November 9, 2004


1.CALL TO ORDER: The 5th meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2004-2005 was called to order at 1:15 PM on November 9, 2004 in the Corey Union Fireplace Lounge by Chair Ram Chaturvedi.


SENATORS AND MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Chaturvedi, J. Rayle, P. Buckenmeyer, C. DeGouff, D. Driscoll, P. Walsh, M. King, K. Alwes, L. Anderson, J. Cottone, K. Rombach, B. Griffen, E. McCabe, T. Phillips, D. Vegas, D. Kirschner, N. Libous, R. Franco, B. Shaut, E. McCabe, J. Cottone, D. Kreh


SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: D. Berger (sabbatical), J. Hokanson, K. Pristash, J. Peluso, D. Canaski, A. Henderson-Harr, A. Young, P. Schroeder, E. Bitterbaum, E. Davis-Russell, C. Plunkett, J. Governali


GUESTS PRESENT: G. Levine, J. Mosser, P. Koryzno, R. Olsson, M. Prus, E. Caffarella



The Minutes from October 26 were distributed. Approval of those Minutes was postponed until the next Senate meeting to facilitate those members who needed time to review them.



There was a motion to approve the resolution regarding the formation of an Ad Hoc Committee to study ROTC and report back to the Senate on 3/15 with a recommendation (Passed)


There was a motion to approve the constitution of the Senate Reconstruction Committee {SEE Old Business} (Passed)


There was a vote to approve discussion of the CTE Committee recommendation at the meeting (Passed)



The Senate Steering Committee met on November 2.The issues discussed were the composition of the Senate Restructuring Committee.The Chair reported that Dave Kreh has the schedule that will allow us to complete the assignment of the committee by March 2005.


A similar structure will be in place for the ROTC Committee. It was suggested that two additional student members be included. The schedule of committee activities will be the same as that for the Senate Restructuring Committee.


Chaturvedi stated that the Steering Committee is still doing research to conclude the status of the GE Committee and whether or not it has been, or should be, a standing committee of the Senate. He said if it is approved as a Senate Standing Committee that will necessitate a change in the Senate by-laws.


A communication was received from Margaret Richardson regarding the Committee on Teaching Effectiveness, as chair, which will be presented on the floor.


The second meeting of the College Council will be held on November 12 at 4 PM in Miller 405. Chaturvedi stated he would be happy to include any ideas, concerns or suggestions in his report.



No report.



{See Vice President�s Report}



Franco opened his report by announcing the ceremony to honor Nancy Cantor, President of Syracuse University, which took place the Friday before. He announced that it was a great ceremony with a wonderful selection representing good work. He expressed that it was nice to see her backed by the Syracuse community, embracing the Onondaga nation and federacy, and a celebration of higher education.


His next item of business was the sold out status of the Cortaca jug game on the upcoming Saturday which will be televised on Time Warner Cable. He said, �We hope that our students and visitors sports spectators and fans, all of the fighting will take place between the lines. It�s a good wonderful athletic competition.�


He hesitated to bring up a mandate from Chancellor King which was sent out as an e-mail asking our students to understand that this campus has a code of conduct. He asked the students to read the code and to understand, saying, �I appreciate everybody understanding. It is very important and required to do by the Chancellor.�


Franco mentioned a meeting hosted by his office related to the code of affirmation involving people from Oswego, Binghamton and Oneonta, working on trying to come up with recommendations to the SUNY System related to the Greek community SUNY-wide, with people making recommendations in December, and then to the Board of Trustees. He said, �Greeks are present on all but 5 of the SUNY campuses�.some campuses have a very large Greek community. The recommendations will provide direction��


He reported that the ASC Board of Director�s meeting came up with members.He asked if anyone had any questions or recommendations as to student or staff constitution to contact his office.


The Athletics and Student Affairs fundraiser will be held on November 19, being the last program offered in Brockway before renovations occur, �nothing but fun from 4:30 to 6:30.� He said they decorated the room so that it looks like a 1950�s diner, and there would be milkshakes, hamburgers, hotdogs, with Phil Connery as disk jockey, �A good time on a Friday afternoon.�He said the proceeds would go to the C-Club Hall of Fame Scholarship Fund. ��



Vice President Mosser asked Dr. Franco how many tickets had been sold for the Cortaca Jug game?


Franco responded that 6500 were sold, and another 1000 for standing room. He said the Stadium could safely handle over 9,000 people, including standing room, but that the last time they were unable to get an accurate count because the stadium was so new.


Shaut said he loaded the budget for the fiscal year this week reflecting stabilization monies for those people so allocated, anticipating the actual budget allocation.


Mosser reported about the new Faculty Staff Directory which he reported as a useful resource. He also announced that Friday at 3:00 PM there would be a dedication of the Economics Department Computer Lab in honor of Victor Rumore, �84, who gave a generous donation to the college, and all faculty and staff were invited to the ceremony.




Long Range Planning Committee - No report.


Educational Policy Committee B Chair Chaturvedi relayed a message from Joseph Governali that the transferability of grades policy was reviewed by his committee, driven by a letter from a parent.His committee discussed it and gave it careful review and decided the policy would remain as is.Although credits transfer in a SUNY Cortland, grades do not.


Student Affairs Committee - No report.


Faculty Affairs Committee - The Faculty Affairs Committee discussed the issue of faculty submitting the same or amended materials both in the fall for promotion and then in the spring for tenure review. While the committee did not feel that changes to the handbook were necessary at this time, they did have a number of suggestions to facilitate the process.


Procedures should be established to assure that: The appropriate chair or dean will have a list of those who are coming up for tenure review in the spring and will flag� those folders to facilitate their movement during the promotion process. The secretary receiving the folders will e-mail back to the applicant so s/he knows where her/his folder is at all times. When a folder is submitted the applicant will be given the option of asking that it be used for both promotion and tenure. The applicant would include appropriate documents recommending him/herself for both promotion and tenure.


There was discussion about the process, duplication of efforts and necessity of such action.It was decided that the Chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee would bring the concerns back to her committee for review and report back with any new developments and/or information.


College Research Committee - No report.


General Education Committee -No report.






Committee on Committees - The Committee on Committees recommended the following additional nominations to the search committee for the Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences:Regarding the search committee for Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences, Dean Prus recommended the following additional nominees from Arts and Sciences: Karla Alwes, {two areas most affected by the search}; Lisi Krall, Elliot Mason; Jerry Casciani from Professional Studies; Education Joseph Rayle.John Shedd was also approved as an additional nominee from Arts and Sciences to the Associate Dean of Professional Studies search committee.��



J. Cottone moved the following representation of the Senate reconstruction committee: 2 Arts and Sciences; 2 Professional Studies; 2 Education, 2 Professional Staff, 2 Management Confidential, 1 Classified Staff, 1 Librarian.The motion carried.


There was an issue that came up from the CTE Committee which P. Walsh addressed in the absence of M. Richardson, Chair, who has a class at that time and was unable to attend.Walsh read the concerns which involved adding a statement on the CTE form to recommendation for approval of the Faculty Senate to request the following clarification be included in the forms requesting students to refrain from inappropriate comments.


The Chair asked the Senate if they wanted action that day since it already went before the Steering Committee. The Senate voted to take it up then.


Alwes said she felt it was fine to put the statement on the CTE forms however she stated, �Nobody�s going to read it. It is perfectly fine to put it there. The students who make obscene remarks are the same students who are gong to continue to do that whether or not you do that. The students who make those comments will not bother to read that. It�s graffiti�I don�t believe the CTE�s are the place where they are supposed to make up obscene comments. It�s graffiti from students who are upset with whatever professor there is�I have no problem with that�no problem with it being on there, it�s not going to stop graffiti on CTE�s, I think..�


Someone said the CTE�s should be shredded immediately if there are obscene or inappropriate comments.


L. Anderson felt it was rude to students putting the statement on there since it�casts light on all students that we have to tell students it�s inappropriate�students who need that kind of message�not see it on CTE.�


Rayle asked about the people who get those kinds of comments. What�s driving it?Is there, perhaps, a gender component? He said, �I know CTE�s are often times influenced by social status. Men get better CTE�s than women, whites better thannon-whites.�


Walsh stated, �I was not a party to the actual discussion�.my understanding was, which came to the attention of the committee, that it was requested we take this off implicitly.�


Someone else stated that they hated putting that in their portfolio.


It was also suggested that information of that nature could be eliminated using White-out.


McCabe stated, �Along those same lines, would you consider the entire issue of students using obscene language be valid� not saying we should shred them all, maybe treated in different way, evaluate them on CTE.�


Vegas had a concern saying,�only thing is that discretion is involved.Who would decide what was included for one and not another?When would we use them and when won�t we? I totally agree there should be no obscene language, but to dismiss it altogether, or to say we are not sure who is going to be taking this and what they are going to be doing with this is rather dangerous.�


A student Senator suggested eliminating any comments section and leaving it as a Scantron form assessment type of evaluation. The individual stated that, for the most part, the majority of students don�t understand where this is coming from�When they say additional comments, their feeling might be �What do you think of this person as an individual. He said students get the impression faculty are not looking for comments like that, they�re looking for teaching style comments and things of that nature.


L. Anderson stated strongly that she felt additional comments are very appropriate


Alwes agreed with Anderson that additional comments are important for students and faculty alike andthat what Walsh refers to, in the way of inappropriate comments, is very rare. She said,I really don�t want to give this, people who did it on this very rare basis, all of the attention this gives them.�


Chaturvedi agreed with Alwes.


J. Rayle added that maybe the Senate could address the issue with slightly different language, that the student could write something as to specific comments on how the instructor could improve their teaching methods or style, instead of using the term �inappropriate language.� He said, �Some students might interpret inappropriate as something negative about teaching which is what we want to know about.�


Kreh made a procedural suggestion, to take the comments back to the committee to discuss it in that context, and then come back with whatever that committee would like to make.


Griffen suggested adding the words, �no adhominem.�


Alwes said that wouldn�t work because the instructor can�t be inside the classroom. She also felt the importance of not limiting the comments.


Prus said, �I think it is important that we recollect the course teacher evaluation system which was codified by a document that probably goes back to 1978. Some people here know that document better than I do�.recollection the guidelines for course teacher evaluations include opportunities for departments to develop support questionnaires�May departments have done that and used them to elicit comments�those kinds of things describing the process that�kind of reports�.contributions that faculty member made to allow and provide guidance for students�.doesn�t just give them a blank sheet�every department has the opportunity to develop that.�


The Chair reminded Walsh that he would go back to the committee and relay recommendations, specifically to update CTE�s as to outdated wording referring to mimeographed materials, etc.


Meeting was adjourned at 2:35.



Joseph Rayle passed around a resolution that emanated from the Steering Committee regarding ROTC and thus not requiring a second, to form an Ad Hoc Committee from all over campus with the same composition as the governance committee with the addition of two students. He stated they would look for nominees from all areas to examine the issue and collect as much information as possible to report back to the Senate its recommendation.


In answer to an inquiry regarding a timeline it was stated the deadline would be 3/15 so that the Senate could report the information at that meeting in the spring.There would be 2 from Professional Studies, 2 from Education, 2 from Arts and Sciences, 2 professional staff, 1 management confidential, 1 librarian, 1 classified staff and two student representatives.


There were some minor editorial problems with changes in the language which were discussed and Rayle expressed would be worked out accordingly.


The resolution passed.



No report.



Student Senator Vegas reported that SGA is working with ASC to address the meal plan. They had a productive meeting with Vice President Shaut and are making a lot of progress.She reported on the Student Assembly Conference which she attended, stating that it was a �good weekend for us, gives us a chance to touch base with officers of SUNY�we learned a lot about the Board of Trustees�so that was really great.� She also announced that Dean Prus brought to their attention an issue concerning the Thanksgiving bus. Since buses leave on Tuesday at 3:00 some professors were concerned that messages were being sent to students that it is okay to use transportation as an excuse to skip classes on Tuesday evenings.She stated that SGA followed up on the problem and were able to obtain another bus leaving Wednesday mornings.There were some questions about this plan since the later bus could only seat another 20-30 students due to the late notice of the request.Dean Prus thanked Vegas and SGA for following up and their subsequent action.


The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 PM


Respectively Submitted,


Barbara Kissel

Recording Secretary


The following reports are appended to the Minutes in the order reported and submitted by Senators and other members.


(1) Thanksgiving Bus Service announcement submitted by D. Vegas, SGA