Minutes of the Faculty Senate
for October 31, 1995
PSF 10/95-96

The University of Wisconsin-Parkside Faculty Senate met on October 31, 1995, in Molinaro Hall D137. The meeting was called to order at 3:33 p.m. by Professor Duetsch (Economics), the senate chair. Other members present were Buenker, Canary, Cloutier, Feldt, Gurnack, Kinchen, Lee, Lindner, Mayer, Meyer, Moy, Murphy, Nice, Norton, Ostheimer, Richards, H. Rosenberg, Rovelstad, Shea, Smith, Snyder, Stathatos, WaMwachofi, Warren, Wood, Wright. Guests include Assistant Chancellor Grace; Associate Vice Chancellor Thomas; Assistant Vice Chancellor Letven; Deans Greenebaum, Pavalko, and Shade; and Professors Carr, Hudson, Murin, Quayle, and Robinson.

MINUTES APPROVED

No objection being heard, the chair declared the minutes of October 3, 1995 approved as distributed.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

There being no objection, the chair ruled that the senate would receive and file the reports of the Academic Achievement Assessment Committee, the Academic Actions Committee, the Academic Policies Committee, the Athletic Board, the Committee on Research and Creative Activity, and the Faculty Rights and Responsibilities Committee.

NEW BUSINESS

FACULTY WORKLOAD POLICY PRINCIPLES

The chair noted that the first item of new business was proposed adoption of a document on "Faculty Workload Policy Principles." This was the first of three related agenda documents. The Agenda Document #2 was the existing policy as passed in spring 1994. Agenda Document #3 was the AASCU document on "The Core of Academe: Teaching, Scholarly Activity and Service"; the University Committee thought this might prove useful to departments considering workload issues.

Statement by University Committee Chair
Professor Feldt (Computer Science & Engineering) introduced the motion on behalf of the University Committee, saying he hoped to answer in advance some questions which had been raised.

• --On the question of "why do anything?" he noted that our existing workload policy was not, as sometimes thought, a 9 hour load, but the 1994 document, which mentioned no number and gave the administration discretion in imposing almost any workload.
• --On the question of "why 21 hours?" he noted that this was the figure recommended by the last meeting of the Faculty Senate acting as a Committee of the Whole, that it was parallel to our sister campus UW-Green Bay, and that it was in line with actual figures here and at other campuses.
• --On the issue of "how will heavy contact hour courses be handled?" he noted that the document indicated that laboratory and studio courses required special consideration and said that there was no intent to change existing arrangements for equating contact hours and credit hours.
• --On the question of "will this undermine the teacher-scholar model?" he said that the document did indicate that all faculty must meet some standard of professional activity to receive maximum merit.
• --On the question of "will this stifle new prepara- tions?" he noted that the document indicated that the number of new preparations should be taken into account.
• --On the key question of "how will this affect me?" he said that faculty active in scholarly activity and service are unlikely to be affected
• --He called attention to the AASCU document and suggested that it might well be useful to departments as they draw up their policies.

Discussion of the Stated Expectation
Much of the initial discussion of the document centered on the first paragraph in the section (III.A) on "General Guidelines":

The University of Wisconsin-Parkside formal teaching expectation is 21 credits hours per year of teaching, based on seven standard three-credit group classroom instruction sections. This norm is consistent with actual loads at other comprehensive universities in the UW-System. In practice, UW-Parkside faculty expect that the institution's average teaching loads will be at about the average for UW-System comprehensive universities. The campus is committed to a "teacher-scholar" model, and all faculty are expected to be professionally active in ways that will allow them to teach on the basis of current thought and practice. All faculty are expected to engage in a share of service required for the faculty as a body to exercise its governance responsibilities in departments, schools, and the university.

Called on by the chair for his comments, Provost/Vice Chancellor Ostheimer said that he would have preferred that the document indicate that the expectation was 24 credit hours per year, since this was the stated expectation at most other comprehensives, and the UW System and Board of Regents saw UW-Parkside as very much part of that group. He thought that this document might work, though. We needed to underline in our own minds that we were committing ourselves to try to match the "actual loads at other comprehensive universities in the UW-System." He recognized that the statement on service had been strengthened but would have liked to have seen it even stronger, given the university's interest in building ties to the community.

Professor Stathatos (Modern Languages) was bothered by the qualifying clause in the first sentence, "based on seven standard three-credit group classroom instruction sections." He wondered why that sentence couldn't do without that language. Professor Mayer (Biological Sciences) said that the language helped make it clear that not all departments taught courses in that kind of framework. Professor Stathatos observed that he was already teaching 11-12 credits per semester with a three-course load, and that the word "seven" was troublesome. Dean Pavalko (Liberal Arts) said that he did not expect that the normal load in Modern Languages was likely to change under the policy.

Professor Snyder (Philosophy) said he was still unclear on why less was not more in this case. He thought that deleting the language in question might make the statement more flexible. Professor Mayer said that such a deletion would make the document less flexible rather than more so, and could be hard on those teaching studio and laboratory courses with heavy contact hours.

Professor Richards (Geography) asked if the new policy would be effective as of Fall 1996, and the chair said it would.

Professor Snyder asked what was the current basis for credit hours now? Were some classes not 3 credits and if so how was it determined how many credits a class was worth? Professor Canary (English) said that this was a matter for departments, subject to review by the campus curricular process, and that this would not change.

Professor Mayer asked whether the term "formal expectation" was chosen deliberately or whether it was a misprint for "normal." The chair said it had been chosen deliberately, but noted that the word "norm" occurred in the next sentence.

Professor Mayer said he understood the concern for what to do with people who might have ceased doing actual research, but he thought that letting them out of research expectations on merit raises might undermine the teacher-scholar model and create a two-track system on campus. The chair said that the intent was not to create a two-track system but to give departments flexibility. Professor Rovelstad (Administrative Science) said that the document left these issues to departments and schools to work out. Professor Feldt noted that the document said that those with higher teaching loads should be reviewed "primarily" on the basis of teaching and service.

Professor Stathatos MOVED to strike the word "seven" from the first sentence of III.A., so that it would read: "The University of Wisconsin-Parkside formal teaching expectation is 21 credits hours per year of teaching, based on standard three-credit group classroom instruction sections." The motion was SECONDED by Professor Buenker (History). Professor Feldt argued that the change would make no difference. MOTION FAILED on a vote of 9 yes, 10 no.

Professor Snyder now MOVED to strike "seven," "three-credit group," and "sections" from the same sentence, so that it would read: "The University of Wisconsin-Parkside formal teaching expectation is 21 credits hours per year of teaching, based on standard classroom instruction." The motion was SECONDED by Professor Stathatos. Professor Mayer said that this would make the language both less clear and less flexible. Professor Kinchen (Music) said that eliminating the phrase in question entirely might have been better. MOTION FAILED on a vote of 2 yes, 14 no.

Professor Meyer (History) MOVED that the offending phrase be replaced by "or the traditional equivalent," so that the sentence would read "The University of Wisconsin-Parkside formal teaching expectation is 21 credits hours per year of teaching or the traditional equivalent." The chair asked for comments from the deans, on the grounds that they would be charged with implementing the policy. Dean Pavalko said that the campus had managed to operate on the basis of common understandings with no specific policy statements at all for many years. Dean Greenebaum said that on the whole he preferred the original wording. Professor Canary suggested that the meaning of "equivalent" would be clearer if the new words were appended to the original rather than replacing part of it, and Professor Mayer agreed. Professor Meyer said that people should then vote down his amendment and he'd propose that alternative. MOTION FAILED on a vote of 3 yes, 10 no.

Professor Richards MOVED the previous question. MOTION FAILED for lack of a second.

Professor Meyer then MOVED to add the phrase "or the traditional equivalent" to the first sentence of III.A., so that it would read "The University of Wisconsin-Parkside formal teaching expectation is 21 credits hours per year of teaching, based on seven standard three-credit group classroom instruction sections or the traditional equiva- lent." SECONDED by Professor Rovelstad. MOTION PASSED

Professor Mayer said that he wished to return to the question of the teacher-scholar model. He MOVED to add the phrase "in scholarly activity and" to the fourth sentence of the opening paragraph of III.A. after the phrase "professional activity," so that the sentence would read "The campus is committed to a `teacher-scholar' model, and all faculty are expected to be professionally active in scholarly activity and in ways that will allow them to teach on the basis of current thought and practice." SECONDED by Professor Buenker. Professor Snyder suggested that adding the word "other" before "ways" would avoid any suggestion that scholarly activity was not one of the ways in which one enriched one's teaching. The suggestion was accepted by Professors Mayer and Buenker as a friendly amendment, so that their amendment would now make the sentence in question read "The campus is committed to a `teacher-scholar' model, and all faculty are expected to be professionally active in scholarly activity and in other ways that will allow them to teach on the basis of current thought and practice." Professor Mayer said that this language would still allow for special arrangements to be made in some cases where individuals were agreeing to higher teaching loads but would make it clear what the campus expected as an ideal. MOTION PASSED with a vote of 13 yes, 0 no.

Grievances and the Authority of the Chair
Professor Snyder asked what redress would be provided for individuals who might think they had been mistreated in the assignment of load. He would like to see some indication of what procedures of appeal might be. Professor Canary said that grievance and complaint procedures were already in place. The chair said that these procedures were spelled out adequately in UWPF 7, the chapter devoted to the Faculty Rights and Responsibilities Committee.

Professors Snyder and Moy raised the issue of the authority granted the chair under the proposed policy, especially in the fourth sentence of the "Process" section, which read "Within the context of such plans and policies, individual teaching assignments are made by the department chair in consultation with the department as a whole." Professor Moy (Computer Science & Engineering) said he thought this had always been clearly a personnel matter in our procedures and thus in the province of executive committees. Professor Mayer asked whether scheduling was not also a curricular matter, and thus up to the department as a whole. Professor Canary said that language which identified course scheduling as the chair's responsibility had been eliminated in the 1989 revision's wholesale borrowing of UW-Milwaukee procedures, leaving the matter ambiguous under current policy since course scheduling could be construed as an administrative function deriving from the dean's authority, as a curricular matter belonging to the department, or as a personnel matter belonging to the executive committee.

Professor Snyder now MOVED to add the phrase "and subject to review by the department executive committee" so that the sentence in question would read "Within the context of such plans and policies, individual teaching assignments are made by the department chair in consultation with the department as a whole and subject to review by the department executive committee." SECONDED by Professor Moy. Professor Lindner (English) said he thought the amendment would restrict the power of the department chair, which he welcomed. Dean Pavalko asked how the review would be triggered. Professor Snyder said that he did not think the language suggested automatic review. A department might go for years without meeting on the matter. But if people felt that the policy was being administered unfairly the executive committee could meet to review or even overrule the chair. MOTION PASSED on a vote of 15 yes, 0 no.

MAIN MOTION PASSED on a vote of 19 yes, 1 no. [see PSF 11/95-96]

SALARY INCREASES

Professor Lindner, who had proposed two resolutions placed on the agenda by petition, said that the hour was late and that he would just as soon see them taken up at the beginning of the next meeting. The chair agreed. Professor Lindner MOVED to table the resolutions on salary increases and on post-tenure review until the next senate meeting. SECONDED by Professor Buenker. MOTION PASSED on a vote of 18 yes, 0 no.

REPORT OF THE CHANCELLOR

The chancellor said that she had been observing the senate's body language and had decided to change her prepared remarks. She had hoped to have some free exchange with the senate on some challenges she saw facing the campus, but she did not believe that time or remaining energies would permit that. She would content herself instead with thanking the faculty for the splendid job they were doing in teaching, scholarly activity, and service, and with noting three items.

• --She was proud of the campus record in the recent United Way campaign.
• --The Budget Reduction Committee had been reconstituted and will meet soon to review progress in meeting this biennium's goals and to meet with the System VP to get an idea on prospects for the next biennial budget. Professor Singer would again chair the committee.
• --The Diversity Advisory Committee would take over functions of the Design for Diversity Committee and the Affirmative Action Committee. Professor Kornetsky would chair the committee on her return from sabbatical.

Professor Meyer asked what the current giveback total was and whether decisions regarding it would follow guidelines established last year regarding the budget. The chancellor said that the campus had anticipated the possibility of a giveback and held back spending some monies. We still hoped to affect the spring figures. Assistant Chancellor Grace (Student Affairs) said that the big loss had been in continuing students. Getting students off of wait lists and into classes would help. The availability of classes was another issue. The chancellor said that the UW System reserve no longer existed, so that campuses had to bear the consequences of enrollment shortfalls. Whatever faculty could do to help would be appreciated.

REPORT OF UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE CHAIR

The chair noted that there would soon be a special election for a replacement for Professor Kolb on the University Committee. School restrictions meant that it could not be someone from the School of Liberal Arts. Nominations were needed. The next big issue would be reorganization, which would be the main item for discussion at the postponed Fall Faculty Meeting. The "First" Friday celebration would be at the Casa Capri on November 10, at 2:30 p.m.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 5:02 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Robert H. Canary Secretary of the Faculty