NORTHEASTERN STATE UNIVERSITY

Minutes of Faculty Council Meeting

FRIDAY, February 18, 2011

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by President Denise Deason-Toyne at 3:03 p.m. in Tahlequah (SCI 129). There was ITV access at Muskogee (SYNR141), Broken Arrow (B226) and Tahlequah (SCI 129).

Council Members in attendance:  Ron Cambiano (COE); Kristopher Copeland (COLA);   Carolyn Cox (COLA); Susan Woitte (Library); Brandon Oberg (Library); Isaac DiIanni (B & T); Dan Sisk (Science & Health Professions)

Council Members in attendance in Broken Arrow: Anita Ede (Education); Buster Hall (COLA); Pamela Louderback (Library), Julia Kwok (B & T); Tia Bennett (COE); John Newhouse (B & T)

Council Members in attendance in Muskogee: Ryan Fenska (Optometry);

Council Officers in attendance:  Denise Deason-Toyne (President), Pamela Louderback (Secretary/Treasurer).

Guests:  Tahlequah: Ernst Bekkering (B & T); Deborah Hyde 

Guests:  Broken Arrow: Tom Rink (Library)

Invited Presentations

[Council will set aside time at the first of each meeting to visit with Administrative Officers should they be able to attend.]

Dr. Tom Jackson, Asstistant Vice President/Dean, Graduate Studies and Research (Academic Affairs) briefly addressed the Faculty Council on the status of the HLC Assessment Academy on Student Outcomes 2011-1-14. The HLC Assessment Academy team is comprised of Drs. Tom Jackson, Pamela Fly, Mark Giese, Martin Venneman, and Ms. Laura Boren who are tasked with furthering their ability to assess and measure student outcomes as it relates to how well students are performing. Additionally, the team is assessing the new GenEd curriculum against the old GenEd curriculum. Factors such as student involvement, personal development, and basic guidelines and goals will be measured.

The second project Dr. Jackson discussed related to NSU’s focused mission, vision and core values. By using old construct validity measurements, all outcome data we have (i.e., surveys of alumni, employers, exit exams, national licensure exams) will be looked at and be determined as to how consistent they are with the core values, vision, and mission of the University. All departments will be part of the process and volunteers will be solicited.

President Deason-Toyne inquired about overseeing the student outcomes learning coordinators for each academic program. Jackson responded they are supposed to be gathering information and helping every program find effective and efficient outcomes within their respective program. That process will happen within this coming year. Peripherally, the coordinators will provide input to Jackson’s team from an informational standpoint.

A. Committees and Standing Reports
    1. Review/Approval of Minutes of the 01/14/11 meeting
January minutes was reviewed. There were no additions, deletions, or corrections made.  Copeland entertained a motion to approve the minutes, it was seconded by Ede.  The motion passed; the minutes were approved.

    2.  Financial Report/Budget for 2011-.
No budget items.

A. COMMITTEES/STANDING REPORTS

President Deason-Toyne noted several committees had no updates:

§ Shared Governance - Position paper update– (Dropped down to Old Business)

§ CIRCUS (None)

§ Bylaws – Kwok presented the revised proposal copy that had been emailed to Faculty Council delegates. A major change proposed was reflected in the document where the term for body of delegates would be modified from “Faculty Council (denotes a more advisory status) to “Faculty Senate” (denotes more of a governing partnership standing). Additionally, a legislative proposal change was recommended to apply the calendar year to appoint delegates/officers in January, rather than following the current practice that uses the school year for appointment dates. (§2.4.1)

It was further noted that the intent of these amendments were to make this body more formal in name and provided more efficiency/synchronization in the election process. Preseident Deason-Toyne noted that the Faculty Council President is usually invited to many summer activities, thus, the proposed January appointment date provides a smoother transition for delegates and officers.

No further discussion occurred. The President offered a motion to move the proposal forward to be placed on an April vote for approval. Fenska entertained a motion to approve the motion, it was seconded by DiIanni.  The motion passed.

§ Faculty Welfare –including New Faculty Orientation (None)

§ Curriculum/Program Review Committee (None)

B. Old Business

1. RESOLUTION ON HANDGUNS – Results of the online voting.

President Deason-Toyne noted the total responses received (175) and numerical totals for each response. Deason-Toyne further noted the statement used in the resolution was taken from the Regent’s survey. Feedback on the handgun resolution included a recommendation that the Council consider changing the resolution to adjust the term “concealed” to the term “handguns”; this adjustment in terminology would cover the open-carry aspect of handguns as well.

Further discussion/suggestions posed included:

February 22^nd is Education Day at the Capitol; it provides a good forum to let legislation know our position. Concern was expressed over the legality of such action regarding the resolution. President Deason-Toyne noted that the Council, acting as a representative body of the faculty, is merely expressing faculty opinion. As a representative body of the faculty, it is our right and responsibility to do so. Therefore, as long as we are not actively engaging in campaigning, it is considered a legal action. A question was posed regarding whether we should promote ourselves as representatives of the faculty by use of the phrase “a majority of the faculty”. Given the percentage was approximately 66%, which constitutes a majority of the faculty who responded, it was agreed that such terminology was appropriate. Deason-Toyne clarified that the CERT team is permitted to carry weapons on campus. Additionally, those individuals who have written permission from Administration to carry weapons are also permitted to carry weapons on campus. It was further observed that the resolution, as written, may appear to imply that no one could carry weapons on campus. Rink pointed out that our intent/wishes, as stated in the resolution, cannot supersede State (or Federal) law that provides law enforcement the right to carry weapons.

Deason-Toyne queried the Council regarding amendments or changes in terminology given the question of interpretation of the survey. A suggestion to take the exact wording of the survey and include all numerical survey results was proffered but declined. After further discussion, Ede entertained a motion go forward with the resolution and place a general statement noting the “majority of faculty” position. The motion was renewed to reflect the inclusion of a one sentence resolution on behalf of Faculty Council (statement reflecting that a majority of faculty do not support allowing of concealed handguns on campus) and was made by Ede, it was seconded by Cox. The motion carried.

· Shared Governance - Position paper update based on information gathered from town hall meetings and email to college/departments

Town hall meetings were held in different areas to solicit community input. Nobody appeared at meetings, possibly due to lack of interest and/or inclement weather. A couple of responses were received by President Deason-Toyne via emails. Four main concerns/questions were raised: 1). Who authored the draft? And does Faculty Council have the necessary authority to do so if this did not originate with Provost Tadlock; 2). There was concern over the wording regarding the area of conflict; 3). The document does not appear to allow faculty or staff to discuss issues with political representatives; this may be considered a freedom of speech issue; and 4). The Chairs council should be represented to be truly representative.

President Deason-Toyne clarified it was she who drafted the document from a conversation which took place with Provost Tadlock concerning shared governance at NSU. Functionally, one must consider whether the Council really represents the faculty and to what authority does it act in its current capacity. Shared governance status would give the Council a bit more authority, which may in turn get faculty more involved, and in due course have faculty acquire more respect at the bargaining table –

Concerns regarding wording and the use of the term “honor” in the second half of paragraph two might create a sentiment of conflict unnecessarily. In cases of exigent circumstances it is incumbent that we continue to act in a professional manner. Bekkering notes shared governance taken seriously from the current administration. Presently, there are a limited number of people who appear as representatives; with shared governance we may be able to achieve a more representative outlook/perspective.

Having a document on shared governance in writing is helpful to clarify when and to whom shared governance should apply. This is the way shared governance should function – where there exists a number of guiding principles and a body of representative faculty to put forth ideas. Deason-Toyne will make changes after DiIanni forwards comments. Deason-Toyne will work on rewording and incorporate the suggestions of the Council into a revised document, focusing on concept instead of structure. The document will be carried forward after everyone is favorable to it. Once revisions are made, Deason-Toyne will email the revised document to the Council. At the next Council meeting slated for March 4, the delegation will revisit the concept context. There were no further questions/concerns regarding this topic.

C.  New Business

Nominating Committee for FC Officers for 2011/2013

It was noted that one cannot be on the committee if you are interested in a position. Newhouse, Van Nostrand, C. Cox, C. Copeland, and R. Cambiano were appointed by President Deason-Toyne to serve as Nominating Committee members.

Circle of Excellence Award Selection panel – Volunteers –

President Deason-Toyne would like to have at least five, hopefully seven individuals. Several delegates were being considered.

Faculty Council Group for the “Big Event” (annual) to perform March 26^th community service at the Tahlequah campus –

Faculty Council representation as a group or as individual faculty is encouraged. Bekkering suggested for future events, we may wish to lead by example by creating a group. This year, the Council will focus on soliciting volunteers given the late date.

@ Marketing of Programs – University Relations assistance?

Comments have been received regarding some colleges getting their programs, etc… marketed in a timely and effective manner. President Deason-Toyne queried whether as a group there may be something we can do to alleviate this problem. Or, is this merely a perceived problem? Given there are recruiters for high schools and junior colleges, is there a particular person(s) who might address the Council. It was suggested that the new Director for Communications & Community College Transfer Process could come to Faculty Council and discuss with us regarding this concern. Deason-Toyne will invite Jason Jessie, Suzanne Myers, and Tom Smith to talk with Faculty Council. It was further noted by B. Hall that we need someone on the BA campus to develop partnerships with programs keeping in mind that BA’s needs differ from Tahlequah’s campus.

Definition of “student centered” – what does that mean at NSU?

President Deason-Toyne was asked by Provost Tadlock to come up with a definition of what “student centered” means at NSU. Suggestions put forth included: rewording to include aspects of respect so it does not sound so much like “customer service”; looking at/taking into account where our students are when they come to our campus (first generation, etc.); and how is this tied to student learning. Another definition posed included such concepts as: learner-centered and instructional practice that needs to change in five key areas (the balance of power, the function of content, the role of the teacher, the responsibility for learning, and the purpose and processes of evaluation).  Another definition put forth was: “a learning model that places the student (learner) in the center of the learning ... an approach to education focusing on the needs of the students”. It was further suggested that it might be helpful to consult Provost Tadlock’s blog to see what his definition is. President Deason-Toyne instructed the Council to send ideas to her; she will compile them and will forward the list back to us.

· Review of Recommendations by Taskforce on Online Courses

There was brief discussion regarding classroom compensation issues. Ede pointed out that COE has converted several courses to hybrids where the only face-to-face class is the first and last class. It seems reasonable that faculty should receive some sort of compensation since only the first and last class meets face-to-face. (88% online). Nursing has all online courses, as well. Fair distribution and tight control (i.e., standardization, class size) should be considered.

· ANNOUNCEMENTS (None)

· ADJOURNMENT BY 5:02 P.M. NEXT MEETING March 4, 2011

.ITEMS BEING MONITORED-

· Location for Faculty Gathering – All campuses –

Location of Circle of Excellence Bricks

Worker’s Comp. advocate/liaison

---

Submitted by Pamela Louderback, Secretary-Treasurer
02/22/11
--------------------------------------------------------------