FACULTY SENATE MINUTES NO. 9
February 17, 2004
1.� CALL TO ORDER: The 9th meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2003-2004
was called to order at 1:10 PM on February 3, 2004 in the Hall of Fame Room,
PER Center, by Chair Jeffrey Walkuski.
SENATORS AND MEMBERS PRESENT:
J. Walkuski, B. Jackson, P. Buckenmeyer, K. Coombs,
B. Mattingly, P. Walsh, J. Cottone, J. Hokanson, M. Friga, J. Rayle, M. Chandler, J. Peluso, K. Pristash,
A. Johnson, S. VanEttten, A. Young, M. Barone, D. Walker, D. Stevens, E. Bitterbaum,
E. Davis-Russell; R. Franco, W. Shaut, B. Jackson, C.
Plunkett, T. Fay, C. Poole, M. Ali
SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT:
G. Beadle, K. Alwes, L. Anderson, P. Schroeder, T. Phillips, E. McCabe
GUESTS PRESENT: J. Mosser, P. Koryzno, M. Prus, E. Caffarella, D. Margine
II. SENATE ACTIONS:
The Senate voted to approve a
pool of six individuals to serve on the Academic Grievance Tribunal: Joy
Mosher, Joseph Rayle, Reginal
Grantham, Eileen Gravani, Jerome O�Callaghan and Jeffrey Walkuski� (Passed)
III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Minutes #8 were voted on and approved from February 3,
2004 as� posted
electrically.
����������������������
The Senate Restructuring Model was voted on and passed with a roll call
vote as follows: Approved: B. Jackson, P. Buckenmeyer,
K. Coombs, B.� Mattingly, P. Walsh, J.
Cottone, J. Hokanson, M. Friga, J. Rayle, M.
Chandler, J. Peluso, K. Pristash, A. Johnson, A.
Young, M. Barone, D. Walker, D. Stevens.� Abstained: S. VanEtten (Mgt. Confid.)� Opposed: None.
IV.� CHAIR�S REPORT:
The Chair opened by thanking
President Bitterbaum for providing the refreshments
at the meeting. The President responded that although, traditionally, it was
done at the last meeting in December, due a delay they were not provided until
this meeting. He apologized because he had hoped they would be fancier but
offered something nicer next time.� The
Senate thanked him for his thoughtfulness.
The Chair announced that he
had been asked by the Provost to form a pool of six individuals to serve on the
Academic Grievance Tribunal, four of which will also be chosen to serve next
year.� The names were: Joy Mosher, Joseph
Rayle, Regina, Grantham, Eileen Gravani, Jerome O�Callaghan,
Jeffrey Walkuski.
V.� VICE CHAIR�S REPORT:
Jackson referred to the
Standing Rules for the Faculty Senate procedures that the formative committee
to review DSI for faculty is not outlined.�
He has chosen some individuals from Professional Studies, and as chair
of the committee, will be biased in looking for two more persons from the School
of Education. He will be asking Michael Friga to recruit some people. The
committee has to move quickly by next week to approve or not approve the Senate
rules for DSI for faculty since it is not stated in the Handbook.
VI.� TREASURER�S REPORT:
Treasurer Coombs reported
that the Faculty Senate is in serious financial straights. There is only $250
in the checking/savings account, and the Senate is very much in need of dues or
the Faculty Scholarship won�t be able to be funded. The Steering Committee is
also discussing fund raising ideas and she urged anyone if they had any ideas
to send her an e-mail.
VII.� SECRETARY�S REPORT: No report.
VIII.� PRESIDENT�S REPORT:
President Bitterbaum
had a few short items. One is that Senator Jim Seward is coming to have lunch
with the President, Cabinet and Sports Council.
Two proposals are being
presented from Academic Affairs, funding for the library, and equipment, which
are very large proposals considered as legislative member items. The Senator
was very interested in both proposals, and the President reported, asked good
questions.� Bitterbaum
offered that, based on that, he is hopeful maybe one, or both, will be
considered, although it is up to Seward�s discretion. The President announced
that he was very pleased.
The next item of business
regarded Vice President William Shaut and the
Construction Fund. He had good news to report that during the recent power
outage where the college had to spend $40,000, these monies were refunded. He
was also very pleased with this news.
He reported that there are
three finalists for the Vice President�s position.
His office heard from the
Chancellor the day before as the campus is about to begin its second round of
Mission Review. They will be outlined and will be forwarded to the Deans, and
appropriate Chairs, and the Provost which will be for 2005-2010.� The Chancellor truly believes in this process
and there are a record numbers of students who come to SUNY where record
research dollars are being raised by philanthropy which effects
Mission Review.
He is very optimistic about
the Capital Plan of 40 million dollars, and although we requested a little
more, he said, �We are keeping our fingers crossed.�
His closing words were
regarding the recent proposal approved by the Faculty Senate regarding the
extension of the drop/add period to seven days.�
�I would like to mention very briefly about the last meeting regarding
drop add. I can tell you that an innumerable people have contacted me through
e-mail or individually. I am interested in having a dialogue with the Provost,
Cabinet, Council Department Chairs and then take it
back to the faculty.� He then read a
typical e-mail, �I am sure you are getting many unsolicited responses regarding
the extension of drop/add. Please let me briefly add my own. Most of us value
our class time with students and do not want to spend our class time with
students and do not want to spend the first class meeting or two treading water
until we start teaching substantive material.��
The letter went on to point out that the last time this happened there
was a vote on Gen Ed reform in 1993 and the whole faculty participated.� President Bitterbaum
a possible model where drop/add would start on Monday and go to Friday which
would allow for 4-1/2 days.� This would
not affect the students, they could pick up their checks on the following
Monday, checks could be run over the weekend, and would allow every student to
attend class and allow faculty to establish class.� He said it is very important to him as a
faculty member.� Another model would be
to start on Tuesday and end on the following Monday.� He said he hopes to �flush these out� and
meet with EOP and find a middle ground that might be sensible.� He said a third of the faculty,
approximately, were in one direction, and added, �...so I want to find where
the greater good can be found...open to questions.�
IX.� QUESTION�S FOR THE PRESIDENT:
Vice Chair Jackson asked what
Mission Review was. Dr. Bitterbaum explained that it
was a process where the campus compensates its goals and strategies as an
entire college as well as covering individual departments.� A Memorandum of Understanding is developed,
he explained further, for the Chancellor which the President if held
accountable for.� This process is
mandated by the Board of Trustees but there is flexibility within each
school.� Not every Mission Review is the
same for every campus but it falls under the substantive values of SUNY.� He believed our Memorandum of Understanding
is on the Web and he also offered, if anyone was interested, to provide
copies.�
X. STANDING COMMITTEE
REPORTS:
Long Range Planning
Committee - Fay mentioned Mission
Review and that by the following day his committee would have met for three
straight weeks.� He said that Dr. Bitterbaum would have a better understanding of the first
planning cycle. They are also going to be bringing back a recommendation as to
a possible adjustment modification model of the planning cycle.
Educational Policy
Committee - No report (absent)
Student Affairs Committee � Buckenmeyer mentioned
that his committee is awaiting selection of candidates for the Faculty Senate
Scholarship pending funding.
Faculty Affairs Committee - No report (absent)
XI. SUNY SENATOR�S REPORT: No report (absent)
XII. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Committee on Committees - No report.
XIII. OLD BUSINESS: The Chair started out the business of the Senate
Restructuring Proposal by handing out the same document that was handed out
last time, with a clarification in bold to make sure it was clear as to the
process.� This Restructuring Model, he
went on to state, did not just appear.�
He wanted to acknowledge the committee�s work who met 3-5 times: Joseph Governali, John Cottone, Michael Friga, Ellen McCabe, Chris
Poole, David Berger and Andrea LaChance.�
He said he really appreciated their work on this.� He clarified that since this came from a
committee it did not need a second.� He
read the document again out loud.
Philip Walsh asked what
original bylaw this referred to and Walkuski responded by referring to page 9
in the Handbook.� He said, �This
particular motion has been intended to replace the second, third and fourth
point in the Handbook.
Shawn VanEtten
asked if this rule would effect his Management
Confidential seat to which Walkuski replied that this motion would not impact
any other positions.
MaryAngela Chandler commended the people for taking all of the
faculty�s comments into consideration. She felt the plan lent itself very well
and allowed for a very cohesive number of people represented on campus as well
as the opportunity to work together.
Walsh asked the Chair to
briefly explain the reason that emerged from the committee surrounding the
issue of representation.
Walkuski explained that the
committee had to tackle several issues, one looking at the number of students
at different schools, plus voting faculty, which includes professional staff as
well as voting faculty.� Along with the
Parliamentarian they looked at other SUNY institutions and took those models
into consideration using a complex math formula where some senators served only
for a year. He said they discussed how to set up a Senate based on numbers of
students and faculty along with the School of Education, which has a large
number of adjuncts. They studied how they could equitably allow for
representation as much as possible.� His
understanding was that they couldn�t come up with a one vote model,
otherwise professionals would have larger representation and outnumber the
various schools. He offered that there is no magic solution, but some slight
modification from what already existed in the handbook which would be palatable
to the faculty.
Walsh reiterated that the
consequence was primarily because of distribution of students.
Walkuski replied that
distribution is difficult to do, because if you look at Arts and Sciences, some
people take Gen Ed with Professional Studies faculty, and the process becomes
more complicated. He felt this was the best compromise based on the feedback
his committee had.
Walsh asked about the at
large position which would allow for more representation for certain segments
of faculty on campus not involved in governance which has been a major problem
in the past.� With this model it would
take into consideration Arts and Sciences who handle a substantial number of students.
He also pointed out our Arts and Sciences Department handle a large no of
faculty compared to other schools and this would keep their number intact.� He also felt that Professional Studies gains
and so professionals.� He did add,
however, that in years past before the changeover on the professional line,
several constituents came to him and said that a full time coach representative
would desire that coaches to participate, but academic faculty will still
maintain majority vote.� He explained
that instead of plying with numbers of faculty, we can represent the number of
senate at a reasonable level. This doesn�t increase the number very much, he
guessed, maybe by 6.
Ed Caffarella
asked if all elections would take place at the same time and Walkuski explained
that all would be on the same cycle except for Education whose elections would
come up on alternate years.
There were no more questions
and the chair called for a roll call vote. Walsh asked if this didn�t require 5
senate votes and the chair explained that the chair could also call for a roll
call vote.
The motion carried [SEE
Senate Actions above]
Walkuski explained that he
would speak for the committee that he appreciated the faculty�s support.
Ballots would be mailed out in two days and in meantime e-mails would be sent
to voting faculty so the issue can be resolved.
XV. NEW BUSINESS: Chair Walkuski distributed documents regarding the
Presentation Skills Proposal as put forth by Dr. Robert Spitzer which will be
discussed and voted on at the next Senate meeting.� He explained that there has been a Sandwich
Seminar on this issue and this has been done in conjunction with the GE
committee.� There are two documents..
XIV. STUDENT REPORTS:� Matt Barone reported that SGA is revising their constitution and
asked for campus feedback. He contacted Dave Kreh who
worked with them in the past when they rewrote their constitution to assist
them if he is willing. Dan Walker reported that the Peer Tutoring program on
campus needed volunteers and asked for faculty recommendations.� Chair Walkuski clarified that this was a
general call and not specific to which Walker applied in the affirmative.
XV.� AREA SENATORS REPORTS: No reports.
The meeting was adjourned at
1:45 PM
Respectfully submitted,
Barbara Kissel
Recording Secretary
The following reports are
appended to the Minutes in the order they are submitted by Senators and other
members.
(1) Administration�s report
to the Senate submitted by Dr. Bitterbaum.
(2) Proposed Presentation
Skills Requirement submitted by Dr. Spitzer on behalf of Chair Walkuski.
(3) SUNY Cortland Faculty
Senate Special Committee on Restructuring
http://www.cortland.edu/senate/minutes/m9th.html
�
�