1. Minutes of November 5, 2004 meeting are online and, in the interest of time for today's special meeting, the delegates will be polled via e-mail about the approvoal of the minutes.

No other reports were given in order to allow time for the questions-and-answers period with President Williams, Vice President Cherry, and Vice President Pate.

III. Old Business

No old business was discussed in order to allow time for the questions-and-answers period with President Williams, Vice President Cherry, and Vice President Pate.

IV. New Business

1. Open discussion with NSU President Larry Williams, VP for Academic Affairs James Pate, and VP for Administration Kim Cherry.

The discussion proceeded from a set of talking points given to President Williams and Vice President Pate on November 16, 2004 (President Williams invited VP Cherry to join the discussion because some of the questions related to the areas of the university which she supervises). The questions (or "talking points") These 14 points were developed from a much longer list of questions provided by Faculty Council Delegates. The discussion began with President Williams thanking the Council for the invitation to discussion these issues.

A. PERSONNEL:

i. Exactly how is the audit of faculty preparation (degrees) being conducted? Have there been any untoward findings? Are we (both faculty and academic administrators) expected to look more closely at the curriculum vita of prospective faculty members?

VP Pate noted that this is always an important process and that the audit was not being conducted with anymore scrutiny than usual. He stressed that official (original, not copies) transcripts are required. President Williams mentioned that the audit was underway. VP Cherry said there were three phases: (1) Documents procedures mandated by the Regents, (2) Determine what the degree requirements are for all job descriptions, and (3) Examine individual's personnel files. No untoward findings on the faculty side had been revealed during the audit; one problem did come up before the audit.

ii. In the event of a President or Vice President of Academic Affairs leaving, what role would the Faculty Council Delegates have in selecting a new President and/or Vice President? This is important to the faculty since the people filling both offices greatly impact faculty success and productivity.

President Williams noted that in the last two searches (for his and Dr. Pate's positions) the President of the Faculty Council and several other faculty members were on the search committees. He assumed that similar procedures would be used in the future.

iii. In the past year, some employee actions (dismissals, suspensions, warnings) were conducted in a manner that immediately cut off network access of employees dismissed or suspended, gave them relatively little time to separate their personal items and intellectual property, and provided an escort off campus by NSU’s Campus Security personnel. Such actions seem to be the talk of the non-University community in Tahlequah. Is this a local policy or does the BOROC Policy Manual address this? The Employee Appreciation Week this Fall focused on our being “just like family.” Most of us do not have a family in which the police are needed to escort brothers and sisters out of the house. Could we not make dismissals a little less threatening and humiliating?

President Williams noted that it is not institutional or BOROC policy to escort employees off campus. He stated that no one was escorted off campus by campus security. It was noted that security is present when there appears to be the possibility of a confrontation; this would be done for the protection of all. VP Cherry stated that normally the processing of the PAF (personnel action form) triggers cession of network access. Gary Wickham volunteered his office (that of Council President) to assist with faculty terminations.

iv. Throughout American Higher Education, numerically quantified student evaluations of faculty have a life of their own. The average teacher has a hard time understanding how an average student, who has yet to test his/her skills out in the real world, can assess what the education in a single class will do for them. How important are student evaluations in the review of non-tenured and tenured faculty members at NSU?

VP Pate said that student evaluations of faculty were "part and parcel" of the faculty evaluation process. He does not agree with the statement that students can't evaluate faculty. Such evaluations are not the sole basis for faculty evaluation, but they are important. Pate would like to have peer review. Regional and national accrediting agencies expect student evaluations of faculty. State Regents expect them. The current survey instrument was developed by the Faculty Council.

B. SHARED GOVERNANCE:

How can the officers of the Faculty Association and the Delegates to the Faculty Council enter into a constructive relationship of shared governance with NSU’s Administration? As is the case at OU and OSU, and to a lesser extent with UCO, might it be possible for the Faculty Council to be a Senate functioning with actual powers to contribute to NSU in a way analogous to the American system of government?

Terri Baker gave the selection of department chairs as an example. President Williams said he thinks chairs should be selected by the faculty in consultation with the deans. VP Pate mentioned a system at Southeastern Oklahoma State University that permitted significant input by the faculty into the selection and subsequent evaluation of chairs. Both Williams and Pate wondered why a similar system was not in place here when they arrived. Chuck Ziehr asked how changes could be made to the selection process for department chairs. VP Pate suggested the appointment of a study group composed of nine members, three from Faculty Council, three from Deans' Council, and three from Chairs' Council.

President Williams noted that he was open to further conversations about shared governance, and mentioned that the creation of the Deans' Council and the Chairs' Council after he became president were designed to promote shared governance.

C. HEALTH CARE/FISCAL:

i. The price of spouse and family coverage under Health Choice seems to have finally reached the point of either breaking the budgets of faculty families or else causing them to leave their families uncovered. What can we do about this serious problem?

President Williams sympathized with the concerns, noting that they affected everyone. VP Cherry said that an external study a few years ago found that services and costs for employees were comparable to other institutions, but that dependent coverage was a little higher. Insurance/health costs care a nationwide problem. She noted that the regional universities in OK has a committee to study the health insurance issue, and Gary Wickham is on that committee. There are three representatives from each of the six campuses. President Williams said the only way to reduce costs is to reduce benefits. Gary Wickham noted that Harrington Benefits who administers the Health Choice program is difficult and unfriendly to work with.

ii. What strategies or plans are in place to bring new money to the Tahlequah campus?

President Williams noted that there was some growth in grants to the university and that a new staff person was added in this area. There will be a campaign to raise funds from private donations. NSU raised about $10 in its last fund-raising campaign.

iii. Are there any plans in place to see that we get annual raises, rather than a nominal raise every 2-3 years? My area is competitive. If NSU can't commit to such a plan, I’m not sure how we will keep many of the faculty who work with me. Several of my colleagues are looking into lateral moves to universities similar to NSU but committed to this goal.

President Williams stated that there has been some raise each year since he has been at NSU except FY2004. There was a $2.9 million lower state appropriation to NSU in FY2005 than FY 2002. A handout was distributed of the history of salary increases (see below).

Northeastern State University
History of Salary Increases

Fiscal Year	Date Implemented	Amount/ Percent	Plan Description	Average Faculty Increase/ Range	Average Professional Increase/ Range	Average NonProf Increase/ Range
FY 97	Jul-96	5.00%	Across the Board with merit consideration given	5.5% 2.6%-16.5%	5.4% 0.5%-10.7%	5.6% 5.0%-10.0%
FY 98	Jul-97	5.00%	Across the Board with merit consideration given	6.0% 2.9%-18.7%	5.7% 4.8%-19.2%	6.0% 5.0%-27.0%
FY 99	Jul-98	5.00% 6.00%	Across the Board for Staff & Admin with a min increase of $1,200 Across the Board for Faculty with an additional increase of $500 for Associate Professors (merit consideration also given)	6.6% 3.4%-17.4%	5.1% 0%-10.0%	6.5% 1.2%-9.7%
FY 2000	Jul-99	3.00%	Across the Board with merit consideration given and an additional $1,000 for Professors and Assoc Professors. Min increase of $480 for staff.	4.0% 0%-8.8%	3.1% 0%-6.0%	3.2% 2.0%-5.9%
FY 2001	Jul-00	$300 3.50%	Across the Board for eligible employees. Additional $1,000 for Professors and Associate Professors Average Available - Award based on merit considerations	5.4% 0.6%-16.5%	4.2% 0.9%-11.5%	4.6% 1.3%-12.7%
FY 2002	July-01	3.00%	Average Available - Award based on merit considerations Additional $500 for Professor and Associate Professors	3.5% 0%-14.6%	2.8% 0%-18.3%	3.0% 0%-6.7%
FY 2003	Jan-03	$600	Stipend
FY 2004			No salary increases
FY 2005	July-04	4.00%	Average Available - Award based on merit considerations New minimum salary raised to $14,520 from $13,020	4.0% 0%-11.8%	3.9% 0%-10.8%	4.9% 0%-13.7%

			Cumulative increase of 41% for Faculty, 34% for Professional, and 39% for NonProfessional employees

D. COMMUNICATION:

i. What is your opinion of the level of communication between you and the faculty as a whole?
a) If you would say it is not so good, what might we do to possibly improve on it?
b) If you would say it is pretty good, what could we do to make sure it stays at that level, or even improves further?

President Williams noted that there's always room for improvement. He noted that the size and complexity of the university is third in the state and that we are cut thin administratively here at NSU. VP Pate also said there was room for improvement. During his tenure here, he has pushed the Deans' Council and the Chairs' Council as a way to improve communication. He noted that communication is a two-way street; this is the only institution that he has been a part of where the chief academic officer was not on the agenda of every Faculty Council meeting. He had been a part of semester breakfast meetings at a sister institution. He would welcome visiting with the Council once a month; he has an open door policy. President Williams said his door is open, too. He wished he could be out and about on campus more.

Terri Baker expressed concern about the short lead-times. President Williams noted that the budget cuts just kept coming. He assumed that the administrative reorganization process was widely known on campus.

VP Pate said that the administrative reorganization was started in 1998 and got going in earnest in 2002. He noted such things as the additional of secretarial staff for all departments. There was an effort to consolidate departments, especially those with only 4 to 6 faculty members. Seven new full-time faculty positions were added this year due to the reorganization.

[President Williams stated that he had to leave to catch a flight. He made a few closing remarks about the last issue on the agenda, "academic reorganization." He made reference to the term "wave of change" in that question, and said that it was not a "wave" but a process that was on-going. He said that a university can't be run like a business, but that all universities could be run more business-like. He wants everyone to be better informed in the future.]

E. PHYSICAL PLANT:

i. What security features will ensure safety in the swimming pool area of Seminary Suites?

VP Cherry noted that no life guard would be on duty due to the expense. There is an emergency telephone. There is a 24/7 surveillence camera which will be monitored during evening hours. Residents will be requested to use a buddy system. Gates will be locked in evenings.

ii. What are the cost/benefit numbers for the facility (toilets, fluorescent lights, motion sensors) modifications being installed? Is it true that a percentage of any savings realized will go to the contractor? Motion sensors do not seem to be in hallways and common areas but can be in some rooms that need to be dark or light only as controlled by the users. Who engineered the scheme of installing these fixtures?

Sempra Energy Solutions si the contractor. They have been on campus for 13 months. The company must guarantee savings to cover costs of capital improvements. They were paid $29,000 the first year which was 4% of cost of project during the first year. If anyone notices problems with the equipment, he/she should contact Bob Criminger, Director of the Physical Plant.

iii. Why does NSU not have an organized paper recycling effort for the whole campus?

There was one that was discontinued in 1991 because it was not supported.

F. CLASSROOM/ACADEMIC FREEDOM:

Most faculty members assume that their classroom operates by the rules established for the class in the course syllabus. Do you believe each faculty member has the right to define the circumstances of classroom operation? What support mechanisms does a faculty member have when he/she is dealing with inappropriate student behavior in the classroom?

VP Pate said that problems should be reported to Ron Cambiano's office (Student Affairs). Terri Baker asked how important was it to have classroom rules in the syllabus. VP Pate replied that it was critical since the syllabus is a contract.

Jon Shapiro brought up tuition benefits for employee dependents and wondered about these being reciprocal with other institutions in the state. VP Cherry noted that this subject had been discussed by the various business officers statewide, but it was not accepted because some institutions thought they would be inundated. She requested that we tell her what we need in terms of such benefits.

G. ACADEMIC REORGANIZATION:

Is our academic structure where it will stay for the foreseeable future, or is there another wave of change coming up? If more changes are anticipated, will we, as Faculty Council Delegates, know about these before they are implemented?

[See item D above for President Williams comments about these questions.]

VP Pate note that the State Regents requires an annual report on low productivity programs and that these programs could be put in abeyance if improvements are not made. The NCA accrediting team questioned two programs being in a particular college. He noted that we always look at best practices. He sees himself as a facilitator for effective programs. He noted that we will continue to look at programs that are on the edge of productivity to make sure that they are in the centrality of the mission of the university. The NSU mission statement needs to be revised; there needs to be a task force to do that. We are pushing scholarship and the "dirty word - research." All three recent accrediting teams to visit campus have talked about research. He noted that we can't have quality programs where the faculty and students are not engaged in scholarly activities.

V. Other Business

There was no other business.

VI. Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at about 5:00 p.m.

Submitted by Chuck Ziehr, Secretary-Treasurer, January 12, 2005.