FACULTY SENATE MEETING AGENDA
May 10, 2000, 3:31 p.m.
Engineering Hall 209

I. Call to Order -- Jerry Musick, Chair

II. Approval of Agenda

III. Approval of the Minutes, April 12, 2000

IV. Old Business

V. New Business

A. Ad Hoc Committee on Part-time and Full-time Non-Tenure-Track Faculty -- Bill Springer, Chair, Buddy Lyle, Michael Lieber, Alberta Bailey, Mark Killenbeck, Bill Currington, Dick Oliver, and Nancy Talburt, Ex Officio (See Attachment A and UA web site for Academic Policies).

B. Ad Hoc Committee on the Faculty Handbook and Other Matters -- David Gay, Chair; Steven Neuse, Curt Rom, and Nancy Talburt, Ex Officio (See Attachment B).

C. Nine Month vs. Twelve Month Appointments -- John King, Chair, Martin Redfern, Kevin Hall, Alberta Bailey, Michael Buono, Randy Luttrell, and Nancy Talburt, Ex Officio.

D. Committee on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure -- Paul Cronan (See Faculty Senate Web Site and Attachment C).

VI. Reports

A. Nominations and Elections Committee -- Doug Adams

B. Retention Task Force -- Dennis Brewer

C. Diversity Task Force -- Mary O'Leary-Kelly

D. Employee Assistance Program -- Barbara Taylor

VII. Announcements/Information

VIII. Adjournment

A T T A C H M E N T S

Attachment A -

Non-Tenure-Track Instructional Faculty

The Faculty Senate recognizes the extremely important contributions made by the non-tenure-track instructional faculty at the University of Arkansas; supports the efforts of the administration to provide fair and equitable appointment and assessment of non-tenure-track instructional faculty at the University of Arkansas through Academic Policies 1405.12, 1405.121, 1405.12C, 1405.12D, 1405.16, and 1435.50; supports the efforts of the American Association of University Professors to reverse the very disturbing and potentially harmful national trend of colleges and universities relying on increasing numbers of non-tenure-track instructional faculty; and makes the following recommendations regarding the appointment and assessment of non-tenure-track faculty at the University of Arkansas:

1) Academic Policy 1405.16 be modified to include more specific instructions concerning the hiring of part-time non-tenure-track faculty especially as regards a complete explanation of the options available regarding benefits and other items and conditions of employment during the hiring process as well as a Sample Letter of Appointment for part-time appointments.

2) Each academic unit review its personnel documents to insure that they cover the appointment and assessment of non-tenure-track faculty and are consistent with Academic Policies 1405.12, 1405.121, 1405.12C, 1405.12D, 1405.16, and 1435.50.

3) In keeping with Academic Policy 1435.50, which states in part "Preferred uses for these ranks/titles are as follows. Lecturer is normally reserved for temporary or part-time appointments and instructor is typically used for full-time appointments that may be renewed from year to year...", all academic units currently using the title "Lecturer" to describe one or more full-time non-tenure-track faculty positions should change those titles to "Instructor" wherever possible.

4) Academic Policy 1405.12 be modified to include provision for offering any full-time non-tenure-track instructional faculty member who has at least five (5) years of continuous satisfactory service in the same instructional position a multi-year rolling appointment which would be contingent on the availability of adequate funds and continued satisfactory service.

Attachment B -

TO: Members of the Faculty Senate and Other Interested Parties

FROM: Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on the Faculty Handbook and Other Matters
David E.R. Gay (convener), Steven Neuse, Curt Rom, and Nancy Talburt

DATE: May 5, 2000

SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORT

The following information is for consideration by the Faculty Senate, May 10, 2000,
at 3:30 p.m., Engineering Hall 209. There are two items of new business for Senate consideration: (1) a series of recommendations, and (2) approval of the committee report.

The recommendations are summarized below as a set of action items (which may be treated collectively or separated). Further rationale for the recommendations follows the summary.

I. SUMMARY
The Ad Hoc Committee recommends the following for approval by the Faculty Senate:

1. Faculty Senate Executive Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: Modify the membership to include the Chair and/or Vice Chair of the Campus Council when held by faculty, the Chair of the Faculty Senate, the FS Parliamentarian, and the FS Secretary. Rationale: Only faculty should serve on the FS Executive Committee and including the Parliamentarian and Secretary adds to the smoother operation of the committee. New members do not join the Executive Committee until their successors are elected (or appointed in the cases of secretary and parliamentarian). Also extend the term past July 1 until the elected members (or, if approved, the appointed FS Secretary and FS Parliamentarian) can serve.

2. Membership of the Financial Advisory Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: Modify the membership to Include the Chair of the Faculty Senate and the Chair of the Campus Faculty as ex officio members. Rationale: Both are become involved in budgetary discussions and this would include their input in the process.

3. Distribution of Faculty Senate "Minutes"-- RECOMMENDATION: That the drafts Of "Minutes" be posted on the website and distributed by e-mail (instead of hard copy distribution). When the "Minutes" are approved by the FS, the drafts are replaced with the approved set. Rationale: We currently post and distribute by e-mail and hard copy distribution is excessive.

4. Calendar Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: That the Calendar Committee become a Faculty Senate Committee. Rationale: The governance documents clearly state that this is an area of exclusive jurisdiction of the Senate and this shift will accommodate our jurisdiction.

5. Terms on the Undergraduate Programs Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: Terms should be stated as two years because membership is appointed from Senate membership (whose terms are for two years). Rationale: This clarifies that this committee, composed of Senators, does not have the traditional three year term.

6. Election of FS representatives to the Campus Council-- RECOMMENDATION: Allow an earlier election of FS representatives to the Campus Council. Rationale: Our procedures allow for election only at our first fall meeting, while Staff Senate and ASG members can be elected earlier. Also it would allow the Campus Council to be functional as its new year, July 1. The Rules of Procedure would be changed to read [underlined portions reflect DELETION] "At the Faculty Senate's first meeting of each academic year, t [T]he Senate shall elect 16 senators ..."

II. Further Rationale and Details of RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Faculty Senate Executive Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: Modify the membership to include the Chair and/or Vice Chair of the Campus Council when held by faculty, the Chair of the Faculty Senate, the Faculty Senate Parliamentarian, and the Faculty Senate Secretary.

Rationale: Only members of the Faculty should serve to determine agendas for that body, and no Faculty Senate Chairperson should be denied the opportunity to assist in preparing agendas for the meeting and learning of the background regarding why items are be put forward (if any), in order to better serve the interests of the Faculty Senate. With the timing of the election to the FS Executive Committee being in the fall after elections are completed, there needs to be an Executive Committee serving until successors can be elected or, if approved, the appointed members (FS Parliamentarian and FS Secretary) can serve.

If these changes are approved, the text of the revised Executive Committee description of Faculty Senate Committees (see section 3-16 of the Faculty Handbook) would read as follows (with proposed changes underlined):

Executive Committee

The Executive Committee will prepare the Faculty Senate agenda and, at the request of the Chair of the Faculty Senate, recommend new policies or modifications to existing policies concerning matters regarding faculty service at this institutions. It shall also be available to advise the Chairs of the Faculty and Faculty Senate on matters of pressing faculty concern.

Its membership shall consist of the Vice Chair of the Faculty Senate who shall chair this committee, the Chair of the Faculty Senate, the immediate past chair of the Faculty Senate, the Chair of the Faculty, the Vice Chair of the Faculty, the Chair and/or Vice Chair of the Campus Council when the incumbent is a member of the Faculty, the Faculty Senate Parliamentarian, and the Faculty Senate Secretary, plus five members elected by the Faculty Senate from its own membership. Election shall take place at the first meeting of the Faculty Senate each fall semester. Members continue to serve until July 1. They may serve after July 1, until their replacements are elected or selected.

2. Membership of the Financial Advisory Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: Modify the membership to include the Chair of the Faculty Senate and the Chair of the Campus Faculty as ex officio members. Rationale: Both are directly involved in budgetary discussions and this would include their input in the process.

3. Distribution of Faculty Senate "Minutes"-- RECOMMENDATION: That the drafts, to be replaced by the subsequently approved "Minutes," be posted on the website and distributed by e-mail (instead of hard copy distribution). Rationale: We currently post and distribute by e-mail and hard copy distribution is excessive. This would revise the Rules of Procedure of the Faculty Senate, Item 7B. Notices and Minutes, to become

B. [Delete: "Even if minutes of Faculty Senate meetings are distributed to them by e-mail, hard copies"....] CHANGE TO "Electronic copies [the items following this proposed new phrase are a distribution list]."

4. Calendar Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: That the Calendar Committee become a Faculty Senate Committee with the description becoming [proposed changes are underlined]:

Calendar Committee
Drafts the academic calendar and makes recommendations concerning the calendar and the academic schedule to the Faculty Senate. The Faculty Senate requests input from the Campus Council prior to the approval of the calendar and academic schedule by the Faculty Senate.

Voting membership consists of one representative from each of the colleges and schools, one student, and one staff representative. Non-voting ex officio representatives will be from the offices of the Provost & Vice chancellor for Academic Affairs, the Vice Chancellor for Student Services, Computing Services, Registrar, and Treasurer.

The Chair and Vice Chair are elected from the committee membership.

Rationale: The governance documents in Article I - The Faculty, Article A. Authority, Item 1, clearly make this a academic matter and the jurisdiction of the faculty "1. The faculty, acting under the Board of Trustees, shall have responsibility for all matter of academic concern. Such matters shall include, but not be limited to: [there is a list] d. University academic calendars and schedules;" As a faculty committee, 3/4 or more of the voting members should be faculty members, in accordance with current FS governing rules.

5. Terms on the Undergraduate Programs Committee -- RECOMMENDATION: Terms should be stated as two years because membership is appointed from Senate membership (whose terms are for two years). Rationale: This clarifies that this committee, composed of Senators, does not have the traditional three year term.

6. Election of FS representatives to the Campus Council-- RECOMMENDATION: Allow an earlier election of FS representatives to the Campus Council. [This is a restatement of the rationale presented earlier.] Rationale: Our procedures allow for election only at our first fall meeting, while Staff Senate and ASG members can be elected earlier. Also it would allow the Campus Council to be functional as its new year, July 1. The Rules of Procedure would be changed to read [underlined portions reflect DELETION] "At the Faculty Senate's first meeting of each academic year, t [T]he Senate shall elect 16 senators ..."

III. Committee Report [Approval is RECOMMENDED for the following report.]

In addition to the action items above, the committee considered a variety of other issues assigned to it during the year. Our report summarizes these issues and reports them to the Faculty Senate.

1. A variety of minor editorial matters should be scrutinized, as usual, by the FS Secretary and the FS Executive Committee and corrected in the on-line text of the Faculty Handbook.

2. Who are voting "faculty"? Issues for those with less than half-time faculty appointments? The governance document, in Article I - The Faculty, Section A. Authority, Item 5, describes eligible voters for faculty offices and members of the Faculty Senate as "those holding a half-time (or greater) faculty appointment who are tenured or on the tenure track or have been declared eligible to vote by the Faculty Senate, and those in their third year (or greater) consecutive year of full-time appointment who are instructors or lecturers."
Review how our governance body handles voting eligibility and possible issues for part-time faculty with less than half-time appointments.

3. Appointments, Promotion and Tenure Committee -- The committee could not reach consensus on a recommendation about changing the composition of the APT Committee.
The APT Committee favors retaining the current At-Large election to function as an appeals body, in accordance with the Campus Governance documents. The at-large election of members provides a broadly representative committee which can operate independently of parochial college or school concerns. When the committee deliberates appeals cases it examines the supporting documentation and can/does ask for additional information whenever it seems appropriate to the committee. However, there is a different model based upon an adversarial/promotional approach with guaranteed representation from each college of school. Reviewing the representation of the various schools and committees on the APT Committee reveals that members have been elected from all colleges and schools.

4. Routing Legislation with Exclusive or Shared Jurisdiction-- Campus Governance
We encourage the Faculty Senate to work with the other governance bodies so that routing legislation through the CC Agenda Committee functions properly. Legislation should be checked for routing to the proper jurisdiction. This should insure that our interests, and the interests of others, are properly routed among the governance bodies, prior to being sent forward to the administration. Each governing body has its own jurisdiction and legislation should be handled only by the appropriate body. In Article VIII - The Campus Council, Article A. Authority, Item 2, "All legislation initiated in the Faculty Senate, the Student Senate, or the Staff Senate shall be reported to the Campus Council for informational purposes. If the legislation is not within the sole jurisdiction of those bodies, it will require final action by the Campus Council for approval." Also through the CC Agenda Committee there is a routing function described in Article VIII, Section E. Committees, Item 1c. "The Committee shall review all legislation reported by the Faculty Senate, Student Senate, or Staff Senate. If final action is required by the Campus Council, the Committee shall include such items as top priority on the agenda for the next meeting of the Campus Council. If legislation reported by the Faculty Senate, Student Senate, or Staff Senate appears to the Committee to be legislation which rests within the sole jurisdiction of a Senate other than the one from which it was reported, it shall be promptly referred to the Senate with sole jurisdiction over such legislation and shall be considered enacted only if approved by the Senate with sole jurisdiction."
Closely working with the Associated Student Government and the Staff Senate will assure that governance matters can be checked for exclusive jurisdiction and routing. To date this routing procedure has not worked regularly.
5. Legislation from Faculties and the Role of Routing Legislation to the Faculty Senate -- We reaffirm the governance documents. Governance documents clearly state that all legislation on academic affairs must be reported promptly to the Faculty Senate [Article III - College, School and At-Large Faculties, Section B. Authority, Item 1] for its approval, disapproval, or forwarding without either action. In other words, academic matters approved by the faculty cannot be vetoed prior to approval by the Faculty Senate which has the sole jurisdiction in these matters, under the authority of the Board of Trustees [Article II - The Faculty Senate, Section A. Authority, Item 6]. If the FS sets other procedures, then the college or school must conform to the FS procedures [Article III, Section B, Item 2]. However, a faculty should be mindful that resource issues must have the support of the administrative officer(s) to be implemented.
6. Some Functions of the International Programs and Services Subcommittee -- A committee should serve the functions of the subcommittee. Also, the academic programs and services at current international and future off campus sites will have reviews to determine that their academic quality is consistent with our campus, along with the accreditation policies and comparable requirements for on-campus programs.

Attachment C -

MEMORANDUM

To: Faculty Senate Executive Committee

From: T. P. Cronan, Chair,
For the Committee on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure

Date: May 8, 2000

In response to questions from the UA Faculty Senate Executive Committee,
there were some procedural issues that the Committee on Appointment,
Promotion, and Tenure (CAPT) found to be at variance with approved
procedures:

1. We note that in all appeal cases that came to the CAPT this year, the
Chancellor, who will review the recommendation of the CAPT, rendered a
negative recommendation for appointment, promotion, and/or tenure by virtue
of his signature on the approval list prior to giving the individual an
opportunity to appeal the Vice Chancellor's recommendation. The Chancellor
should not have signed the approval list until an opportunity for appeal had
been filed and an appeal recommendation reviewed.
2. The Chancellor indicated to the CAPT (January 24, 2000) that he had met
with the Deans, as a group, to discuss appointment, promotion, and tenure
candidates. There is no provision for the Chancellor to consult the Deans
as a group in the review of faculty for appointment, promotion, and/or
tenure. On November 19, 1999 (prior to this year's consultation with the
Deans as a group), the CAPT committee communicated to the Chancellor its
concern with this practice that was used by the Chancellor the previous
year. This concern was also communicated to the Faculty Senate Chair
requesting that the Faculty Senate be advised of our concerns.