1) The minutes of the meeting of February 28, 2006 were approved.

 

2) Announcements (the Chair):

a) Barbara Baruth, Director of the Library, asked to speak at the March 28th
meeting about potential copyright problems with some course packs. She was listed under miscellaneous business since the agenda had already been posted.

b) Provost Rebecca Martin requested time on the agenda of an upcoming meeting of the U.C. to speak about options for a more permanent organization for the First Year Program. The committee agreed to invite her (and Jerry Greenfield and Steve McLaughlin, as requested) to the April 4 meeting.

3) Unfinished Business:

a) The Faculty Senate minutes of March 21, 2006 were approved as corrected.

b) The Secretary of the Faculty reminded the members that the Evaluations of Administrators remain as unfinished business.

c) The call for nominations for the Faculty Distinguished Service award has gone out. The committee that will evaluate the nominations required two members of the University Committee: Christine Evans and Mary Lenard volunteered.

d) The nomination process for the Teaching award has not begun. Since Penny Lyter, Chair of the Teaching and Learning Committee, has been out of the country, the U.C. decided to initiate the call for nominations through the Secretary of the Faculty's office.

4) New Business

a) Plan 2008 Executive Committee: Diversity Statement

--Professor Mary Kay Schleiter presented the Diversity Statement, which has been approved by the 2008 Committee and the Chancellor's Cabinet.

--Prof. Kavenik asked where "neglect" comes from.

--Prof. Schleiter replied that certain groups of people are neglected.

--Prof. Goldsmith added that people often do nothing, allowing inequities which support the status quo. Proactive steps are needed.

--Prof. Statham noted that discrimination is what one does; neglect is what is not done.

--Prof. Kavenik stated that she was extremely concerned about someone charging someone else with neglect, when negligence is based on not doing something.

--Prof. Schleiter replied that this document is being put forth as a vision statement: to be proactive in pursuing equity and non-discrimination.

--Mr. Fujimoto added that the committee desires to put out something concrete--doing nothing perpetuates the problem. It is a vision statement; nothing legal is attached to it.

--Prof. Schleiter added that it is meant to be a statement of the beliefs and desires of the institution.

--Prof. Statham noted that people come to the University Committee to ask advice; there is a similar situation in the Faculty Senate. Governance is not scrutinizing these processes.

--Prof. Goldsmith noted that there are incidences of neglect, where people have been marginalized. The university needs to do something to address it.

--Prof. Schleiter noted that the Senate and the U.C. have affirmed Plan 2008 from the beginning.

--Mr. Fujimoto stated that he understood the concern; there is faculty representation on the group.

--Prof. Schleiter noted that these faculty members are not elected.

--Prof. DeVinny asked how the rest of the campus community will hear of this document.

--Prof. Schleiter replied that it has already been presented to the Classified Staff.

--Prof. Statham asked what action from the U.C. was desired.

--Prof. DeVinny noted that this can be an item for the Faculty meeting on Thursday, April 20.

--Mr. Fujimoto noted that this Diversity Statement has been passed by the Chancellor's Cabinet, that the desire is to inform the campus about what is happening with Plan 2008, that the equity scorecard is tailored to fit us. He added that the input of faculty is crucial.

--Prof. Rome asked if this goes to the Faculty Senate.

--Mr. Fujimoto replied that this is a done deal. Now the concern is how to actualize this; this is what the Plan 2008 equity scorecard is about.

He presented the Plan 2008 Goals, which comes from the Regents. The aim is to improve student access and success, particularly ethnic minorities and students of color. these goals are:

(1) Increase the number of Wisconsin high school graduates who apply, are accepted and enroll at UW System institutions.

(2) Encourage partnerships that build the educational pipeline by reaching children and their parents at an earlier age.

(3) Close the gap in educational achievement by bringing retention and graduation rates for students of color in line with those of the student body as a whole.

(4) Increase the amount of financial aid available to needy students and reduce their reliance on loans.

(5) Increase the number of faculty, academic staff, classified staff and administrators of color so that they are represented in the UW System work force in proportion to their current availability in relevant job pools. In addition, work to increase their future availability as potential employees.

(6) Foster institutional environments and development of courses that enhance learning and a respect for racial and ethnic diversity.

(7) Improve accountability of the UW System and its institutions.

--Mr. Fujimoto shared the Nomination solicitation announcement for the Diversity Award and asked that the U.C. encourage help in this. The deadline is April 3rd.

--Prof. Kavenik noted that if the Diversity Statement is going to be presented at the Faculty meeting, it would be very good to have data attached, such as the gap in retention.

--Prof. DeVinny noted that a comparative analysis would be good; are we as good as we think we are?

--Prof. Goldsmith noted that he in conducting a survey on the presence of race and ethnicity within courses. Of 361 sent out, 25 have been returned.

--Prof. Goldsmith presented the "equity scorecard."

There is a team of 7 people, led by Provost Martin. This Program is being put together by the UW System; 1/2 of the schools in the system are participating.

This is a program developed by a woman at the University of Southern California. It involves using data already collected on campus. There are four main areas:

access, excellence, institutional receptivity, and retention . He provided some examples of retention data for African-Americans. The goal is to identify everything that we can do on the campus to improve these areas. There is a checklist for the relationship between the four dimensions in the equity scorecard and the seven goals of Plan 2008.

--Members noted several areas that could/should be explored: including where students go when they drop out, the impact of financial vs. academic reasons for dropping out, the impact of gender, what students do when they graduate, programs that would reach out to low-income students.

The April 6 deadline for additional to the agenda for the Faculty meeting was noted (the addition of the Diversity Statement to the agenda).

b) Ms. Baruth presented the problem of copyrights laws and some university course packs.

--This is a real problem for Duplicating, where instructors need to fill out a forms for copyright permission before copyrighted materials can be copied. Anything fixed in form is copyrighted, with the exclusive right to copy. the exception is fair use, for which there are four tests:

(1) educational use or not
(2) the nature of the work: factual vs. creative
(3) the amount of the work used
(4) the effect on the market (selling the copyrighted materials)

Some instructors are copying complete articles and selling them semester after semester.. Other examples include Mapquest maps, graphs pulled off the web (students could be given the link to get this themselves), etc. The problem is particularly acute with last minutes orders for copies.

--There have been lawsuits against Cornell and the University of Florida t Gainesville. The question of liability is a serious one: at Cornell, the Provost and Chancellor were specifically named.

--Prof. Kavenik suggested that the educational component of this (re instructors) be managed through the Department Chairs.

--Ms. Baruth noted that she is now the copyright officer.

--Prof. Statham suggested that some sessions could be run out of the Teaching Center: copyright and plagiarism.

--Ms. Baruth noted the intense pressure being put on the copy center personnel, and the impact this is having on them. Course packs are all right if they have materials which are created by the instructor, include materials in the public domain, or have copyright permission. The rule for last minute materials is to Xerox them and not sell them. The guidelines for classroom use are fairly restrictive and narrow and include spontaneity. Nothing can be placed on reserve which is not a legal copy.

--Prof. DeVinny suggest that this issue should be in a message from the Provost to the faculty, but that it could also be an item for the Senate agenda.

c) The conflict between areas in UWPF Chapter 5.05 and 6.11 arose relative to the reconsideration of a Full Professor case.

--There was some discussion of the urgency of this situation as opposed to a tenure case and as an issue of due process. It was noted that until cases get to the Board of Regents, every "vote" along the way is a recommendation. The sentiment of the body was to dump the references in Chapter 5 (locally approved) and fix Chapter 6 (Regent approved). This would have to be done by the next meeting if it were to be taken to the Senate.

d) The Secretary of the Faculty raised the question of term limits for committees. Currently these only exist for U.C. and PRC. Prof. Kavenik suggested that now that CAP has three year terms, it might make sense to look at term limits for it.

She also raised the question of the timetable for the all faculty elections. The tentative ballot based on the Faculty Committee Preference survey should be ready by the next meeting (April 4). If that ballot is approved, the call for additional nominations will be sent out, with a deadline of the 11th of April. The elections will then be conducted (paper ballot approved).

e) REMINDERS:

PRC SESSION FOR CANDIDATES COMING UP FOR TENURE.

SABBATICAL PROCESS: TIMETABLE AND REVIEW COMMITTEE

FACULTY SENATE AGENDA: GRADUATE THE GRADUATES!!

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 5:25 P.M.