Final approved 2-2-06

Meet and Confer

January 19, 2006

Admin:† Roy Saigo, Michael Spitzer, John C. Burgeson, Larry Chambers, Kristi Tornquist, Margaret Vos, Mitch Rubinstein, Rex Veeder

Faculty:† Judy Kilborn, Annette Schoenberger, JoAnn Gasparino, Andrew Larkin, Robert Johnson, Jayantha Herath, Susan Motin, Bill Langen, Steve Hornstein, Balsy Kasi, Polly Chappell Ė Note taker



Admin: Iíd like to begin by introducing Mitch Rubenstein.† Mitch, just wave.† Mitch is the new Interim Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs in my office.† And heíll be working on a lot of the things that involve you and helping with NCA accreditations.


Admin: And heís been here?


Admin:† A whole week, I think.


Admin:† And youíre still coming?† (Laughter)


FA:† We havenít had a cold snap yet.†


Admin:† Heís from St. Paul.† For the record, Judy reminds me, the President is expected, but heís had a busy schedule today.† Heís leaving tomorrow for an overseas trip, so there might have been an emergency.†


FA:† Weíre assuming heíll be here soon.


Admin:† Yes.


FA:† But we want to start moving since itís getting so late.


Approval of Minutes


Meet and Confer Notes of December 15, 2005óNotes not ready.


Admin:† With regard to the Meet and Confer notes of December 15th, they are not ready yet, so weíre not ready to approve those.† We have a number of unfinished business items, but many of these will go very quickly because they are quick reports.†



Unfinished Business


1.     Attendance Policy† (Admin) (9/08/05)†


Admin:† We established, with the first item, a draft Attendance Policy.† We established a group to work on developing that.† I donít know if theyíve met yet, but I know itís been scheduled.† So we should hear back from those folks shortly.† Any comments on that?


2.     Task forces on Diversity (a.k.a. Motion from Teacher Development) (FA) (9/22/05)


Admin: Task force on Diversity.† The COE group -- I think there were a number of folks that got together and were meeting, and there were a number of things scheduled.† So thatís begun.


FA:† So the COE Task force?


Admin:† Right.


FA:† The one that was recommended by EEOCÖ.


Admin:† Youíre referring to two things.


FA:† Right.


Admin:† This one refers to the motion from Teacher Development.† So thatís the COE one.


FA:† Okay.


Admin: †The other one is the Task force on Diversity.† Rex, you want to comment on that?


Admin:† Itís meeting tomorrow morning to finish up the proposal.†


FA:† Are they continuing to talk about resources and plans?


Admin:† Yeah, the two things that we will be proposing are the make up of the group and the resourcesÖ discussion of resources.


Admin:† Okay?


FA:† Um hum.


3.     Grade Appeal Policy Guidelines (FA) (10/06/05)†


Admin:† Grade Appeal Policy Guidelines.† We are waiting for a response from faculty on that one.


FA: And Academic Affairs Committee is who worked on the initial document that we brought to Meet and Confer, weíve referred that to them, and they are supposed to bring back their recommendations to Senate in February.†


4.     Template on Teaching Schedule/Office Hours (FA) (10/20/05)


Admin:† Template on Teaching Schedule, and that should say student contact hours on the agenda.† Again, we have a small task force convening on that one.† Two deans and two faculty members are involved.†† I donít know if the meeting has been scheduled yet.†


Admin:† Not yet.


Admin:† It should be very soon.


FA:† I talked to Dean Specht-Jarvis today.† He said that he was going to be contacting people tomorrow.† He wanted our information on what had been discussed.† So weíll be forwarding him the Meet and Confer minutes so we have something for that group to start with.


Admin:† Could it get sent to all four committee members?


FA:† Pardon?


Admin:† Could you send it to all four committee members, maybe?


Admin:† Kristi is in that group as well.


FA:† Iíll do that tomorrow.†


††††††††††† [President Saigo Arrived]


Admin:† We started without you.†


Admin:† Iím glad you did.† (Laughter)† Itís like waiting for a professor to show up to class.†


FA:† You would have had just a couple more minutes.† (Laughter)


5.     DGS and University College (FA) (10/20/05) and (Admin) (11/17/05)†


Admin:† DGS and University College Task Force.†


FA: We have put out a request for people to serve on that committee, and Iím assuming weíll take names forward to Senate next Tuesday.† Iím waiting for committees to get their names in.† Primarily those were committees or units with the University.


Admin:† Right.


FA:† Iím assuming weíll appoint them next Tuesday.


Admin:† Okay.


6.     Applied Doctorate (Admin) (11/17/05)


Admin: Under the Applied Doctorate, we had asked if the faculty would consider some of the potential ramifications to the University when we have applied doctorates in place.† And I donít know if youíve had an opportunity to . . .?


FA:† Thatís on the agenda for next Tuesdayís meeting.


Admin:† Well, that takes care of all the old business.† Most of it remains to be followed up.


FA:† Oh, this shouldnít be under New Business.† We should move some of this up.†


Admin:† Yeah, thatís true.† Some of the stuff that is under New Business is old business.† (Laughter)


FA:† In fact all the way through item three.


Admin:† Right.


FA:† Itís really old, unfinished business.


Admin:† Take the term New Business and move it down three spots.


FA:† And Iíll beat up the editor of this document.


New Business


1.     Request for Hire Form (Admin) (11/17/05)


Admin:† The Request for Hire Form, we had asked for some comments and feedback from the faculty on that.


FA:† And, Iíve asked Robert to speak to that.


FA:† We have comments involving two, three categories.† One is we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the transparency of the process.† And we understand that you will be using the form in the short term without input.† What weíd like to do is use this opportunity to have a conversation about the nature of the criteria that were used for making decisions of position allocations.† So weíd like to have that on the agenda for this spring for Meet and Confer.† The nature of the criteria used.† We do have some recommendations for moving the boxes on the current form, and Susan has those.† We feel that the rationale for the position should be provided for contents there early on.† We have a couple other things.


FA:† The number and the narrative and the justification are together on the top.† And the other thing is, that weíre suggesting tható


Admin:† Say that again.


FA:† The form, it has the narrative and the justification on the bottom.† Weíre saying move that to the top.† And the other thing that we were asking, that somewhere there be a department sign-off, you know, with the department signature?


Admin:† Isnít it on there?


FA:† Um, um.† There is nothing on there.


FA:† And somewhere, as we have the discussion about what criteria should be used, we should probably get a report on how those criteria have been applied down the road.


Admin:† Okay, anything else?


FA:† Well, we need to have the discussions on it.†


Admin:† No, I mean are there any other points that people want to raise about that?† And weíll take that under advisement.


2.     Counseling Center† (FA) (12/15/05)


Admin:† Counseling Center.†


FA:† Well, we thought you would bring a response to our proposal?


Admin:† I think what we would like to do is establish a little sub-group to come together.† And for the report the sub-group would be comprised of two faculty members, two MSUAASF members, and two Administrators. MSUAASF has a stake in this as well as the IFO.†


FA: Iím not sure if I understand what the purpose of this group would be?


Admin:† To consider the obligations and nature of the position.


FA:† We need to talk.† Excuse us, weíre going to Caucus.




FA:† I think weíre all back.† We believe that our request has a contractual, legal basis.† And this is really a unit dispute thatís governed by Article III, Section C, with unit disputes.† So, for that reason this has already been reported.† Itís already at the IFO level, and we will ask them to discuss with MnSCU what the appropriate resolution of this is.


Admin:† Okay.† One of the reasons I want the three groups to get together in that way is to decide on how, whatever arrangement we come up with, we want to make sure we meet student needs; that we are providing the appropriate coverage throughout the year for our students; where that unit will report.† Those are things that have yet to be determined as far as I am concerned.† And we need to look at those.† If you donít want to have this group meet, thatís okay, weíll just go talk with MSUAASF, and see what they have to say.


FA:† We need to caucus.




FA:† We really need clarification of what it is youíre saying.† Weíre not sure if youíre agreeing to the proposal, and that the discussion that you want to have with MSUAASF and IFO is kind of a transition plan, or if you are saying something else.† So if you could clarifyÖ


Admin:† Well, Larry would you like to talk about MSUAASF?


Admin:† I go to the MSUAASF Meet and Confers.† And there has been a concern in the MSUAASF union that they have discussed on several occasions, and one of the things that they suggested was to have an independent, outside consultant come in to take a look at the situation and make a recommendation to Administration.


FA:† Weíve heard that they made that proposal. I believe at the last Meet and Confer we asked for a copy of it. †And the Counseling Center, in their proposal, was addressing issues of coverage and quality.† But it seems to me that if youíre not agreeing to this, itís really inappropriate for us to be discussing with MSUAASF IFO issues.† It really is a unit dispute; itís inappropriate for us to be having a conversation about it.† It really needs to be a conversation between IFO and MnSCU, according to Article III, Section C.


Admin:† The parties will attempt to resolve disputes over bargaining unit inclusion or exclusion of new positions.† So that seems to me to suggest that we do discuss those things.


FA: Upon advice of Pat Arsenault, she said that that would take place at the IFO/MnSCU level.† Weíve already had conversations with her about it.† And itís really a negotiation, among bargaining units at the state-wide level really, not a local issue anymore.


Admin: Well, I think the issue really has to do with the particular position of the director.† The issue has to do with what percentage of time that individual spends doing supervision and what percentage is spent doing counseling.


FA:† And the unit clarification order is based on those percentages, I understand.† Part of that conversation, at the IFO/MnSCU level, could be on investigation on percentages.†


Admin:† Well, but we havenít . . . Well, I think what we ought to be talking about in this group is how that personís time will be spent, and whether or not that position gets redefined in some way or another.† I donít see that getting, at this point, yet, to be an IFO/MnSCU . . . I mean, itís a campus-based position.† We need to define the duties of that individual in that position.† And once we do that, then if thereís a dispute, it would go to where youíre saying.


FA: Isnít there currently a job description?


Admin:† Well, weíve waited for several months to get this proposal from the Counseling Center.


FA:† Right.


Admin:† And now we want to be able to look at the position, now that we have that, and come up with some definition of how weíd like that position to function.


FA: I think we need to go back and ask if itís appropriate.


FA:† To have this discussion?


FA:† Yes.


FA:† We certainly can ask that from the IFO and get back to you on that.


Admin:† Okay, and weíll start looking at it from our perspective, in terms of how we think it should be, some more.


FA: Thank you.†


Admin:† Okay, next item.


3.     Additional Duty Day (Admin) (12/15/05)


Admin:†† Additional Duty Day.† We had discovered that we were missing one duty day for 2006-07 in the academic year.† We talked about this last time, and made a suggestion of how to handle that.† You want to provide some feedback on that?† I believe that you had suggested that we try to find a way of making that a classroom day rather than just another duty day to make sure that we have comparable days.† Weíve looked into that.† Mitch, do you want to talk about which days that we found were available and what that would mean?


Admin:† The two days that were available were the 2nd of September and the 13th of December. . . . Tuesday the 5th of September or Wednesday the 13th of December.† And the question was, what would be the effect on the Monday-Wednesday-Friday classes versus Tuesday-Thursday classes.† And right now they are very close.† There seems to be a slight edge in terms of Monday-Wednesday-Friday classes.† So if this could become a decision point, it might be a little better to go with a Tuesday class instead of a Wednesday class.† The difference is marginal.


FA:† Excuse me.† I need to ask a question.† The 5th is already a duty day.


Admin:† Theyíre both already duty days.† So the point is that we can add another class day by changing a duty day to a class day.† But it wonít address the issue of needing another duty day.


FA:† But that day in December is important because itís a study day for the students.


Admin:† Thatís correct.


FA:† Itís something we asked for.


Admin:† We know that.† You asked that we find a way of adding another classroom day.† These are the only two classroom days that we can figure out that we could add.† One would be at the beginning of the semester, and one would be on the study day.† Even if we did either of those two things, which weíre not saying we should do, but even if we did either of those two things, it wouldnít solve the problem.


FA:† Okay.† So one question is, what is the difference between instructional days the following spring?


Admin:† On the Monday-Wednesday-Friday, Tuesday-Thursday thing?


FA:† The total number.


Admin:† There are more in the spring than in the fall.† I think we did count them up at some point.†


FA:† So you need to add extra duty days for the entire year or just for fall?


Admin:† For the entire year.† And we had proposed doing what we did this year, where the same issue had come up, adding the Friday the week before classes begin.


Admin:† I think for fall, counting final days is 73, not counting that study day.† Subtract five if you donít want to count finals week.† I think 77 in the spring, thatís a fast count.


Admin:† Itís probably helpful to count instructional days, but itís also important to know how many Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays--


FA: Yeah.


Admin:† --Thursdays, and Fridays there are.†


Admin:† And in the spring, you should subtract one for that faculty, you know that one day. . .


FA:† Faculty Forum Day?


Admin:† Yeah, that day.


FA:† Do you have proposals for when to add the duty day?†


Admin:† That Friday, yes. Thatís what we proposed last time.†


FA:† Let me see. Actually there are two separate problems.† It might be desirable to have an additional instructional day, but thereís room already in the existing array of duty days to put in another instructional day.† So thatís the lesser of the two problems.†


Admin:† Yes.


FA:† Problem number two, is weíre not in conformity with the total number of duty days.


Admin:† Thatís the primary problem.


FA:† By what?† And so, formally thatís the more important question.† But in terms of the difficulty of the problem, itís the lesser one.† We could go for the last day to turn in grades solution at the end of the first semester, which is the Soviet answer: we pretend to work and you pretend to pay us.† (Laughter)† I mean that figuratively in this case.† We add a duty dayó


Admin:† Well, that would solve our tuition problem.† We could pretend to pay you.† (Laughter)


FA:† Yeah, right.† No, I mean that very figuratively, where we donít really have a real problem, and we solve it with a couple of scratches on a piece of paper.


FA: I know that one issue that the faculty have talked about is that there are less instruction days in fall.† For some people thatís been a problem.† And the second thing, also, now this is my recollection, wasnít that the last time North-Central came through, we were very, very tight on our instruction days, our contact time with our students?† Is that something we need to be thinking about this go-around as well?


Admin:† I donít know what happened the last time that North-Central was here.


FA:† Itís been an issue in the past, the number of teaching days.


FA:† Teaching days, yes.† It was mentioned in a North-Central report.


Admin:† We calculated for the full semester, and we calculated the number of weekly units, or three-hour segments, in each week, and it came out to something like 14ó


Admin:† For Tuesday-Thursdays itís a 13-week equivalent, plus one session.† For Monday-Wednesday-Friday sessions, itís a 13-week equivalent.† A week being three sessions, plus two extra sessions.†


Admin:† And that didnít count exams?


Admin:† Thatís not counting exams.


FA:† I think thatís the issue.† We had a recommendation to you a couple years ago for a kind of model for the academic year, which called for 15 weeks of instructional time.† Iím not sure if that included exams or not.† And this 13 is falling very short of that, and it really affects all of us in the classroom, especially students.† Last semester was a prime example.† It was a hurdle to get in the material in a short instruction period.† So I think we have 116 duty days.†


Admin:† Now the final exams are two hours, are they not?


FA:† They go from 7:30 to 9:45 . . .


Admin:† So thatís two hours and 15 minutes.† How many 50 minute hours are those?


FA:† (Calculating out loud)


Admin:† Three 50 minute blocks adds another week to the 13, thatís 14 and 2/3.†


FA:† I think when I did this at another school I was at, what the minimum requirement was that a course had to be fourteen weeks meeting, and then you add the finals onto that.† So I donít think weíre at that.† I think weíre at 13 and a little more.† And the recommendation from the Senate was to have both semesters be 14 plus finals, at least.


Admin:† This is a good discussion for us to have. Itís very valuable, but that calendar has already been published.


FA:† We know that.


Admin:† So we really canít do anything to change the dates for that calendar, other than to change the number of duty days, which we need to do.† We could change some of the class days, as we said, if we wanted to do that, but we need to pay attention, very carefully, to the recommendation from the faculty, in developing the next set of calendars.† And one of the things that I just mentioned to Judy was that we need to set up a calendar committee to develop the next calendar and take these factors into consideration.† But weíre faced with, what do we do right now for next year?†


FA:† It looks to me, and I donít know how much you want to monkey with this, if you add a Tuesday and the Tuesdays-Thursdays are at 14, that theyíre not operating in thirds, theyíre operating in halves.† One is at 14, and the other is 13-2/3. Why not add the Wednesday, and they are both at 14?† I donít know.


FA:† But we canít do that because the physics students will have their final day . . .


Admin:† The one thing I know that was an issue when we did have class on that Tuesday and Wednesday, was it two years ago, is that a lot of orientations that go on for students within halls, within work areas, and work spaces, Respect and Responsibility.† All of those classes, thatís a great day to do it, because youíre not going against any class time.† So, I know that from a Student Life perspective, the recommendation was to have that Tuesday be a day to kind of get the training part done.


FA: So our options now are to add an instructional day, say December 13?


Admin:† Let me suggest . . . Weíre talking about two different things, and weíre conflating them.


FA: Letís follow the Soviet model.† You know thatís to add another to grading theory, or whatever.


FA: Weíll have that Friday to work.† Thereís not going to be meetings.


Admin:† Thatís what we did this year.†


FA: Thatís an option.†


Admin:† And thatís the day that we suggested last time that we add, and you came back with, can we do it in such a way that would add a classroom day?† No, we canít do that in such a way that would add a classroom day.† So thatís our response to that particular question.† Now if we want to add another classroom day, after we resolve the number of duty days, we can discuss that.


FA: Okay, so weíve had really two options.† One is that Friday . . .


FA: †The Committee on the Institution, as Robert mentioned, had a really good layout for a calendar that addressed this very issue.† And so it would be nice if we could . . .


FA:† Iím sure, as Michael said, heís asked to have a committee, a calendar committee, which would be the Committee on the Institution, convene and meet with Mitch, and they could bring that proposal forward as a starting point.


FA:† Yeah.


FA:† Did anyone look at the year after next?† Are we going to be in this same situation where we have to add an instructional day to fall?†


Admin:† We always find this, you know, because we look in about November, December, to find out where we are at.† Thatís where we find it out.


FA:† So we donít have a calendar for---


Admin:† 07-08?† Is it 07-08?


Admin:† We should get going on it, 07-08.


FA:† We need to then add the Committee on the Institution . . .


FA:† Right, and Iím going to do that.† That will be on my agenda for tomorrow.† So back to the question, which was, do we want to at this point add an instructional day to fall either on that Tuesday, which would be the day after Labor Day, or on that December 13, which we are strongly against as faculty?†


FA:† How soon do we have to make a decision?


Admin:† February, I think


FA:† Can I ask Margaret to explain why the Student Life would like that Tuesday open?


Admin:† The halls do a three-day move in.† So people could move in starting on Saturday, Sunday, but then Monday is also still a move-in day.† So you do have about 3,100 students that are moving in.† If they have that Tuesday as an open day, thatís when Respect and Responsibility, which is a required class for about 2,400 freshmen and probably close to 2,000 transfer students -- I think they run about eight sessions that day.† Itís a heavy day.† But they can literally get through almost 90 percent, so then those students donít have to work around their class schedule to get that requirement done.† Anyone who employs large groups of students, Rec Life, Rec Sports, Atwood, they employ 100 to 300 students.† Well, itís hard to do a training for all students.† I bet library, Learning Resources, runs into the same thing.† Itís a great training day to bring folks on board because once again, you donít have to work around that class schedule.† So, I know when it happened, there were questions, at least from the Student Life side saying, boy it was really hard this year when classes started like that.† The other thing is we donít have a . . . we always have an orientation day that happens for late folks who register, and those students wouldnít have it.† And that year that we had classes that Tuesday, we were running orientation for students, and they were supposed to be in classes, so it gives a little bit of breathing room.†


FA:† What is the orientation?


Admin:† The orientation is about a four-hour program that runs through for students who either registered late, or transfer students, and you would think that no one should be walking in the door that late.† But I bet they run maybe sixty to _____óitís a full house that day.† Doesnít make any sense, but theyíve done it that day.† So I just know it was their concern when it did happen.† And Iím sure it was because we were trying to figure out the calendar, our duty days.


FA: So what Iím hearing is that there are serious reservations from Student Life about that Tuesday.† And there are serious reservations from faculty, who have argued for that study day, and Iím wondering if we should just put this off until. . . have this be a goal for the next calendar, to make sure that we even out the instructional days.† What do you think?


FA:† Yes.


FA:† Good solution.


Admin:† We have to figure out to what extent Uniform Start Date is going to influence this . . . (Laughter)


FA:† We're assuming that weíre going to be successful in that endeavor, but I suppose. . .


Admin:† Well, we can try.


FA:† Thatís a stupid hope.


Admin:† So are we in agreement on this then?† Okay.


4.     Upper Division Writing Requirement (Admin) (01/19/06)†


Admin:† Upper Division Writing Requirement.† This is on the agenda, just at this point, as an informational thing, unless you have some stuff you want to deal with on that, Judy?


FA:† I think we could hear your information and see if it covers the things that we have.


Admin:† Well, we have a policy that was supposed to have Upper Division Writing Requirement in place, and it should be publicized to students in each of the programs, and Iím not sure that that in fact is true, and exists across the campus in all of our departments at this point.† Weíre supposed be able to identify which courses meet the Upper Division Writing Requirement, program by program.† And I donít think weíre quite there yet.† But I think, primarily, this is an issue that I need to bring to the deans in the departments to let that get worked out that way.† Thereís a statement in that report about when this is supposed to take affect, and weíre behind.


FA:† Well, one reason I asked for this to be kept on the agenda is thereís a lot of confusion about this.† And many of the questions involve, you know, really whoís responsible for overseeing this?† How does this tie in with the way we check for other university requirements?† How does it align with that?† It seems to me that thereís been some confusion because at semester conversion, many departments responded to the same set of questions that came out here, and the information actually isnít consistent between what they submitted there and whatís here.† There seems to be some inaccurate information in here.† I know that the committee was--


Admin: Can I have a copy of that?


FA: --yeah.† Actually, I brought enough so that people could take them if theyíd like.† Even just talking in pre-Meet and Confer, some members of the Executive Committee were saying that the information isnít really accurate.† Thereís also some concern about this at the departmental level.† A lot of departments have multiple majors, and they may have different requirements, Upper Division Writing Requirements, for those.†


Admin: This was done by a faculty committee.


FA:† Right.


Admin:† So if itís got inaccurate data in it, weíll go back to the faculty committee and say, youíve got inaccurate dataó


FA: Our point is the lack of coordination, who is responsible?†


Admin:† If I remember correctly, it was the Curriculum Committee.† And there were some issues that came up with regard to what requirements would be from the Curriculum Committee, and there was some discussion about having each department indicate what the goals were for the Upper Division Writing Requirement in that program, and then an indication on how that was going to be measured by the department.


FA: Isnít that really assessment?† I think it might be governed by the Assessment Committee.


Admin:† The Assessment Committee would be looking at the way in which this is assessed, but if you have an Upper Division Writing Requirement, then what does that mean?† You canít just say well our students are going to write something in the upper division.† If thereís a requirement, itís a requirement because there is a certain level of achievement that is expected of students in this program.† And so the expectation is the department would specify what that level of achievement needs to be because if someone else specifies it, it might not be appropriate.† So therefore, the department is expected to say these are the requirements. This is what we expect students to be able to do.† The assessment comes in, in measuring the extent to which theyíve succeeded in meeting that requirement.


FA:† I think thatís actually, the question is, to whom, which body is responsible, and thatís the issue.


Admin:† As I understand it, the Curriculum Committee is supposed to approve this for each department.† And then each department is responsible for implementing it by itself.


FA:† In other words, how do we in turn . . . I mean this was an ad hoc committee, the Upper Division Writing Requirement Committee. It gathered some information, the information may not be complete, it may have come in from various sources, what have you.† And so where do we go from here?† Is this committee still functioning?


Admin:† I donít think so.


FA:† Who takes on the responsibilitiesó


Admin:† I think that has to occur within each College and that the Deans need to see to it that each department is meeting this responsibility, and then forward that information.


FA:† To?


Admin:† To Academic Affairs, probably Mitch.


FA:† Well, see thatís the point.† Weíre not clear on this.


Admin:† Well, the process, until last year, was that this went to Lin Holder, so now it goes to Mitch.


FA:† It seems to me that we have the ďtoo many cooksĒ problem.† Thereís a curriculum issue.† We havenít gone back. We kind of asked them to tell us what it is.† But we havenít really gone back and asked for the program change to make sure that each program really has a writing requirement in the program.† Nor have we worked with UCC to get the Upper Division Writing Requirement stuck onto the program proposal so that when new programs or a revised program comes through, it comes through with this Upper Division Writing Requirement.† And finally, once that is all done, that comes through its normal channels, as all of the curriculum stuff does, and the flip side of that is, like any other program, part of the program goes here and the other half sits in Assessment.† I donít see any clear lines in that, and thatís the problem.† My suggestion, personally, is that we need to go back to Senate and talk about it with them, figure out how to get all this stuff straightened out, and go from there.


FA:† There is no diagram that says youíve done this, but thatís fine for that, but itís not satisfying this.† And it may very well be that, or may not be, what we submitted may not have gotten to where it had to go.


Admin:† I think that was in fact addressed.† And I think the way this works, and the way it has been working, the way itís supposed to work, is that the department submits a proposal to the Curriculum Committee.† It says this is the Upper Division Writing Requirement for this program.† The committee recommends that that be adopted.† It goes to Academic Affairs. Itís certified as meeting the criteria, and then it gets identified as such, and gets back to the department.


FA: Well it says that this form goes to assessment.


Admin:† This goes where?


FA:† It goes to assessment.


Admin:† Well, this is what this committee came up with last year.† I donít even know where this committee came from.† (Laughter)† But, see the point of this, we havenít resolved the issue of what to do.† And my understanding was that we had a process because I know we had discussions with the Curriculum Committee about certifying certain courses as meeting those requirements.† And I know that I met with the Curriculum Committeeówhat do you call that when you have to get invited?


FA: Sanctioned.


Admin:† A sanctioned meeting with the Curriculum Committee to say that these learning outcomes have to be specified in order for the writing requirement to be met.†


FA: And they follow that?


Admin: And they follow that.


FA:† What they tell you, what they told us, is that itís there, but then the rest of that is assessment.† They make a clear distinction between whatís their responsibility, and what they feel is the responsibility--


Admin:† What who feels--?


FA:† UCC feels . . . They will say thatís assessment.


Admin:† To identify the learning outcomes?


FA:† Yes.†


FA:† I believe that when semester conversion happened, and we agreed to this, we began the process, and it seemed to be not working.† General Education was saying this isnít a general education course; itís a university requirement, and there were other issues.† And in February 2005 this committee was convened to deal with some of the issues that were being kind of dropped, it seems to me.† And it was an agreement, I think at Meet and Confer, that we convened this committee.† And it was to take on the role of assessment, you know, get assessment going for the Upper Division Writing Requirement.† That would be separate from Gen Ed, because Gen Ed didnít want to do it.† But now we have separately an Assessment Committee.† And I guess to me this seems to be an overly burdensome kind of structure.† The Upper Division Writing Requirement, we have the progress report, but they were really only appointed ad hoc for a year.† Okay, theyíre not functioning anymore.† And so itís kind of like whoís in charge?† Okay, is it Gen Ed? Gen Ed would say no because this isnít a Gen Ed course; itís a university requirement.† I get the sense that Assessment sees this as kind of a subdivision of their work.† Theyíre focusing on the Upper Division Writing Requirement, and this is filtered into Assessment.† But I guess Iím wondering if thereís a more streamlined fashion that we can use for this.† It seems to me UCC has one role in it.† Gen Ed probably doesnít have a role in it.


Admin: I donít think the Gen Ed Committee has a role in this.† I think that UCC has a role in it.† Academic Affairs has a role in it.† And then Assessment has a role in assessing the extent to which this is satisfying the requirement.† But I think the requirement has to be submitted through the Curriculum Committee and approved as a requirement for that program so that we can then identify that requirement for students, because right now weíre not doing that.† Weíre not telling them.† Weíre supposed to be able to state in the bulletin or in the schedule of classes, I donít remember which, those courses in a program that satisfy the Upper Division Writing Requirement.† And weíre not doing that.


FA:† Okay.† So we have here an--


Admin:† We still have a little time because the regulations are supposed to apply to students who began this past fall.†


FA:† We have a document that they quote from April 9, 2003, that gives essentially minimal qualifications for that Upper Division Writing Requirement.† Is that all the UCC would need?† Are we talking about program forms?† Are we talking about separate forms?† And in what kind of timeline do these need to be approved?† Iím seeing this now as several layers, and maybe we just ought to look at it--†


Admin: I need to look at that again.† I think, Iím not sure if the paragraph you cite is the one that we ended up changing or not.† I would want to go back and check.


FA:† Okay.


FA:† Who ended up changing it?


Admin:† Academic Affairs in conjunction with the Curriculum Committee.


FA:† When?†


Admin:† Iím not sure.† But I will gladly check that.†


FA:† So when has Academic Affairs most recently talked with UCC about this issue?


Admin:† It must have been at least a year and a half or two years ago.


FA:† That was what got this committee started.†


Admin:† This looks like the one we agreed to.


FA:† So the question is what are we going to do?†


FA:† What we could do, is approach this in several steps.† I mean we could maybe ask UCC to meet with Mitch to figure this out, this process out, or the approving of the actual requirements, departmental requirements, or program requirements.† And that could be one step.† And then the assessment piece could be a separate thing.


Admin: I donít think what we say in here, necessarily is, you know, the assessment of this is different than the definition of it.† What weíre talking about is defining and describing the requirements.† The assessment is a measure that comes later to determine if the requirement has been met.† So theyíre two separate things.


FA:† So would it be useful to have UCC and Mitch meet, and work on this program approval, or this requirement approval?††


Admin:† As you said earlier, there are two phases.† We need to check that any new program coming through has the requirement in it, but also to review all the existing programs to see if thereís a required course in the program that meets the Upper Division Writing Requirement.††††


FA:† Weíre supposed to publicize this.† And as we go through each department, they need to go through the curriculum process to get their curriculum changed.†


Admin:† Once you determine whether or not each program has an appropriate course, then the department or program has to be looked at since there may be several different programs in a department, or interdepartmental programs.† It has to be figured out.


Admin:† And once the approval occurs, the extent to which it carries over into either bulletin or the schedule of courses becomes the responsibility of the Academic Affairs office.†


FA:† There is going to have to be some discussion about this process of approval because how many programs are we talking about that need this?† If the program proposals go to UCC, swamping those folks who are already swamped, with a whole lot proposals.† So, something needs to be done.†


Admin:† Well, theyíd have to look at probably, somewhere in the order of 100 course descriptions.


FA:† We have 180 programs.


Admin:† Well, the minors donít need them.† These are for majors, as far as I know.


FA:† I got a call, I mean, I got a message that I donít have one in our area for minors.


Admin: I donít think it applies to minors.†


FA:† I didnít think so either, but somebody is lying to minors. †(Laughter)


FA:† The other thing youíre going to have to deal with, and I think you need to think about very carefully, it goes with the streamlining, I think my department thinks weíve done this three times already.† And we keep getting asked to do it again.† And so weíre starting to get really annoyed.†


Admin:† Well, I donít thinkó


FA:† Because it involves work.


Admin:† If youíve already done it, all you need to do is submit a copy of what youíve done for somebody to review.†


FA:† But then it never getsó


Admin:† To make sureó


FA:† I mean that the annoyance is that we think weíve done it.† Why are you asking us for it again?† Youíre saying all you have to do is send in a copy of what youíve done before.† Well, you know, itís pretty annoying to think that thereís somebody there that doesnít seem to be able to keep track of what weíve done.† Why canít you find a copy that weíve already submitted to you?† Thatís what our response is.


Admin:† Well, how do I know you did?† Who did you submit it to?


FA: I donít know.†


Admin:† Well, therefore, how do I know that I have it?


FA:† Youíre missing the point.† The point is youíre going to have to figure out a way to do this in a manner that doesnít cause even more work for people who are trying to teach their classes.


Admin:† Well, weíre trying to do that.


FA:† Itís even more than that because I was chair and coordinator for that program, and I sent those things over a couple times.† And Iíve also been on UCC, and I have to tell you, what I sent over is not the kind of stuff UCC is going to look at and say, yeah, this meets our criteria.† It wasnít set up that way.† It was very narrative and informal.† There wasnít very much to do with it, and I was told that was okay.† I think itís fine if UCC gets that.† Maybe thereís an interim that people can file those documents, as we work through them.† And all the programs as they come through have to have them, and certainly we have to get catalog copy.


Admin: Hereís a question I guess Iím entitled to ask since Iím new. Who approves courses to be on the list of approved courses in the Upper Division Writing Requirement?† Is that something done in the Deanís office?


FA: No.† UCC.


Admin: No, itís Mitch.† (Laughter)† Mitch, itís you.


Admin: So someone in the office of Academic Affairs gives a blessing to a course that meets the Upper Division Writing Requirement.† Then itís a matter of determining which programs require at least one of those courses on the approved list.


FA:† No, the program will say this is a course we want to use, and then you would say okay, it satisfies it.† So you donít go out and decide which courses satisfy until the program says this is the one I want to use.


Admin:† It comes across my desk ,and I say, this courseó


Admin:† It comes to your desk from the Curriculum Committee.


Admin:† --letís say the course may fulfill several different programs?


FA:† Yes.


FA:† But the programs get to decide that; you donít get to decide that much.† You only get to decide whether it actually fulfills any requirement.† Does that make sense?




Admin: Right, but my point is you could have the same course appear in two different programs?


FA:† Yes.


FA:† Okay so thatís one piece.† But the other piece is--


Admin:† So one of the things we do in my office is look to see which of these courses have so far been approved.† We should have a record of that.† And if they havenít been approved in our office, then they havenít been approved.†


FA:† And there is a process in your office for approval for proposals that come through UCC?


Admin:† Right.† There is a document that we get periodically that lists what, you know, all of these curriculum proposals, what their status is, where they are, whether theyíre--


FA:† My point is, I think we should be clear about this because a proposal will go from the department to the College Curriculum Committee to UCC, and that is what has happened to these--


FA:† UCC to Senate.


FA:† --to Senate. But, so that is what has happened to these . . . So all of these departments here--


Admin: We donít know that.


FA: Thatís why Iím asking.† I was afraid of that.


FA:† Having been on UCC for many years, I have to say, we never approved any Upper Division Writing Requirement things at all.† Iíve never seen them in the minutes.† Iíve never seen them on the agenda.† You take a look at that thing that comes out every time.† It doesnít say Upper Division Writing Requirement.† The only ones that its there for might be new programsó


FA:† I suspect these proposals that have an ďXĒ beside them are in Assessment.†††


FA:† And thatís actually information that comes from departments.†


FA:† Thatís where the problemís at.† Thatís where weíre asked to send them.† Thatís where weíre asked to follow up.†


Admin: This request here says to send information to Neil. That has to do with Assessment of the Upper Division Writing Requirement copy, the identification of the assessment.† So weíll have to do some work on this.


FA:† How would you like that to proceed?† I mean, I did ask the committee if they were meeting, and they werenít, although most indicated they would be willing to continue.† I guess I should tell them at this point, hold off on it.† Weíre working on this.


Admin:† Right.† What we really need to work on is the curriculum process to get the approval of these courses.


FA:† First, and then weíll look at the assessment later?


Admin:† Right.


FA:† Okay.† We need to identify these courses and find out what condition they are in and what process they are being approved by.† My personal position is the point I was making there needs to be some way of facilitating this whole process because youíre not going to get it through that committee in a timely fashion.


Admin:† I think there is an assumption that many of these courses are already courses that have been approvedó


FA:† They are.† Courses are approved through the curriculum process.† The question is: were they approved in the question of satisfying the Upper Division Writing Requirement?


Admin: So the issue is, though, Robert, do they need to go through the Curriculum Committee for that, or do they need to be reviewed in Academic Affairs to see if they meet the criteria?† In other words, if theyíve been approved as a university course, see what Iím saying?


FA:† Thatís why Michael gave me a scenario that says it goes through the curriculum process.


Admin:† Right.†


FA:† If thatís the case, we need to make some decisions on how are we going to approve these courses as Upper Division Writing classes.


FA:† My understanding is that this conversation is going to continue between UCC and Mitch, right?† And Iíll facilitate that meeting being set up.


FA:† I have a suspicion itís--


FA:† Weíll give it a try


FA:† So weíll keep this on the agenda?


FA:† Yeah.†


5.     Status of Hiring of DGS Director and FYE Positions (FA) (01/19/06)


Admin:† The next item is the Status of Hiring a DGS Director and FYE Positions.


FA:† Yeah, thatís our agenda item.† And, Iím looking at a new academic program initiatives document that was distributed in October.† And we essentially wanted to find out the status of some of the positions and expenses listed on here?


Admin:† Um hum.


FA:† Particularly on the front page, the DGS Director, Associate Dean/FYE Director, FYE Expansion and Clerical position?


Admin:† Well the FYE Expansion is not a position.†


FA:† Right.


Admin: Itís for course work basically.


FA:† For next year?


Admin:† Maybe, yeah.† The DGS Director and Associate Dean, those are positions that have got to be benchmarked by MnSCU, and then we wait for those to come back from MnSCU.† Then they should be able to start a search to fill those positions.† And that stuff has been sent in, as far as I know.


FA:† When are you hoping to be able to fill those positions?† Whatís the goal?


Admin:† The DGS Director, certainly by the end of this semester at the latest.†


FA:† And do you know about the First Year Experience Associate Dean position?


Admin:† Yeah, whether itís an Associate Dean or a FYE position, itís a little bit unclear depending on where we are going with the University College.† We want to be able to settle that first.† Rather than hire the person and then say weíre not going to do it.† So, I donít want that to happen.† So, thatís where we are right now on that.† But weíre in the process of getting the position description benchmarked so that weíll be able to go forward with it when and if we decide thatís the direction weíre going in.†


FA:† When did those positions go to get benchmarked?† Whatís the usual time it takes?


Admin:† Iím not sure when they were sent.† Larry, would you know?


Admin:† No, some of these, itís the first time Iíve seen them listed.†


FA:† Theyíre on this budget sheet, which was distributed November 10th as a revision from a document that was distributed on campus on October 23rd.†


FA:† So would that benchmarking come out of your office or somebody elseís office?


Admin:† Well, in order to get benchmarked, somebody has to write up a position description, and then get it to HR.† And HR sends it to MnSCU.


FA:† So we donít really know if those have been sent to MnSCU?


Admin:† Iím not . . . I canít swear on it right now.


FA:† Okay.


Admin:† But, Iíll check.†


FA:† Okay.† I appreciate that.† And the clerical position is for what?


Admin:†† To support those activities.


FA:† Okay.† Okay. †Thank you.† Thatís what we wanted to know.


Admin:† Okay, next item.


6.     Tenure for Deans (Admin) (01/19/06)


Admin: Tenure for Deans.† This is I guess, a topic thatís come up before on several occasions.† And when weíve done searches for dean positions, weíve often been unsuccessful in attracting candidates because we canít provide tenure to those individuals.† And theyíre coming often with, you know, theyíre coming from positions where they are tenured, and they donít want to give that up.† One of the things that I was thinking of to do this was to have the department in which the dean candidate had a tenured position, the discipline in which that person has been trained, that department could interview as part of the process.† And if the department is agreeable and recommends that if the person gets selected, that that person be tenured, then at the end of that year, we could tenure that individual.† And we would be in a lot stronger position when it comes to recruiting the right person.†


FA:† Our position is that this is an issue for collective bargaining in the contract.† And, so, we donít think itís appropriate to take it up here. But, so as not to be abrupt about this, there are a couple things that need to be mentioned.† Number one was I personally was very interested in this issue.† So I tracked it through the process.† Principally I was responding to conversations Iíve had on this.† So I was tracking.† And as negotiations heated up, we got through the rubber hits the road phase, and both sides listed their top priorities, and I remember that, as sure as I can be anymore in my recollection of things, to my surprise, this was not listed.† And as I recall the moment your head negotiator, for once as an exception, looked all around the room at the academic people and said, well, do any of you, I donít remember, academic people have anything else youíd like to add after he had listed his priorities.† Chris Dale Iím talking about.† And I kept thinking, okay, Iím going to hear tenure for deans.† A couple other issues were mentioned by your academic folks.† It was not as if it was a dead silence.† Then there was another pause. I guess thatís it.† And we took back the list and continued negotiations on that basis.† So the point of this anecdote is that if it appeared to be priority, youíd have your academic folks bring it up at negotiations.† So, and this was a surprise to me, of course.† And my conclusion was, although Iíd be happy to be corrected, that you werenít prepared to give anything up for it at the table.† So, maybe I might be wrong.† I donít know.† For whatever reason, it was not listed in your priorities in the later stages of negotiating.† For the bargaining team itís a major concern, which we could go into if you care, but . . .


Admin: Iíd be interested in hearing why itís a concern.


FA:† Okay, in the first place you have relief available by just giving MnSCU Tenure.†


Admin:† What is MnSCU Tenure?


FA:† MnSCU can grant tenure, System Tenure.† And their reluctance to do that is based on, and this is part of St. Cloud State lore, actually, we had a President, unnamed but still fresh in many peopleís recollections, who left us and had system tenure.† And the MnSCU folks are very frank in talking about this.† They donít ever want to make that mistake again.† So, that was just no secret at all.† Been there, done that, no thank you.† And you can inquire with themó


Admin: I am puzzled by this term MnSCU or System Tenure because people have tenure as faculty members in a department, not in the system.† In my mind, thatís always the way tenure works.


FA:† Well check it out.


Admin:† However, itís been ___ rewarded.† Tenure would be in a department as faculty.†


FA:† Some of the reasons we consider it a major issue from our, from the faculty side, from the IFO side, are the following:† in the first place, to be blunt, thereís kind of a reflexive resistance to it, but thatís, lets put that aside.† That said, if an Administrator . . . if a faculty member decides to go into the Administrative mind, it is sometimes the case because teaching has lost its charm.† And thatís a problem.† I donít have to go any further.† Number two--


Admin:† And what if teaching has lost its charm for a faculty member who doesnít go into an Administrative position?


FA:† You still donít have a problem.† The person is tenured and theyíre in grace, and the chairperson probably has a problem.† (Laughter)† And the dean, when the dean looks at the student evaluations, has some options.† Second point a department needs a new faculty member with a certain profile of qualifications, however, by coincidence somebody in Administration has not worked out for you and needs to resort to teaching again, but doesnít have the qualifications that the department needs.† So this person goes back. We still have the charm problem.† But now in addition to that, the department had probably also lost its shot at getting the person they really need.† And, so on, and on.


Admin:† Yeah, I think with regard to the particular issue, we could say that the department would not lose the position . . . that would not be considered a position to the department in the same way.


FA:† Which is why this needs to be done at contract negotiations.


FA: Exactly, this would be a very powerful addendum to your position at the bargaining table next time around.† No, seriously. I was stunned that your side didnít bring this up.


Admin:† Well, Iím stunned that you find this a difficult thing because it would seem to me that itís in the faculty interest to recruit and keep the best possible persons as deans.† And to the extent that we donít do that, itís harmful to the faculty, as well as to the Administration.


Admin:† Also we traditionally have deans who have evolved through the ranks to become dean, and then if they want to retreat back, they still have opportunity.† So why should certain departments have that and other departments not.† And if you are dean of the college that Iím in, and you donít have tenure, youíre going to have a tough time making a difficult decision against the departments in your college.† And Iíd want the strongest dean, with the most security, to be my leader.


FA:† I understand the notion of having the best and strongest people.† But I think many of us will tell you that our history with deans in the last five or eight years or so, a number of years, has not been particularly happy.† And given that, you know, given that experience, why would the people then want those deans back in their departments? So, I understand the notion of attracting and getting the best people, but at the same time that reflexive resistance that Bill was talking about, stems from some of the experiences that some of us have here.††


Admin: And I think itís a huge assumption to say that once you leave, youíre not faculty.† I still think of myself as a faculty member.† And I did the research. I did the publishing.† And I think it would be fun to go back and teach introductory biology.† I think itís a huge assumption to say that we have all gone sour on teaching.† And I think that these are times that people change, people go back, people continue to grow.† So those are issues that . . . but, again, as a university, what is in the best interest of the institution?† And weíre trying to attract deans, and weíve have numerous failures.† And we canít come up with the salary. We canít come up with the security.† If a young person would come in there with two, three kids . . . and I was called by Andy Lo-- . . .† Mike Lopez when I was a dean, two, three times, and I would not come to the Minnesota system because of this problem.† Who would want to come in and have to make tough decisions six years ago on these issues of race, of religion, on faculty grievances, to make a tough choice . . . a situation where people might come against you?† And you have tenure otherwise?† I had tenure at every place, Bill, except here.† And those are the issues that weíre dealing with.† So, I just . . . weíre not going to solve this today, and I understand that.† But I want you guys to think about how we as an institution would want to be twenty years from today.† How do you want to survive in this very competitive world?† And donít you want the most secure, idealistic, thoughtful, wise people here to support to make the best decisions for this institution?† Thatís what weíre talking about.


FA:† Well, we, of course, want that too.† But this desire is alongside of a bunch of other desires as well.† I mean itís the same old St. Cloud State problem:† weíve got 35 priorities, and theyíre all number one.† So this is a concern for you.† I have to say that a certain fraction of the university shares it with you.† It is, however, formally a bargaining issue.† And if your side could keep it on the table and make a viable proposal, I mean, Iím sure that our side would look at it seriously.† But weíre bound . . . we have certain procedures that we have to respect.


Admin:† What makes it a bargaining issue?


FA:† What makes it a bargaining issue?


Admin: Yeah.


FA:† Well for oneó


Admin:† You said itís a bargaining issue, and Iím just curious as to what makes it that.† Because any faculty member, or anybody hired who is given an appointment as a faculty member, can be tenured.


FA:† Yeah, but the recommendation comes from our side.


Admin:† Well, Iím saying, as well, that the recommendation . . . what I proposed was that the recommendation comes from the department.† I didnít say that the university would tenure the person.† I said the department would recommend that individual for tenure.††


Admin:† And we wouldnít bring anyone in for a candidacy of a dean if, letís say in Foreign Languages, if you donít approve of this person whoís a Foreign Language person. We wouldnít even consider the person for a dean of Fine Arts.† Youíd approve it first, so weíd have five people, and different people from . . . different individuals would be approved by the home department.† Theyíd be approved before weíd bring this person in to be considered for dean.† And if the Foreign Languages person got the deanship, he or she would have tenure.† And we wouldnít count that against your position.† Anyway, weíre not going to solve this today.†


Admin:† Right.


Admin:† I just . . . and I need to run because I need to sign some papers before I go.† I just got back . . . Can I just jump in?†


Admin:† You most certainly can.†


Admin:† Thank you.† (Laughter)


Admin:† Iím not tenured.† (Laughter)


Admin:† But you do have an appointment though?† In a department?


Admin:† No I donít.


Admin:† Did they turn you down?† (Laughter)


FA:† Nobody asked us.


Admin:† I do.† I do.†


Admin:† Anyway, I just got back from the board meeting and Margaret had gone and Steve is the RV.† It was interesting because John Asmusson was speaking about the audit, and he mentioned, I had talked to Lisa Foss on the telephone from home, but we are moving, from the Trusteesí point of view, to more audit and more accountability.† And he mentioned Texas, where they randomly apparently take 100 freshmen students and test that group.† And they retest another 100 soon-to-graduate seniors.† They test that group.† And so there seems to be this collection of data, and now itís moving to accountability. And I donít know where itís going to go, but I think the things youíre talking about on Upper Division Writing will help us in the future when this starts to take place.† And I think in about four, five months, Governor Pawlenty will appoint four more Trustees.† And youíre going to start seeing more of this.† Iím really concerned that we donít have much money coming into the system.† The healthcare is going to take most of that.† And that is the direction we are going to, and this is what Trustee Paskach has said, that weíre going to be doing more with less money.† And thereís going to be more accountability on how the outcomes of the institutions are.† And that is starting to come up more and more at the Board of Trustees meetings.† Weíre talking about, also, looking at helping students that canít afford to attend the university.† And they had all kinds of different graphs.† And this has been going on for a year and a half.† And Trustee Grendahl said this is not where we wanted to go.† And after Patrick Opatz was in the midst of his presentation, they voted to curtail the conversation and stop the study.† And so, again, basically weíre trying to take money from here and help people here who donít have money.† And to tax this person more, but thereís no money.† And so how can you keep going back to the bucket to find monies to help other students when there really isnít any money.† So thatís the conclusion they came to.† And so they stopped there.† But it was really frustrating.† And right now the conditions appear to be that weíre looking at different things.† Theyíre not quite sure where the data is leading us.† And so I just kind of want to report back to you about accountability information.† Itís becoming top of the board.† What are we going to be measuring?† How are the outcomes going to be?† And that direct example about Texas may be put on us because in Texas they are already doing it, and these things filter through from state to state.† But thereís going to be more accountability.† And so if we can get some of these kinds of courses approved and recognized, this is going to help us on these different kinds of tests.† So, again, thank you so much.† Iím going to excuse myself.† But I appreciate the conversation, I really do.†


Admin:† We have one other item on the agenda.


7.     Final Revision of Academic Data Book: How much should be online? (Admin) (01/19/06)


Admin: We got a Final Revision on the Academic Data Book, and the question that has come up with that, how much of this should go up online, available on the web for anybody that wants to see it?† We just thought we would solicit your opinion on that.† Weíll give some opinions as well.


FA: I know we talked about this before.† And now we have the recent draft and some of the data available to us.† I think in response to that I thought we talked about this before.† From that perspective, we need as much data that is available out there so that we can have it, in terms of financial resources and so forth, so that we can pull these numbers together.† And so, when we fill out that form on COE we can get those numbers ready.† On the other hand, is the question about privacy in terms of can the public ascertain what professors have done in the classroom or what departments are going to what?† And how would that information be used, and there are issues around privacy, issues around security.† So I think this question may need to be redefined in the sense of who has access to the information and their purposes.†††


Admin: Well, okay, let me respond to that. We had a conversation before.† It wasnít about the Data Book. It was about a Workload Report.


FA:† Okay.


Admin:† And that Workload Report did break things down into the individual faculty level.† The Academic Data Book does not do that.† The lowest level to which it goes is the departmental level.† And, frankly, I think that if someone from the public were to request a copy of that Data Book, we would have to provide it under the Freedom of Information Act.† So, what Iím talking about, what I think we ought to do with the Academic Data Book, is put it online, but put it on an Intranet that would be available to members of the campus community.† But if someone from the public did request it, we would have to provide that information to them.†


FA: I havenít seen the Academic Data Book, so I donít have any idea of what youíre talking about here.† I mean Iíve seen old versions, but I havenít seen the one youíre talking about, and my understanding is that it changed some.


Admin:† It went through at least two revisions based on feedback from departments.† I donít know why you shouldnít have seen it.†


FA:† Is it in the same format as the old version of it?


Admin:† Yes.† Yes it is, and itís for three years.


FA:† So it isnít a five-year, Ďcause the older one used to have five years in it.


Admin:† The old one was done on a one-year basis, and then it had . . .† This has some comparisons.† So if you combine this with an old one, you can see over a longer period of time.† But I think this is 2002, 03, and 04.


FA: Right.† But they used to be like you would have a form one that would have three, two, one, and zero, for the five years.†


Admin:† I donít know about that.


FA:† So this is essentially the same format?


Admin:† Same format, yes.† Yes


FA:† Thatís the point Iím making. The Data Book that exists now doesnít provide sufficient information.


Admin: I understand that.†


FA:† And so my point is that we really need more data than whatís provided in the Data Book.†


Admin: Thatís actually a whole other question now.† And I agree with you.† And that should be the case.† But, weíre working to develop a system, a whole set of traditional data that I hope would be available.† But, now weíre just talking about this set of data because this is the set of data that we do have available.


FA:† So do we have server space and the kind of security that we need and someone to set this up?


Admin: I think that, and Kristi can probably respond to that piece, that we are working to do something along those lines for another purpose so it would exist once thatís done.


Admin:† Yes.


Admin:† How does this differ from the information in the Chancellorís office?


Admin: Some of it is similar. There are things that are in here that . . . The Office of the Chancellor data is aggregated over the institution.† And this has it broken down by college and departments.


FA:† And it has a limited set of variables.


Admin:† And thereís other data that is going on the system that will be in the NCA web space so that there will be other data available electronically, but we have to figure out a way to coordinate it ,and then be clear where the data is so that people will have access to that.† But more and more data will become available.


FA:† This is something that we need to talk about amongst ourselves. Do you want to caucus for two minutes and come back with an answer?


FA:† I think some of this went through the deans, so it went through chairs, maybe some departments got it and some departments didnít get it.† So I donít if this is something we need to take back to Senate.† So that people can see the actual Book, or at least the format and the information thatís contained in this electronic document.


Admin:† Well, how was the Academic Data Book handled in the past?


FA:† They printed a copy of it and gave one copy to each department.† And then if we wanted additional copies you could ask and if you would hem-haw about getting one, maybe youíd get one and maybe you wouldnít.††


Admin:† So how is that any different, essentially, than putting it on the web?


FA:† Youíre asking how much on the web?


Admin:† I think the whole thing should be online.† Otherwise thereís not much point to it.


FA:† So are we saying that we should bring that proposal for it going online, you could type in your password kind of thing, back to Senate and see what they say?


FA:†† Sure.


FA:† You want to talk about it for a few minutes?


FA:† If people want to read it and they donít know what it is . . .


FA:† Yeah.


Admin:† Who in here has seen it?


FA:† The most recent one?


FA:† Not the most recent, but . . .


Admin:† The most recent one is, essentially, hereís what we did: We had a draft, a version of this thing, done.† We sent it out to the colleges.† The Deans were supposed to share it with Department Chairs, who were supposed to verify the accuracy of the data.† We made changes to it, but not everyone had responded.† At least, one of the colleges in particular hadnít.† And so after the second version was printed, we went back to that college, and they put in a bunch of suggestions.† And we changed it again based on that.† And thatís what we have now.† So itís been reviewed, presumably, or it could have been reviewed, twice by every department in the university, every academic department.† Now it may not have been, but there was the opportunity to do that.†


FA:† We probably need to caucus or take it back to Senate.


FA:† So do you want to caucus and discuss it? †Weíll be fast.




FA:† So what we decided was that we should just simply say that, sure, go ahead and put it up on an Intranet, password protected, with access for campus.


Admin:† Thank you.


FA:† And we will tell people that if they have problems with the information, they should contact the Provostís office.† (Laughter)


FA:† You had to get that in before you went to teach, right?


Admin:† And Iíll say you had an opportunity to review it.† (Laughter)


Admin:† Maybe once that youíre logged on, youíre computer will be protected that way . . .


FA:† The way they do the Oxford English Dictionary?† (Laughter)


Admin:† Something like that if thatís what you like.† (Laughter)†


FA:† You could put it up on D2L and enroll us all in a class.† (Laughter)† And it will take about 20 minutes to do.


Admin:† And then weíll give you a test.† (Laughter)† I think we completed the agenda and we should adjourn.