����������������������� �� October 14, 2008                                  ������������������������������������������


1. CALL TO ORDER: The fourth meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order by Chair William Buxton at 1:10 PM in Brockway Hall, Jacobus Lounge.


SENATORS AND MEMBERS PRESENT:B. Buxton, N. Helsper, H. Botwinick, D. West, D. Miller, J. Governali, J. Hendrick, O. White, J. Rayle, B. Langhans, A. Dahlman, D. Harrington, T. Vigars, E. McCabe, D. Videto, M. Ware, S. Snell, M. Dwyer, C. Hahl, E. Bitterbaum, M. Prus, G. Sharer, S. Anderson, T. Phillips


SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: K. Lawrence, J. Duncan, J. Shedd, I. Jubran, J. Reese, J. Walkuski, T. Slack, M. Rainsford, R. Franco, W. Shaut, R. Kendrick


GUESTS: N. Aumann, H. Wilson, B. Mattingly, K. Alwes, R. Borden, A. Wiegard, M. Kennedy



The minutes from September 30, 2008 were approved.



The nomination from the Committee on Committees was approved (Passed) {SEE Appendix 1]


There was a vote to amend the proposal regarding the addition of two full-time lecturers with voting rights to the Senate elected at large (Approved)


There was a vote as follows: Article VI of the Senate bylaws should be amended to include the following additional voting members:�Two elected representatives for full-time lecturers.One to be elected at-large from full-time lecturers in Arts and Sciences. One to be elected at-large from full-time lecturers in Professional Studies and Education, combined.� (Postponed; October 28, 2008 Faculty Senate meeting)


There was a vote to send the Summer Scheduling Proposal to the Educational Policy Committee (Approved)


There was an amendment to the motion to send the Summer Scheduling Proposal to the Educational Policy Committee with the provision that it be reviewed by the EPC and sent back to the Senate by the next meeting on October 28, if possible (Approved)



Chair Buxton began his report with a reminder that the next Faculty Senate meeting on October 28 would be in the Corey Union, Exhibition Lounge, due to a scheduling conflict.


The next item of business concerned the Academic Grievance Tribunal involving the need for new members since the present terms have run out.Buxton explained that, although a procedure is supposed to be in place for the Senate to fill these vacancies, after having done some research on the matter, none presently exists.To resolve the problem, Buxton referred to a place in the handbook allowing the Faculty Senate chair to decide the process.The chair explained that in the interest of expediency, it has been decided that Buxton would send out an e-mail asking for names of interested individuals who would be nominated at the next Faculty Senate meeting.He encouraged those with names to contact him so that he could begin compiling a list. Chair Buxton also answered questions involving staggered terms so that vacancies would not expire at the same time, possibly assigning two and three year terms, respectively, to the two members from each of the three schools.The nominations will be approved at the next Faculty Senate meeting on October 28.



K. Lawrence � No report (absent)



J. Duncan �  No report (absent)



J. Shedd - No report (absent)



President Bitterbaum gave a report involving alums who have offered to donate frequent flyer miles to help defray costs of travel considering the current budget situation; Strategic Planning on campus; the Resource Enhancement Committee; a productive meeting he had with Student Government recently; and the SUNY Student Assembly who voted for a tuition increase.


The President indicated that the campus would not hear anything new until after the election.


President Bitterbaum, as well as Provost Prus, answered several question regarding the enrollment overflow allocation funds.




Long Range Planning Committee � no report (absent)


Educational Policy Committee � R. Kendrick � R. Kendrick was absent but reported through the chair that the EPC is continuing its discussion of the policies affecting overlaps between majors, minors, and concentrations. Ginny Levine, Assistant to the President, prepared a packet of materials on SUNY and college policies on this issue that will be distributed to committee members at the meeting on Thursday, October 16 at 2-3 PM in Old Main Room 218. Jerry O�Callaghan, Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences, and Scott Anderson, chair of Geography, will be at the next meeting to discuss their views of the overlap issue. Bob Spitzer will be presiding at the meeting in the absence of R. Kendrick who will be away for a three-day workshop.


Student Affairs Committee � T. Phillips, Chair � no report.


Faculty Affairs Committee � J. Walkuski (absent) � Chair Buxton reported for the committee that they are getting organized and, hopefully, they should have something to report soon.


College Research Committee � No report (absent)


General Education Committee � D. Miller, Chair � Miller reported that his committee is finalizing notification to faculty who are teaching GE courses to be assessed the spring semester, which is scheduled to go out at the end of the week.The GE committee is trying to clarify whether the Math category is going to be assessed or whether it will be postponed.Miller indicated that the committee has been planning on using the test that was being developed by an outside agency, but since that standardized test collapsed, they are working through the issue.He finished by reporting that things are looking good.


Committee on Committees � B. Buxton gave the report for the Committee on Committees.

The nomination from the committee was approved {SEE APPENDIX 1}



There were no Area Senator reports.


XI. SUNY SENATOR�S REPORT � M. Ware gave a detailed report, along with a report from SUNY President, Carl Wiezalis, which are included in their entirety in Appendix 2.


B. Buxton asked Dr. Ware a question regarding the issue of articulation, indicating that he had been asked to approve a 200 or 300 level from a community college which he declined to approve. Chair Buxton inquired as to how strong the push is regarding articulation.


M. Ware encouraged anyone interested to look at the resolution from the UFS that is set up on the Senate website regarding articulation.She indicated that what the UFS is trying to do is keep articulation within the hands of the faculty.


M. Prus also reported on different ways the topic is being approached, including from System Administration, the Board of Trustees, chief academic officers of all the campuses, and especially the comprehensive colleges.



C. Hahl had nothing to report.



The Old Business from the Review of Governance Report regarding the addition of two full-time lecturer positions to the Senate was discussed at length.The proposal was amended by H. Botwinick as follows: Article IV of the Senate bylaws should be amended to include the following additional voting members:�Two elected representatives for full-time lecturers. One to be elected at-large from full-time lecturers in Arts and Sciences.One to be elected at-large from full-time lecturers in Professional Studies and Education, combined. {SEE Senate Actions}


Ann Wiegard was recognized from the floor who spoke to the proposal. She read from a statement from the Lecturer�s Review Committee {SEE Appendix 3}.She indicated that she has been a full-time lecturer since 1999 on this campus, and before in California.She reported on a petition which she had distributed, obtaining 98 signatures from 7 departments across campus in support of allowing two full time lecturers two seats on the Senate which she submitted to the Secretary.Wiegard stated that it was not representational since she distributed the petition only to those people she knew.She also responded to questions involving the feelings of the Lecturer Committee, since the representation had been changed from the original proposal.


H. Botwinick referred to the statistics as far as full-time lecturers which had been provided by M. Prus showing the number of full-time lecturers broken down by department {SEE Appendix 4)


H. Botwinick made a motion to amend the proposal from the original one, that one full time lecturer be added from Arts and Sciences to be elected at large, and one from Professional Studies and Education combined to be elected at large.The motion to amend the proposal was approved. Then discussion ensued regarding the actual amended proposal.


There were several questions directed to A. Wiegard regarding the Lecturer Review Committee�s sentiments, since none were in attendance and the original proposal had been changed.Dr. Wiegard indicated the committee�s continued support.


There was the need for clarification since the previously unseen amended version had been listed erroneously on the agenda instead of the original one, causing some confusion.


D. West commented that she felt it might cause some discord between Education and Professional Studies if the schools were not represented over a period of time.


B. Buxton confirmed that the positions would require standard two year terms.


R. Borden also spoke to the proposal, indicating that he has served as a full-time lecturer and on the Lecturer Review Committee on campus for many years.He mentioned that the issues full-time lecturers deal with go across all schools and all work has been shared without division.


D. West asked a question regarding salary distinctions across the schools as far as full-time lecturers are concerned.


R. Borden indicated that the salaries are essentially the same, quoting salary figures.


M. Prus expressed concern since Borden made a statement that was contradictory to the amended version of the proposal.


R. Borden responded that although there are some issues that divide the schools, he felt this was not true in terms of the issues specific to them.


K. Alwes responded, as chair of the department (English) with the most lecturers on campus, in support of the proposal stating that the issues transcend schools.


M. Kennedy from the English Department also spoke in support of the proposal.


H. Botwinick mentioned his intent on amending the proposal indicating awareness of how sensitive individuals are on campus to numbers between the schools.


Dr. Weigard reported that many schools are doing this across the country.


J. Governali asked a question regarding the election process, if the lecturers would be elected by school.


B. Buxton responded that such a process would be consistent with what Senator Botwinick proposed.


D. West wondered why one full-time lecturer would not suffice for now, with expansion possible at a later date.


There was a motion to approve amending the original motion regarding the addition of two full time lecturers as voting members to the Faculty Senate which was passed.


J. Governali asked for clarification as to what specific issues this constituency deals with.


N. Helsper responded that the issue is that they are faculty who don�t get to vote.


Dr. Wiegard indicated that the group is not included in tenure track decisions and they would like a voice.


Dr. Borden mentioned academic freedom issues.


J. Hendrick asked a question regarding the number of lecturers (48) and if that figure would stay consistent over the years.


M. Prus indicated that full time lecturer positions within the schools are at a cap.


R. Borden mentioned the problem of contingency on campus and the fact that the part-time faculty are too busy trying to find additional employment to attend Senate meetings.


E. McCabe mentioned her work with full-time lecturers and spoke in favor of the proposal.


D. West felt that there are still some divisions between the disciplines.


A. Dahlman asked a question, if the proposed number of two full-time lecturers derived from the part a or b option from the Review of Governance Report, where the professionals were theoretically proposed to be changed to 6.


H. Botwinick responded in the affirmative and mentioned the incongruity and level of inconsistency as to how the process evolved over the years as to numbers and representation.


J. Governali asked about the lack of a rationale asking for more clarification as to specific issues the group deals with.


J. Rayle made a motion to postpone the proposal until the next meeting on October 28 which was approved.


After lengthy discussion, due to time limitations, there was a motion from J. Rayle to postpone further discussion and vote until the next meeting on October 28, which was approved.



The Summer Scheduling Proposal was introduced by B. Mattingly and discussed.Following a question from J. Hendrick as to why the proposal had not gone through the Educational Policy Committee, according to Senate procedures and since the original summer scheduling plans had originated from here, there was a motion from J. Hendrick to send the proposal to the Educational Policy Committee for its consideration before bringing it back to the Senate.There was an amendment to this motion, which was approved, that the proposal be expedited so that it could be considered by the next Senate meeting on October 28, if possible, due to the need for urgency.


B. Mattingly spoke to two issues, possible energy and money savings, and elimination of under-utilized classes.


Respectfully Submitted:


Barbara Kissel

Recording Secretary


The following reports are appended to the minutes in the order they are submitted:


(1)      Committee on Committees report submitted by J. Barry, Chair.

(2)      SUNY Senator�s report and President�s Report, submitted by M. Ware

(3)      Full-time Lecturer document from Colleen Buchanan, Chair, Lecturer�s Committee submitted by A. Wiegard

(4)      Number of Full-time Lecturer�s, submitted by H. Botwinick

(5)      Summer Scheduling Proposal, submitted by B. Mattingly



����������������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������� APPENDIX 1

����������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������� Committee on Committees report


Committee on Committees � Report to the Faculty Senate

October 14, 2008


Committee on Committees � Report to the Faculty Senate

October 14, 2008


Item # 1


  • The Committee recommends the following appointment:


Committee on Teaching Effectiveness � Kathleen Burke representing Social/Behavioral Sciences (2005-2009 � complete unexpired term)


This requires confirmation by the Faculty Senate.




��������������������������� Submitted by SUNY Senator M. Ware


Faculty Senator�s Report � Oct. 14, 2008


The Faculty Senate statewide has had a planning retreat (in September) and committees, both standing and ad hoc, have been working in preparation for the Fall Plenary to be held Oct. 24-25 at SUNY Potsdam.I regret that I am unable to attend, due to a professional commitment out of state.Our alternate Senator cannot attend either, so I will contact other senators to obtain up to date information after the Senate has met.


Of interest, however, is the President�s report which has been sent to us already, in preparation for the Plenary.I will append that report to my report and give you some highlights here.The year�s theme is � Empowering New York through Sustainability and Diversity�.The budget remains a concern uppermost in everyone�s minds.The Acting Vice Chancellor of Finance and Administration (SUNY System Admin) will be at the Potsdam meeting to report and answer questions.Questions may also be sent in advance to Carol.Donato@suny.edu and answers will be built into his presentation.


The Senate is working with the UUP and with the trustees to attempt to deal with budget issues on a unified basis.Carl McCall, Phil Smith and Carl Weizelis have met face to face to begin this effort and to get to know each other.


The Chancellor�s search committee (of which Carl Weizelis is a member) is still working. Carl mentioned many rumors flying around and dispelled those which he could, given his requirement of confidentiality.The committee is meeting again soon.


A Senate committee on Articulation and Transfer (one of the ad hoc committees I mentioned) will present a resolution at the Fall Plenary.After reading it, I�m not sure it will pass, however for those interested, information and the resolution are posted on the Faculty Senate website (http://www.suny.edu/facultySenate/artr.cfm).


Again I am sorry not to be attending this Plenary, as I think it will be an interesting gathering of concerned senators and the issues of budget, chancellor search and articulation and transfer will be discussed, however I will gather information and keep you informed once the Plenary ends.I have close contact with several other senators from four year colleges, and will ask them to share information with me.


Respectfully submitted,


Mary Ware

University Faculty Senator



President�s Report

October 2008


May I begin this report by welcoming you all back to the Fall semester and to faculty governance.It was difficult to enjoy this past summer with the challenges of the State and SUNY budgets looming over the State of New York.The changes in the Governor�s Office, coupled with the unclear destiny of the Report of the Commission on Public Higher Education in New York State, have made SUNY�s future very difficult to anticipate and plan.The deficit activity has been the omnibus,multi-tangential, shotgun approach to everything that moves, or does not move.Strategic planning has been impossible, given that the very foundation of the University is threatened by budget deprivation.And every month the fiscal picture grows worse, culminating in the Wall Street and national financial failures, which will probably affect New York State more than any other.Otherwise, the year to date, and the summer in particular, has been different and challenging.


During our Spring Plenary meeting at SUNY Delhi you will remember that I asked our committees, standing and ad hoc, to extend their activities into the summer to advance their project work and create a less-interrupted business year.Many of our faculty and staff colleagues work a calendar year, and all of our campuses and System Administration certainly are very active throughout the summer.


By pressing on with our committee work through the summer we have the opportunity to increase the volume and timeliness of our work.I want to thank all of our committee members and leaders who pressed on while others enjoyed an extended vacation.The additional work was measurable.


The UFS Summer Planning Retreat was held at the White Eagle Conference Center in Hamilton, NY for the second year in a row.While the accommodations were modest, the food was excellent and the atmosphere conducive to our work.Most of our new Executive Committee and committee chairs were able to meet to establish the theme for the year �Empowering New York through sustainability and diversity� and explore possible projects to be advanced, completed or attenuated.By all measures, this was an enjoyable and productive meeting.


This is a good place in my report to give credit to a very important person, critical to the day-to-day operation of the Senate � Carol Donato.She is the organizational force behind the planning and operations of all of our executive, standing and ad hoc committee meetings, plenary meetings, design of all documents, communications with our colleagues and administration, and management of the president�s travel, calendar and correspondence.She is a wise and respected advisor, having worked with System Administrators for over two decades.She often puts her position and the University Faculty Senate before her own personal interests.Much of what the Senate membership accomplishes may be attributed to the exceptional work of Carol Donato.Please, when you speak with Carol, thank her for being a devoted administrative assistant beyond compare.


I want to recognize and thank the out-going chairs and members of our committees for their dedication and high performance during the last academic year.We deeply appreciate their sacrifices and invite them to return to this work in the future as time allows.For those member and chair returning for yet another year, we want you to know that the leadership and membership recognize your service efforts and celebrate your engagement is shared governance.


The University Faculty Senate, with the New York State Department of Education co-sponsored the first-ever symposium with the Office of the Licensed Professions on June 5, 2008.Leaders of the 45-odd licensed professions programs offered by SUNY institutions were invited to attend the meeting held in Albany at the New York State Museum Cultural Education Center Huxley Theatre.About one hundred faculty leaders attended this all-day meeting, and I believe all left with a sense of appreciation for the exchange of critical information.The Secretaries (assigned New York State Department of Education administrators) of all of the licensed professions were in attendance and several offered presentations.Frank Munoz, Associate Commissioner

NYS Department of Education Office of the Professions, co-chaired the day with me.Frank was an enthusiastic supporter of this first-ever colloquium and has pledged his support for doing this annually.(For those of you unfamiliar with the licensed professions, they include medicine, nursing, respiratory care, dentistry, veterinary science, to name a few.)Alignment between the SUNY academic programs and the Office of the Professions is critical for NYS licensing.Even if a student graduates from a college of medicine, for example, that student cannot practice in the State of New York until he/she passes the licensing examination developed and administered by the NYS Department of Education Office of the Professions.Further, the Department of Education controls the content, quality and accreditation of the academic programs of the licensed professions, yet another justification for developing and maintaining a close relationship between SUNY colleges/programs and the New York State Department of Education.


The Governor�s budget continues to challenge SUNY in proportion to other State agencies.While Chancellor Clark and Trustee Chair Carl Hayden have diligently tried to re-negotiate the relationship between SUNY and the Governor�s Office, most efforts to date have met with failure.The Board of Trustees Finance Committee, chaired by past New York State Comptroller H. Carl McCall, is advisory to the full Board of Trustees relative to budget policy and planning.The Finance Committee, together with Carl Hayden and senior System Administration have been working tirelessly throughout the summer to find a way to manage and mitigate the across-the-board cuts advanced by Governor Patterson.At the last meeting of the Finance Committee, Carl McCall asked all State-operated college presidents to prepare budgets consistent with the proposed cuts.Further, our college presidents were asked to describe, in some detail, what the proposed cuts would mean to campus programs and operations.The only persistent good news is that the capital budget remains intact, as described at our spring plenary.


Jim Van Voorst, Acting Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration will be with us at the Potsdam Plenary to offer an up-to-that-date budget presentation and answer your questions as only he can.So please talk with your colleagues about their budget concerns and bring those questions with you to Potsdam.Better yet, if you will send those questions to the Faculty Senate office (carol.donato@suny.edu) we shall direct them to Jim prior to his appearance, so that he may build your questions and his answers into his presentation.


I am pleased to report that we were successful in arranging a meeting between/among myself, H. Carl McCall, UUP President Phil Smith, Executive Vice President of NYSUT Allen Lubin and senior staff of UUP and NYSUT.This was an effort to organize the behavior of these educational leadership bodes to seek pathways to short and long-term mitigation of the financial short-falls which threaten the future of all education in New York State.Additional meetings are planned for the near future.It is clear that no single strategy will heal the rift between what SUNY needs and what we are offered in the Governor�s budget.If SUNY is to be the engine of economic development and social change described in the Report of the Commission for Public Higher Education, then adequate fuel must be provided to SUNY.The status quo ensures that tomorrow will become the same as yesterday.An improved future for the people of New York State requires investment of precious resources in all forms of education, disproportionate with other works of government.Hopefully, our Governor and legislators will hear our arguments and respond to our admonitions.


On October 2, I was able to organize a private meeting in Syracuse with Board of Trustees Chairman Carl Hayden, UUP President Phil Smith and myself.Chairman Hayden and President Smith had never met one another.The tone of the meeting was very collegial, but all major concerns were placed on the table.UUP is seeking faculty/staff supportive statements from SUNY administration similar to those advanced to the academic community by CUNY Chancellor Matt Goldstein.��� Chairman Hayden stated that he would re-double his efforts to emphasize the value of strong faculty, staff and programs to the State University and the people of New York State.While no single strategy was subscribed to by all present, it was agreed that a diversity of strategies, coupled with a respect for the offices and organizations engaged could be best for SUNY and the budget challenges before us.


As always, our advocacy work begins at our home campuses, with our local administrators, businesses, legislators and unions to promote the parts of our System.Many of us are active with the legislative initiatives of UUP, as our union is uniquely positioned for local and State-wide advocacy.I recommend your engagement without reservation.As President, I meet with System Administrators to explore what the Senate might do as a body to promote SUNY.As a member of the SUNY Board of Trustees I get to share our perspectives with the Board and its committees.Additionally, I meet with the President and leadership of the SUNY Student Assembly and I attend their State-wide meetings, where budget is frequently on the agenda.The budget is always a prime subject of the Executive Committee of the University Faculty Senate.


Other than pragmatic questions about the budget, most questions directed to me relate to the Chancellor�s Search Committee.I am pleased to represent the University Faculty Senate for the second Chancellor�s search of my tenure.It is good that the faculty are represented on these committees; it is not good that our chancellorship has become a revolving door.


Contrary to the popular rumor and articles in newspapers, our Chancellor Search process continues.Three names were NOT given to Governor Paterson to select from.Without violating my oath of confidentiality regarding this search, Imay add that many applications have been received from individuals interested in the position.A small sub-committee of the full Search Committee was appointed by Chair Carl Hayden, Milton Johnson, President of the Faculty Council of Community Colleges and I have been serving on that sub-committee. The sub-committee has been screening and offering preliminary interviews to applicants of promise, and there have been several promising candidates identified.Most of these promising applicants remain in the active applicant pool.We have not lost many applicants as a result of protracted time, press leaks and/or the gloomy budget situation for SUNY.The mix of applicants has been of traditional academics as well as non-traditional candidates.And I must report that the diverse mix of candidates has not caused an extra-ordinary split among the Search Committee members, as has been reported in the press.We have been assured that the search has been and will be objective, transparent and without political intrusion.If it becomes otherwise, I would resign from the search committee.Everyone agrees that we are upon difficult times in SUNY, and these times require a strong, experienced leader able to articulate the vision and mission of public higher education and market that mission and vision to all New Yorker-legislators, economic leaders and the taxpayers alike.Our future is dependent upon our recruiting such a person.A meeting of the full Search Committee will be scheduled in the next couple of weeks.I shall keep you updated.


Ram Chugh, the new Executive Director of the SUNY Retiree Service Corps will present an update of the work of his office at the Potsdam Plenary.Potsdam was Ram�s home campus for several decades prior to his retirement.His Advisory Committee has been meeting regularly throughout the summer to advance the development of the new Service Corps.


We have three ad hoc committees operating under the umbrella of the Faculty Senate this year.The work of each committee will be reported to you in proper detail.They are the Special Committee for Diversity and Cultural Competency, chaired by Phil Ortiz, ESC; the Committee on Professional Behavior, Ethical Conduct and Institutional Integrity (the Ethics Committee) chaired by Janet Nepkie, SUNY Oneonta; and the Special Committee for Sustainability chaired by Maureen Dolan, SUNY Old Westbury.All three exist to emphasize the pressing importance of their work to the Senate and the SUNY System.The chairs will share their work and recommendations with the Senate through reports and our publications.


The Special Joint Committee on Articulation and Transfer, an ad hoc committee jointly sponsored by the University Faculty Senate and the Faculty Council of Community Colleges, has been meeting regularly since last year to untangle the convolutions which impair smooth transfer of students from our Community Colleges to our State-operated colleges and universities.The Joint Committee has members from campuses and System Administration, as well as a balance of faculty leaders.Tina Good from Suffolk County Community College and Joe Hildreth from SUNY Potsdam co-chair this august body.Because of the high interest of the Governor, the Legislature, the Higher Education Commission and the SUNY Board of Trustees, the Governor�s Office has recognized the work of this committee in the public press.We may become the first public university faculty organization to successfully address the somewhat complex and difficult issues impeding smooth and successful transfer.From the start our mantra has been student success, and by that we mean successful commencement.The SUNY Provost�s Office has been a great partner in advancing many of the essential elements of articulation and transfer in a successful and complementary direction.Co-chair Joe Hildreth will be presenting a joint resolution to the Senate for your consideration.The same resolution will be presented to the Faculty Council of Community Colleges by their Co-chair, Tina Good.There has been give and take on both sides in the formulation of this transfer resolution.It must be passed by both bodies for the transfer and articulation process to remain in our control.The bottom line is that reform is coming to SUNY.The only issue remaining is whether the faculty will retain control as prescribed by the resolution.Provost Palm and her staff have workedvaliantly to preserve the priority of faculty in transfer in articulation, and have worked with faculty to create new materials and a new website SUNY � Acts, to assist students with their investigations and planning.The Board of Trustees have followed this whole process with the intensity of parents about to give birth.The pressure from the Governor to the Legislature is palpable and the faculty cannot abrogate their pre-eminence in this domain.


I have been a monthly participant of the meetings of the Business and Education Leadership Cooperative, an organization of agency, business and education (public and private) leaders dedicated to preserving and advancing New York through research, education, workforce development and economic development.Barbara Drago, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Business and Education chairs this informal organization of over one hundred interested parties/organizations.Barbara will be offering a short presentation at Potsdam describing the activities and aspirations of the Cooperative.Additional, Doug Leavens, Director of Career and Technical Education for the Washington, Saratoga, Warren, Hamilton, Essex BOCES, who presented to the Cooperative recently, will share a recently completed study on future educational and employment needs in Eastern New York.This presentation will help drive home the changing landscape of American business, industry and employment and how the schools, colleges and universities must seek to become part of the solution to New York State challenges.


Well, I thought that this would be a short report when I sat down to write it five hours ago.This report remains incomplete, but it does address the snow-capped peaks of our mountain range.Clearly, we must seek to preserve what we have before we research new initiatives.The Report of the Commission on Public Higher Education describes the immaturity of our great public promise, but it also advises on our great potential.The faculty remain the foundation of our great University System.The work of the faculty defines the University.And it is the faculty who must guide this public university to its date with destiny.The power of the University is in the diversity and sustainability of the faculty and all that means.


Respectively submitted,

Carl P. Wiezalis, President

SUNY University Faculty Senate


����������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������� APPENDIX 3

Full-Time Lecturer�s Statement, submitted by A. Wiegard


Statement to the Faculty Senate On Behalf of Full-Time Lecturers

14 October 2008


We the undersigned are the current members of the Lecturer Review Committee, a standing committee of the College charged to support the institution of full-time lectureships and to advise in personnel decisions on advancement.Since 2003, we have reviewed the work of many candidates for promotion and made recommendations to the Deans, the Provost, and the President.


Our work as a committee has confirmed what we know from individual experience: that full-time lecturers are fully involved in teaching, the basic work of the College.In the pattern of this work, we are all interdependent � contingent and tenure-line faculty together.Some of us have served on other committees with you, within departments and also college-wide.As full-time lecturers share the work with you, we ask that you allow us a role in the most important institution of shared governance, the Faculty Senate.Until then, nearly fifty members of the faculty must remain a largely unknown quantity, recognized only in passing and on a personal rather than a professional basis.


Full-time lecturers have served the College for many years and are integral to many departments.Our work is informed by our experience, drawing on the history and culture of the College, the ambitions and needs of the Cortland student, changes in our disciplines, and developments in pedagogy and instructional technology.We are fully qualified to address many issues of the curriculum, including subject matter and methods of instruction, faculty rights, and student life.We understand full well that we are not positioned to make sound judgments about tenured personnel, and we are not seeking a voice in those deliberations.


In the policy statement �Contingent Appointments and the Academic Profession,� published in November 2003, the AAUP declared, �Governance responsibilities should be shared among all faculty.�With respect to academic freedom, it emphasized, �In order to protect the right and the responsibility of nontenured as well as tenured faculty to participate freely and effectively in faculty governance, it is incumbent on all faculty to protect the exercise of academic freedom by their colleagues in faculty governance processes.�


Full-time lecturers are no less interested than our tenure-line colleagues in the ideals of the university and in the crisis of academic labor.Without a voice in faculty governance, we cannot bring our experience to bear on questions of academic freedom and academic responsibility.We cannot join the Senate�s efforts both to protect and improve the College and to resist managerial models of restructuring.We are prevented from winning the principled respect of our colleagues and from achieving a genuine measure of academic freedom.


As the College extends its relationships with the community and with the market, it is divided into separate interests and instrumentalities.The academic profession becomes segmented, and as we answer to others, we lose the confidence of a common purpose.The Senate is a place for the faculty to negotiate these differences and to constitute itself again as a faculty.


We recognize that the Senate is concerned not to legitimate the College�s reliance on contingent faculty.  But this reliance too � with its many implications now and for the future � needs to be recognized openly.  And a third fact deserves special emphasis here.  The contingent faculty itself wants to serve the College in reducing contingency and restoring a stable and autonomous professoriate.  This is our strongest reason for requesting that full-time lecturers be allowed two seats on the Senate, to be filled by faculty in different Schools.


Yours truly,


Lecturer Review Committee:


Colleen Buchanan, Chair

Virginia Dudgeon

Susan Kather

Renee Potter

Laureen Wells



������ ����������������


����������������������������������������������� APPENDIX 4


���������������������� ����� Number of Full-time Lecturers

����������������������������������� Submitted by H. Botwinick


��������� Of the 48 FTL�s, 31 are in A&S

����������������������� English (15)

����������������������� ICC (7)

����������������������� BIO (3)

����������������������� ECO (2)

����������������������� 1 each in CHE, COM, GEOL, AND MATH


����������� School of Education (7)

����������������������� Childhood (6)

����������������������� FSA (1)


����������� School of Professional Studies (10)

����������������������� Health

����������������������� KIN (2)

����������������������� PE (3)

����������������������� REC (1)

����������������������� SPEECH (2)

����������������������� SPMG (1)


����������������������� �����



����������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������� APPENDIX 5

����������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������� Summer Scheduling Proposal


Summer Scheduling Proposal

September 19, 2008

Background: The issue of summer scheduling was raised at Provost�s cabinet on July 23. The initial motivation for this discussion was a desire to revisit the past practice (in some departments) of offering daytime courses 4 days per week.Provost Prus appointed a subcommittee to study this issue and develop recommendations. Committee members included Bruce Mattingly, John Cottone, Joy Mosher, Mary Cervoni and Donna Margine. During our discussions, other issues emerged that are relevant to this topic. In particular, we discovered that when the Faculty Senate approved the restructuring of summer session in February 2005, there was a suggestion that the reconfiguration of summer session be reviewed after two years. To our knowledge, this has not occurred. We therefore felt that this was an appropriate time to revisit the configuration of summer terms as well, because the two issues are related.Beginning in summer 2006, the Summer Session Office discouraged the scheduling of 4-day per week courses. Their justification was that the introduction of the four 2.5-week terms increased the complexity of the scheduling process, and that the additional option of 4-day per week courses could no longer be accommodated.

Process: The committee reviewed data provided by the Summer Session Office with particular attention to the number of courses offered and cancelled in various terms, and the resulting enrollments in the courses that ran. Our intent was to formulate a list of specific recommendations as a starting point for a broad-based campus discussion in multiple venues.Initially the recommendations will be presented to the chairs� council in each of the three schools, with the expectation that further discussion will occur at the department level, and also at the Joint Chairs� council. These recommendations will also be sent to the Faculty Senate Steering Committee so that they may determine whether this issue should be addressed by the Faculty Senate.

Recommendations: Based on our review of summer session enrollment data, we are issuing the following recommendations at this time. We encourage that implementation as early as summer 2009 be considered, with the understanding that there should be ample opportunity for broad-based discussion and consensus before any decisions are made.

        Summer courses that meet during the day will meet Monday-Thursday. Starting and ending times are shown in the attached Course times Chart (Appendix A.)

        Retain the full term (10 weeks), the two 5-week terms (I and II) and two 2.5-week terms (A and C) that coincide with the beginning of the 5-week terms.

        Eliminate the B and D terms (2.5 weeks, coinciding with the second half of the 5-week terms.)

        One-week courses may only be offered during the first week of terms A or C, with the exception of courses at Raquette Lake.

        One-week courses scheduled at Raquette Lake may be scheduled on an individual case by case basis determined by availability.The refund policies for such courses must be clearly articulated to potential students well in advance.


        Offering summer daytime courses for 4 days per week instead of 5 will reduce commuting time and expense for both students and faculty. It therefore has the potential to increase summer enrollments. Offering 4-day per week courses has been past practice in some departments, both formally and informally, indicating that this has been a desirable scheduling option.

        Data shows that current B and D terms are under-utilized. Retaining them creates additional difficulties for an already complex scheduling procedure. The tables in Appendix B show the number of courses offered and cancelled during the last 4 summer sessions, broken down according to term. Appendix C provides a bar graph showing the number off courses offered and cancelled in each of the short terms. Appendix D provides this information in tabular form and also shows the number of courses that were allowed to run with fewer than 10 students.