Minutes of 23 October 2006

Circulated: 24 October 2006

Approved: 6 November 2006

THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs

6048 Fleming Administration Building

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1340

Phone: (734) 764-0303

Fax: (734) 764-6564

Internet Address:  http://www.umich.edu/~sacua/

Approved minutes:  http://www.umich.edu/~sacua/sacmin/sacuaminutes.html

MINUTES OF THE SACUA MEETING OF 23 OCTOBER 2006

Present: Combi, Frier, Giordani, MacAdam, Meerkov, Potter, Riles, Seabury, Smith (chair); Lehman, Leu, Schneider

Absent:  none

Guests:  T. Sullivan, J. Lee, D. Gershman, K. Brown

MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED:

1.        Draft Agenda

2.        Draft minutes of the SACUA meeting of 9 October 2006

3.        Portion of President Coleman's visit in the draft minutes of the SACUA meeting of 9 October 2006 with changes indicated by her

4.       Spellings Commission on the Future of Higher Education, "A Test of Leadership:  Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education", Pre-Publication Copy September 2006 (link is to a downloaded pdf version of the report which is  available at http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports.html )

5.        Memorandum to Charles Smith, SACUA Chair, from Gloria Hage and Jeff Frumkin dated 10 October 2006 regarding proposed preferred names policy

6.       "The Propaganda of Numbers" by Clifford Adelman in The Chronicle Daily News:  10/13/2006, THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION

7.        "Regent candidates will appear at Oct 30 forum" in The University Record issued on October 16, 2006

8.        Format for Regent Candidates Forum, to be held on 30 October 2006

9.        Electronic mail message from Christopher Zbrozek, The Michigan Daily Editorial Page Editor, to Charles B.  Smith, SACUA and Senate Assembly Chair, dated 23 October 2006 regarding Friday's Daily editorial (20 October 2006)

10.    Electronic mail message from Charles B. Smith to S. Offen dated 20 October 2006 regarding Davis, Markert, Nickerson Lecture

11.    Editorial "From the Daily:  Academic freedom for all – Consider students when planning lecture series" in The Michigan Daily, 20 October 2006

12.    SACUA/Senate Assembly Planning Schedule updated 20 October 2006

 Chair Smith convened the meeting at 2:30 P.M.  The proposed agenda was approved with one deletion.

CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES

The minutes of 9 October 2006 were approved with changes offered by the president to the account of her visit.
 

ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES

1.  Ms. Linda Carr has accepted a position in the Faculty Senate Office.

2. The SACUA chair historically has been invited to attend the president's tailgate parties and has been provided with football tickets.  This practice has now been revoked by the vice president for development.  The decision was ascribed to the office of development by the office of the provost. 

3. The provost has not yet implemented attendance of a SACUA representative at APG meetings.

4. The Rackham School of Graduate Studies charges room fees for some groups but not others. Faculty Governance is charged $275 for the use of the Amphitheatre for meetings of the Senate Assembly.  Dean Weiss declined a Senate Office request to lower the fee.  An alternative venue is needed for the March Assembly meeting.  Palmer Commons in the Life Sciences building costs only $50 for audiovisual setup.

5. Academic Human Resources has proposed a Preferred Name Policy (distributed item 5).

6. The chair and Professor Potter met with the provost last week.  They discussed a proposal from Professor Maybaum for an IT advisory committee established by the Senate Assembly for the purpose of advising the provost's office on IT matters. 

7. The provost has received an appeal from a faculty grievant.  She said she would respond within two weeks.

8. The provost discussed the Spellings Commission Report and said that it challenges universities to demonstrate improvement in their students.  A data acquisition committee called the Faculty Study Group has been established with Professors MacAdam and Meerkov as members from elected faculty governance.

9. With respect to the January 2000 resolution from Senate Assembly regarding a role for faculty in tenure review at the level of executive vice president for academic affairs, the provost suggested waiting until she makes a decision about the McDonald-Weiss tenure committee report. 

10. The provost is receptive to the idea of a faculty-staff benefits oversight committee, comparable to the existing committee for pharmacy benefits.

11. Professor Meerkov volunteered to draft the November Faculty Governance Update to the Board of Regents.  The Update is due on 2 November.

12. Professor Frier and Chair Smith will attend a regularly scheduled private meeting with the provost on Wednesday, 1 November from 4:30 to 5 P.M.  

VISIT OF UNIVERSITY PROVOST

The provost arrived at 3:30 P.M. 

Public Relations-

Professor Meerkov inquired why there has been a change in the established tradition of inviting the SACUA chair to mingle with guests at the president's tailgate functions and to subsequently attend football games.  The provost replied that the office of development has said that they did not intend to provide tickets to every game.  She said that there are no free tickets, and that the vice presidents buy season tickets from their budgets.  She added that it is appropriate to buy the tickets from a university budget because attendance is part of their jobs.  She said she would increase the Senate Office budget by the price of one season ticket.

APG Meetings-

Professor Meerkov asked whether the provost foresees an opportunity for useful participation by faculty governance in upcoming APG meetings.  Provost Sullivan replied that she is inviting SACUA as well as the executive officers on a day-long trip with the APG to the Detroit Center on Monday, 4 December 2006.  She said the visit will include a brief meeting of the APG and an assessment of outreach possibilities. 

Evaluation of Academic Administrators-

Professor Riles reported that the UM-Dearborn deans, chancellor, and provost have all provided statements for this year's on-line evaluation of academic administrators, and some have provided additional questions, as well. The provost suggested that the AEC may wish to extract some of the accessory questions without identifying the authors and circulate them among Ann Arbor administrators for information purposes.  Members discussed with the provost the pros and cons of seeking endorsement from administration for the faculty's evaluation process, without reaching conclusion.

On-line Evaluation of Academic Instruction-

Chair Smith inquired about the intended role for faculty involvement in development of an on-line evaluation system for teaching.  Provost Sullivan replied that so far all discussions have been about technical matters rather than policy matters, and that things are still at the talking stage.  She said there would be an opportunity for faculty involvement when a policy group is established.  She suggested the possibility of a pilot study with both paper and on-line components, saying that she did not think there has yet been a true pilot study.  Professor Riles suggested that EECS in the College of Engineering might be able to supply expertise.  The provost replied that she was looking at the Dental School as a model.  She said that the Dental School uses a third party that strips identifying information from evaluations.  She explained that the use of handwritten comments potentially constitutes a FERPA violation.  She emphasized that she is not advocating coercion of participation, but that she is interested in response bias.

Role of Faculty in Provost-level Tenure Review-

Professor Frier asked how the provost views a proposal for increased faculty input at the post-unit stage of tenure review.  The provost replied that she thinks the tertiary review of tenure decisions that occurs at her level is not supposed to go so much to the substance, as to issues of fundamental fairness of process.  She acknowledged, however, that there may be different degree of review inherent in submissions from different units, owing to their sizes and review structures. She said she thought it would be imprudent to suggest changes without experience. She added that it might be disconcerting to some stakeholders, particularly assistant professors in their year 5, to change the review process abruptly and without ample notice and consultation.

The provost left the meeting at 4:06 P.M.

REPORT ON DAVIS, MARKERT, NICKERSON LECTURE AND PROFESSORSHIP

Chair Smith reported that news accounts of the DMN lecture appeared both in the Ann Arbor News and the Michigan Daily.  The Michigan Daily also ran an editorial last Friday (distributed item 11), and SACUA chair has responded (distributed item 10).

The chair had a discussion with administration representative G. Krenz about proposed bylaws for the DMN Professorship, but Krenz has not yet responded on behalf of the administration.

PLANNING FOR SENATE ASSEMBLY

SACUA reviewed the proposed agenda for the October meeting of Senate Assembly.  Chair Smith noted that the Regent Candidates Forum would follow the business part of the meeting.  Members signified unanimous approval of a proposed agenda.

LIAISON REPORTS

Civil Liberties Board-

Professor MacAdam reported that the committee expressed limited knowledge of faculty grievance procedures.  She added that the committee hopes that SACUA will look at proposed changes to the Student Code.

Privacy Oversight-

Professor MacAdam reported a discussion of privacy  issues related to Ctools, including issues related to admission of guest members, and the need for guidelines about report tallies of student visits to the website.  The committee is also thinking about recommending a privacy officer for the U-M.

Multicultural University-

Professor Seabury reported that the committee met earlier in the day and set its agenda.  He relayed a request that Faculty Governance post an electronic copy of the pamphlet about Proposition 2 prepared by Scott Paige.

ACTION OF SACUA 102306-1

Professor Frier moved that a hyperlink to an electronic copy of the booklet regarding Proposition 2 be placed on the faculty governance website (Professor Riles seconded). 

AAAC-

Professor Riles reported that AAAC met with the provost and discussed registration brackets, on-line evaluation of academic instruction, and formulation of a response to the Spellings Report.  The provost has asked for an advisory report from AAAC regarding the latter issue by May 2007.

General Counsel Advisory-

Chair Smith reported that no meeting has yet been scheduled for this committee.

CESF and Budget Study-

The committees are scheduled to meet on 24 October.

Task Force on Grievance Procedure Reform-

The task force is scheduled to meet on 24 October for its 3^rd meeting, and is on track to meet its December deadline.

University Shared Governance Committee-

There has been no report from the chair.  Professor Meerkov asked the SACUA chair to contact the committee chair for a status report.

Advisory Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics-

The committee is scheduled to meet on 24 October.

OLD BUSINESS

Professor MacAdam reported that she plans to meet with the Rules Committee in order to present a request from assistant librarians that they be included in the University Senate. 

The meeting adjourned at 4:45 P.M. 

Respectfully submitted,

John Lehman

Senate Secretary

University of Michigan Bylaws of the Board of Regents, Sec. 5.02: 

Governing Bodies in Schools and Colleges