Senate of the Urbana-Champaign Campus

Academic Calendar Agendas & Minutes Committees Committee Members Honorary Degrees Meeting Schedule Meeting Videos Senate Membership

Minutes
Urbana-Champaign Senate Meeting
February 9, 1998

A regular meeting of the Urbana-Champaign Senate was called to order at 3:10 p.m. in Foellinger Auditorium, with Chancellor Michael Aiken presiding.

Approval of Minutes

02/09/98-01 The minutes of November 24, 1997, were approved as written.

Senate Council Report

Senator Richard Schacht (LAS), Chair of Senate Council, reported that the following person has requested floor privileges and moved that such privileges be granted—to speak to: AD.98.01, Proposal to Approve Criminal History Review and Appeal Processes, C. K. Gunsalus, Associate Provost. There was no objection.

Schacht moved that CG.98.01, Proposed Revision in Rule 83 of the Code of Policies and Regulations Applying to all Students, be removed from today's agenda. There was no objection.

Schacht reported that Senate Council recently discussed the following:

FAC/IBHE Representative. Faculty Advisory Committee of the Illinois Board of Higher Education representative (and ex officio Council member) Walter McMahon is resigning his post effective in April. The Council honored Professor McMahon with a round of applause for his long and outstanding service.

Tenure Issues Committee. Senate Council Vice-Chair Don Uchtmann (Aces), Chair of the ad hoc Tenure Issues Committee, reported that his committee (Professors G. Belford, R. Clift, E. Delacruz, M. Finkin, J. F. Giertz, M. Grossman, W. Henson, K. Hjelmstad, C. Jones, E. Shoben, R. Sousa, D. Uchtmann) has been charged with reviewing the recommendations of the USC Principles Committee and developing recommendations for Senate action relating to them.

Uchtmann described tenure as a subject of great interest on campus and across the country, and he addressed three points towards which his committee is particularly focused: 1) a discussion of post-tenure review is timely, considering the interest expressed by bodies such as the USC and BOT, 2) issues of academic freedom are woven into those of tenure, and 3) the Senate will be the appropriate forum for this discussion. He indicated his committee expects to make an initial report to the Senate before the end of spring.

Campus Budget Oversight Committee. Schacht deferred his comments until this item appears later on today's agenda.

Sexual Harassment Issues. Schacht announced that a draft of the report of the Sexual Harassment Task Force has been made available, and that Senate Council referred the document to a number of committees for review and comment.

Council Meeting January 26, 1998, with President Stukel. President Stukel discussed a number of issues with Senate Council at this meeting, including the Human Resources Reorganization, which was recently put into effect. Council questioned the process of the reorganization, more so than the end result. Provost Faulkner and Vice-Chancellor Charles Colbert both indicated that this reorganization had no adverse effect in the areas of their respective responsibilities.

Faculty Workload. Council discussed the need for Senate involvement in developing a policy that addresses instructional workload and other faculty roles and responsibilities. Schacht added that the Office of the Provost will take the lead in this discussion during this academic year, in accordance with its charge in the Campus as Classroom report.

Statutes Revisions. A review of the University Statutes conducted by Professor Ken Andersen has been completed, and the Urbana Statutes Committee is now preparing a document for Senate action this spring.

Schacht announced that the following senators agreed to serve as tellers: John Lalande (Las), Nancy O'Brien (Libr), H. George Friedman (Engr), and Donald Uchtmann (Aces).

Chancellor's Remarks

Chancellor Aiken, referring to the previously mentioned Tenure Issues Committee, stressed the importance of the committee's work and the need for faculty to take the lead in addressing issues related to tenure.

The Chancellor urged the campus community to take a close look at the recommendations in the report of the Task Force on Sexual Harassment, adding that the need for debate on the report's recommendations is very high.

In other matters, Chancellor Aiken thanked the Senate for its faculty and student nominations to the Provost Search Committee, noting it is expected the search will take 6-8 months to complete. He estimated target deadlines as: June for the first round of interviews, August for the second round, October 1 for the acceptance of an offer, and January 1, 1999, for a new Provost to be in place. He cited competition for candidates from other universities, such as Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Texas, that are also searching for provosts at this time.

The Chancellor then announced he has named Thomas M. Mengler, Dean of the College of Law, as the Interim Provost. (Dean Mengler rose to accept a round of applause from the Senate.) Chancellor Aiken said Dean Mengler, who recently completed his five-year review as Law Dean, will work with Provost Larry Faulkner on issues such as budget reform and promotion and tenure recommendations until the Provost's departure in April, after which Mengler will continue to serve as Interim Provost until a new Provost is named.

The Chancellor then turned over the podium to Ms. Lex Tate and Ms. Anne Hicks, representatives of President Stukel's Support Services Strategy (S3).

Ms. Hicks described S3 as an initiative to create a University-wide strategic plan for administrative processes. Objectives and guiding principles of the plan include benchmarking, prioritizing, developing a comprehensive strategy for evaluating current business practices, and communicating with units to determine what works and what does not work.

Ms. Lex Tate continued the presentation by delineating how the project focuses on three functional areas and their matching University component: human resources—organizational structure; business and finance—business systems; and information systems—technology.

Operationally, a Business Team composed of representatives from the campuses (and the functional areas) has been planning and conducting the day-to-day project activities. Also, each campus has an advisory team to help develop the administrative vision for the University. The Human Resources and Administrative Management Team serves as the project steering committee. Finally, subject experts have provided information and insight about specific administrative processes.

Consultants from the firm of Arthur Andersen are also members of the team, providing expert advice and analytical help. These consultants have also helped organize and conduct meetings, prepare interim reports and communications and will help create the final strategic plan.

Ms. Tate concluded by stating the team hopes to have a final report to President Stukel by May. She welcomed any questions or comments.

Questions/Discussion

Senator Nikki Budzinski (Las) asked for a response to her perception that the University of Illinois has the highest incidence of date rape in the Big Ten.

The Chancellor replied that campus records show that date rape has actually declined from last year, stressing that he is not aware of the numbers from other Big Ten campuses. He added that for purposes of reporting crime, our definition of "campus" is much broader than required (Lincoln Ave. to Neil St.; St. Mary's Road to University Ave.), and that the mandatory CARE workshops have been extremely effective in educating freshmen about the dangers of campus crime.

Proposals for Action

02/09/98-02 The Chancellor presented for action AD.98.01*, Proposal to Approve Criminal History Review and Appeal Processes. Professor Hiram Paley, Admissions Chair, briefly described the rationale behind this proposal, which calls for the solicitation and consideration of information on relevant criminal history from applicants for admission; it also involves the creation of a Case Review Committee and an Appeals Committee. Paley moved its approval.

Senator Fayez Abu Awad (Grad) referred to the section of the proposal titled Accommodation of Programs with Certification Requirements and asked for an example of "admission with conditions." Professor Paley replied that such conditions would be subject to interpretation by the Case Review Committee.

02/09/98-03 By voice vote, AD.98.01 was approved.

02/09/98-04 Chancellor Aiken presented for action CC.98.10*, Senate Approval of Nominations for the Athletic Board. Senator Nancy O'Brien (Libr), Chair of the Committee on Committees, reported that her committee received 8 faculty nominations and 14 student nominations. There were no floor nominations, and nominations were declared closed.

02/09/98-05 By voice vote, the slate of candidates on CC.98.10 was approved.

Proposed Amendment to the General Rules

02/09/98-06 The Chancellor presented for action SP.97.02*, Revised Policy on Intellectual Property. Senator H. George Friedman (Engr), Statutes Chair, characterized this proposal as a complete rewrite of the Intellectual Property Article of the General Rules, as drafted by the University Intellectual Property Committee. Friedman reported that the Senate Committees on General University Policy and University Statutes and Senate Procedures each made minor revisions to the policy. He moved its approval.

Senator Terry Weech (Lisc) asked if the section titled Traditional Academic Copyrightable Works intended to include course syllabi within its scope. Friedman believed that the listed category of "class notes" in this section is sufficiently broad to encompass syllabi. Weech asked about the use of the phrase "usually and customarily" in the context of (creator) ownership rights of academic copyrightable works. Friedman replied that this phrase is ubiquitous in this policy, as you would expect from a document touching on legal themes, and that its meaning changes with changes in our working environment.

Senator Steve Portnoy (Las) asked if there are faculty representatives on the University Intellectual Property Committee. Friedman responded in the affirmative. Senator Nicholas Burbules (Educ) pointed out that the existing language in the General Rules explicitly calls for "a faculty representative from each campus" on the University Intellectual Property Committee, while the proposed language omits specific reference to faculty membership on the committee. Friedman acknowledged the discrepancy and advised the Senate he would look into the matter.

> Senator Stephen A. Douglas (Las) asked for a clarification of line 74: "This policy…shall be deemed a part of the conditions of employment for every employee of the University…". Douglas thought the line could be interpreted to mean an individual's employment was dependent upon adhering to the provisions of this policy. Friedman replied that the intent of the line was primarily descriptive in nature, that this policy is simply part of a person's employment contract with the University, and that its main thrust is to provide faculty with various explicit assurances and protections.

02/09/98-07 By voice vote, SP.97.02 was approved.

Proposed Amendment to the Senate Bylaws

02/09/98-08 Chancellor Aiken presented for action SP.96.11*, Proposed Changes to Senate Bylaws, Part A.5 (Meetings) and Part D.7.c (Committee on Committees)—to eliminate the First Organizational Meeting. Statutes Chair Friedman described this proposal as an attempt to eliminate the perfunctory First Organizational Senate Meeting, which includes the presentation of nominations for Senate Council officers and membership on the Committee on Committees. Friedman explained that this proposal would allow the nomination process to be conducted by mail from the Senate Office. He moved its approval.

Senator Al Kagan (Libr) noted the absence of specific deadlines for such nominations by mail to take place. Friedman replied that Senate Council would establish reasonable deadlines, to which the Senate Office would adhere. Senator Wes Seitz (Aces) suggested the possibility of an election by e-mail. Friedman believed the proposed language would not preclude such an occurrence.

02/09/98-09 By voice vote, SP.96.11 was approved.

02/09/98-10 Chancellor Aiken presented for action SP.96.12*, Revision to Bylaws, Part E.1—Athletic Board. Statutes Chair Friedman summarized the background of this proposal, noting that it originated from and carries the endorsement of the Athletic Board itself. In brief, this proposal would increase the number of faculty on the Board from 6 to 7 (and increase terms from 3 years to 4), increase the number of students from 2 to 3 (and decrease terms from 2 years to 1, with possible reappointment for a 2nd year), and codify a voting member of the University Board of Trustees to the Athletic Board. He moved its approval.

Senator Steven P. Hill (Las) proposed a "friendly" amendment to lines 30-35, rephrasing the selection process for student members of the Athletic Board to read, "One student appointed by the Chancellor from a slate of two candidates from the Student Athlete Advisory Board,…UIUC Senate,…Illinois Student Government." Friedman had no objection.

02/09/98-11 By voice vote, SP.96.12 was approved.

Proposed Revisions to Election Rules for Student Senators

02/09/98-12 The Chancellor presented for action SP.98.05*, Proposed Revisions to Election Rules for Student Senators. Statutes Chair Friedman explained that student Senate elections are expected to be conducted by computer, possibly as early as this semester. As a result, selected revisions must be made to the election rules to ensure they are not violated when student elections are conducted electronically. After making editorial revisions on lines 8, 10, and 33 (re SEC General Elections Packet—Section VI should read Section VIII), he moved its approval.

02/09/98-13 By voice vote, SP.98.05 was approved.

Reports for Information

A Draft of the section of Office of the Provost Communication #1 pertaining to the proposed Campus Budget Oversight Committee (CBOC)*, dated February 8, 1998, had been distributed at the door. Senate Council Chair Schacht described this document as the latest in a series of iterations following a considerable amount of discussion involving Senate Council, the Council of Deans, and the Provost.

He observed that the provisions of this document are not written in stone, and that there is time for further discussion between now and the next Senate meeting on March 9, at which this subject will be on the agenda for discussion, with a view to action at the March 30 meeting. He encouraged anyone wishing to comment on the plan set out in the draft to send their comments to Senate Council and/or the Provost, preferably before the next Senate Council meeting (February 18). He reported that this discussion draft will be posted on the web and urged all to advise their colleagues of its web location. He invited comments from the floor.

Senator Emanuel Donchin (Las) expressed his surprise that provisions which had been suggested by the Senate Committee on General University Policy (Gup), of which he is a member, do not appear in the February 8 draft. Donchin specifically referred to a provision proposed by the GUP to allow for an election by the Senate to winnow the list of CBOC nominees which would then be forwarded to the Provost. (The February 8 draft distributed at the door makes provision for Senate involvement at a number of points in the selection process, including a Senate vote of approval of the full slate of nominees from which new members of CBOC are to be selected, but for no such election.)

Schacht replied that while GUP certainly had significant input into the development of the plan contained in the draft, there were many other individuals and groups both in and beyond the Senate who also were consulted and made important contributions to it. He emphasized that, while the Senate assisted in the development of this plan, it is a part of the budget process described in Office of the Provost Communication #1, which is ultimately a document of the Provost.

Provost Larry Faulkner reiterated several points from his letter to the Senate in Fall 1997, in which he stated that the Senate has not held a traditional role in the fiduciary responsibility of the campus, and that while one objective of the CBOC is to amplify the role of faculty, the CBOC is not a Senate committee. He added that it should be considered significant that the Senate is being invited to participate in the nomination and selection of CBOC members, along with the Deans, the Provost, and the Chancellor.

Schacht described the options Senate Council had pursuant to the Senate's decision in October to refer Council's recommendation of the confirmation of the CBOC slate presented to it back to Council, to provide for discussion and for Senate approval of any plan for the constitution and selection of the CBOC: 1) it could have launched a process intended to result in a Senate plan for the CBOC, which then would likely have to be revised by other CBOC constituents (notably the Deans and the Provost and Chancellor), or 2) it could try to work with the others to develop a system that would prove satisfactory to all involved, the Senate included (whose approval would still be needed in order to enable Senate participation in it). Council opted for the second of these courses. Donchin stated he would have preferred the former, and indicated his disapproval, citing this process as a major abrogation of shared governance.

The Chancellor presented the following report for information:

02/09/98-14 FAC.98.01*, 1996-97 Annual Report of the Faculty Advisory Committee (Fac). Senator Stephen A. Douglas (Las), 1996-97 FAC Chair, reminded all present that nominations for next year's FAC will end on Friday, March 6.

Reports of the Proceedings of other Meetings

Chancellor Aiken presented the following meeting reports:

BOT
02/09/98-15 SC.98.11*, November 12-13, 1997, K. Andersen
02/09/98-16 SC.98.15*, January 14-15, 1998, D. Uchtmann

FAC/IBHE (W. McMahon)
02/09/98-17 HE.98.03*, November 11, 1997
02/09/98-18 HE.98.04*, December 5, 1997

USC
02/09/98-19 UC.98.03*, November 25, 1997, G. Belford

Executive Session

The Senate met in Executive Session to discuss honorary degree nominations.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Robert C. Damrau, Senate Clerk
* Filed with the Senate Clerk and incorporated by reference in these Minutes.