UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - MILWAUKEE FACULTY SENATE MEETING M I N U T E S Thursday, April 16, 1998; 2:30 p.m.; MERRILL 131 UWM. FAC. DOC. NO. I. COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS 1. Chancellor Schroeder reported freshmen up 6% to 8% and graduate applications considerably ahead of last year. We are expecting fall enrollment to be right on target. The legislation allowing construction of a new Sandburg Dorm tower directly east of the commons area between Sandburg and the Klotsche Center was passed by the legislature. The Chancellor mentioned the efforts of Assistant Chancellor Sandra Hoeh-Lyon and Barbara Notestein from the legislature as critical to the passage of the legislation. Commencement for spring of 1999 will be as earlier announced (16 May 1999). Difficulties in obtaining a suitable place to hold it precluded shifting it along with other changes in the academic calendar. The parking proposal has been approved by the chancellor and is being factored into the 98-99 budget. B. Schwartz asked if W-2 was having any effect on enrollment. The answer was that approximately 200 students have the potential of being affected. The university is prepared and giving special consideration to the few with problems. The effect so far has been numerically insignificant. J. Bowers gave a plea for not putting the new dorm tower in the Downer recreation area with the resultant loss of trees. The chancellor replied that the alternate location would be the corner of Hampton and Maryland with the loss of significantly more and larger trees. Design and construction is to be organized with a goal of minimum environmental impact. There will be three meeting: the first on scoping the project, the next two on environmental impact before plans are finished. These meetings will be publicized and give ample opportunity for public input. B. Schwartz asked "how can we be sure the architects are ok?" The answer is that the State picks the architect and the university has limited input. G. Davida asked why no underground parking area was included. The chancellor replied that in response to neighborhood concerns the university had made a commitment that no additional parking would be included. The small area involved also makes underground parking impractical. 2. S. Percy gave an update on the status of the search for chancellor. A meeting of the Search and Screen Committee was to be held Friday, April 17, 1998 with Regents Randall and Lubar and President Lyall at which the nominees for finalists were presented. President Lyall will review the list and announce the list of finalists during the week of the 20th. As soon as the names become public, profiles of the candidates will be made available. The committee is currently working on scheduling visits and events on campus. G. McBride commented that naming the search and screen committee involved some difference of opinions between System and UWM and System appointed an additional member after the initial appointments. She asked if any such problems might arise now. S. Percy replied that System had not been intrusive in the search and screen process and that system can consider only those names coming from the search and screen committee. 3. M. Anderson gave a report on current activities of the University Committee. The committee is considering the appointment process for departmental chairs and will put forth proposed changes in legislation concerning the need for deans to consult with departmental faculty and the University Committee when contemplating the appointment of someone other than one receiving a plurality on the faculty preference ballot. The committee is also looking at faculty salaries. The recent AAUP report on salaries once again demonstrates the presence of structural problems in the salary allocation process for faculty. These data, analyzed by the state Department of Administration, indicate that average senior faculty salaries continue to lag significantly behind their peers. UWM full professors rank 13th of 14; Madison's full professors also rank second to last in the big ten. Both campuses pay market assistant professor salaries. The University Committee and the System Compensation Advisory Council are attempting to get some new thoughts on the issue of faculty salaries. Faculty should be prepared for visits with candidates for chancellor in the next 2-3 weeks. Schedules for visits will be publicized widely. R. Ryder has been elected the chair of the University Committee for the 1998-99 year. The University committee is working on questions relating to workload and compensation for the intersession. The committee hopes to bring forward recommendations in May or early fall. Provost Watters commented that he was in contact with System on the question and hoped to maintain maximum flexibility in using various mechanisms including overload and regular load. G. Davida asked if the credits generated by intersession would count toward our enrollment goals as set by System. The answer was that since System currently looks only at fall enrollment they would not. The tuition involved would however stay with UWM. 3. G. McBride reported that some faculty had not received ballots for committee elections. G. Baker stated that any faculty not receiving a ballot should report that fact to the Secretary of the University's office and they would be provided with a ballot. 4. There was no report from the Student Association. II. SENATE ROLL CALL The Parliamentarian and 38 senators were present. Senators B. Cross; M. Day; S. Emmons; R. Fox; R. Jeffries; M. McBride; R. Ryder; G. Schneider; V. Stoffel; P. Teeter; B. Wishne and Y. Yannay were listed as absent. III. AUTOMATIC CONSENT BUSINESS 1. The minutes of the Faculty Senate Meeting of March 19, 1998 were approved as submitted. 2. A Memorial Resolution for Professor William A. Jenkins, former Associate Dean of the School of Education was read by Professor Emeritus Carlton Beck. IV. CHANCELLOR'S REPORT The Chancellor's Report was received. V. BUSINESS 1. Recommendation of the Academic Policy Committee that the 2136 1998-1999 calendar be amended. Moved and seconded that Faculty Doc. 2136 be approved. J. Bowers gave a summary of calendar development and reasons for the change. The change in question is necessary for a week long steam shutdown in the spring. Changing the shutdown to August is not feasible due to scheduled dorm activities. M. Anderson moved/G. McBride seconded to amend the motion by insertion the following change to the spring calendar: As many of you may be aware, the Faculty Senate, on recommendation of the Academic Policy Committee, recommended the creation of a Wintersession for UWM's Academic Calendar starting in 1998-1999. The previously scheduled Spring 1999 calendar was moved back a week to make room for a 3-week intersession. A number of faculty from the School of Fine Arts have asked for a revision of that Spring 1999 calendar as approved (recently distributed around campus on a blue form) because the revised calendar conflicts with previously scheduled performances and concerts. Therefore a further revision of the Spring 1999 calendar has been proposed, and may, if it does not meet with further objections, be submitted to the Faculty Senate for approval this spring. -------------------------------------------------------------- 1998-99 OLD CURRENT PROPOSED Intersession ------------- Instruction begins n/a M 1/4 M 1/4 Last day of classes n/a R 1/21 W 1/20 Semester II Orientation and advising M 1/11- F 1/15, W 1/13 - F 1/15 T 1/19 - F 1/15, F 1/22 T 1/19 - W 1/20 Instruction begins T 1/19 M 1/25 R 1/21 End miniterm I Sa 2/20 Sa 2/27 W 2/24 Begin miniterm II M 2/22 M 3/1 R 2/25 Spring recess Su 3/14 - Su 3/21 - Su 3/14 - Su 3/21 Su 3/28 Su 3/21 End miniterm II Sa 4/3 Sa 4/10 T 4/6 Begin miniterm III M 4/5 M 4/12 W 4/7 Last day of semester classes R 5/6 W 5/12 M 5/10 Study day R 5/7 R 5/13 T 5/11 Final exams Sa 5/8, F 5/14 - W 5/12 - M 5/10 - Sa 5/15, Sa 5/15, Sa 5/15 M 5/17 - M 5/17 - F 5/21 W 5/19 Graduation Su 5/16 Su 5/16 Su 5/16 Last contractual day Su 5/23 Su 5/23 Su 5/23 ------------------------------------------------------------- Remarks about PROPOSED: - Spring recess moved back to OLD time period and occurs in PROPOSED between the first 7 weeks and 2 days of the term and the last 7 weeks and 1 day of the term. - Intersession cut from 13 days to 12 days (possible major problem if either last 2 days are a snow day) - Semester 2 begins 2 days earlier than CURRENT and has last day of classes 2 days earlier than CURRENT (----Or equivalently----)Semester 2 begins 2 days later than OLD and has last day of classes 2 class days (4 calendar days) later than OLD. (Note: the ends of intersession and the first day of classes for semester 2 abut) - Miniterms end and start in the middle of week to balance three equal miniterms. S. Hansen outlined the reasons that the original motion would give significant difficulties to performance areas of the School of Fine Arts. The school gives more than 50 public performances that must be scheduled well in advance. Preparations start at least 18 months before performances and contracts for venues are signed early. The original motion would put some performances during spring break and compromise the educational value of others. The amendment is a compromise that helps in avoiding the worst of their problems while allowing an intersession. G. McBride commented that moving the calendar around again would make significant problems for those students that had made plans. B. Schwartz asked why a public performance during spring break would be a problem. L. Stoner answered that the performances are closely tied to academics with very tight schedules for rehearsals, etc. T. O'Bryan commented that the amendment seems to be a reasonable compromise. M. Hossain asked about all the other departments that weren't in involved in the compromise. M. Anderson answered that all departments had been circulated with the proposal and would have the opportunity to comment. C. Dunning pointed out that courses with Monday sessions would lose a day. This would be a significant change for those classes meeting one night a week. It was moved (G. Davida) and seconded to Lie on the Table the pending motion. It was understood that this would allow wide circulation and opportunity for comment before a motion to take from the table in the May meeting. 2. Proposal by the Senate Subcommittee on the Evaluation of 2137 Administrators to replace Faculty Documents 1863 and 2046. It was moved and seconded to replace Faculty Documents 1863 and 2046 with Faculty Document 2137. R. Schwartz presented a summary of practice and reasoning behind combining the two documents into one. He stated that the intent was to clarify present procedures. He also stated that the appended questionnaires were to be considered as examples only and not intended to limit committees ability to alter the questions to fit individual needs. Davida asked if there was a difference between what is referred to in the proposed legislation as "summary report" in some places and elsewhere as "report." The answer was that they were one and the same. The committee's responsibility is to summarize the returns from the survey, not to present their analysis. It was moved and seconded to add "summary" before the word "report" wherever it appears in the proposed legislation. The motion was approved by a voice vote. D. Mulroy questioned the removal of the question on reappointment. He stated his opinion that this was the only question that allowed faculty to have an unambiguous input on the dean. The rest of the sample questions are open to interpretation. It was moved and seconded to add " and whether they support reappointment of the administrator" to item 4 under Recommendations. The second sentence of item 4 would then read: "The procedure should include as a minimum, a questionnaire in which faculty are asked to comment on and indicate their level of satisfaction with the administrators performance and whether they support reappointment of the administrator." W. Van Horne stated that the question was a damaging one that served no useful purpose. Motion to amend failed on a show of hands: 11 yes, 15 no, with an unknown number of abstentions. The change in the statement of time of evaluation from present "every five years" to "upon completion of 4 years of service and every 4 years thereafter." was questioned. R. Schwartz answered that this was not a change in practice and that the only substantive change was the dropping of the question on reappointment. The motion as amended was passed on a voice vote. VI. SPECIAL REPORT P. Haubrich, Chair of the ad Hoc committee on Charter schools gave a report on the status of UWM efforts concerning charter schools. He handed out a FAQ on charter schools and suggested guidelines for such schools at UWM. D. Berkman asked why we felt obligated to go along with the attempt by the right wing to undermine public education. He stated that we should refuse to participate. That charter schools are an attempt to take over education; assume ideological control, take away the tax base from public education, and work their way up to universities. If we don't recognize this we are naive. D. Mulroy stated that charter schools were a last gasp left wing initiative to preempt the right wing agenda. In Minnesota charter schools were initiated by progressive groups. VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Nothing IX. GENERAL GOOD AND WELFARE Nothing There being no further business, the Senate adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, George S. Baker Secretary of the University