Helen J. Kahn, Vice Chair s1

ACADEMIC SENATE 2010-2011 David R. Boe, Chair Helen J. Kahn, Vice Chair Deanna L. Pozega, Secretary

Minutes: NMU Academic Senate Executive Committee Meeting Tuesday, 08 February 2011 Presiding: David Boe, Chair Members Present: Michael Andary At-Large; Helen Kahn, Vice-Chair; Larry Pagel, At-Large; Andrew Poe, Past-Chair; Deanna Pozega, Secretary; Ron Sundell, AAUP Liaison; Bitsy Wedin, At-Large Members Absent: Susan Koch, VPAA & Provost

AGENDA

I. Call to Order (3:05 PM)

II. Additions to/Adoption of Agenda Agenda was approved, with the addition of three new items under informal consideration.

III. Approval of Draft Minutes of Tuesday 01 February 2011 Minutes Approved.

IV. Reports: A. Chair: David welcomed new member Bitsy Wedin, and asked all Executive Senate Members to introduce themselves. The President’s Council meeting scheduled on 2/9 has been cancelled (in anticipation of President Obama’s upcoming visit). CEC Chair, Rebecca Ulland, has distributed the Senate Standing Committee preference list survey.

John MacDevitt from Counseling Services wants to formally address the Senate Floor next meeting, but he has to leave early due to a conflict with a counseling session scheduled at 4:00 on Tuesdays. He’s basically requesting to make a “Good of the Order” message earlier on the agenda. However, President Wong will be addressing the Senate in our next meeting, and it’s difficult to estimate how long his presentation will take due to discussion of his dealings with Snyder and President Obama’s upcoming visit.

Also, notice the latest updates to NMU’s home page.

B. Vice Chair: Helen has been corresponding with Tim Cook regarding the international program and why the recent middle-eastern discussions have had such a narrow focus. These discussions have primarily concentrated on Arabic countries, overlooking the Israeli cultures. Aided by funding from a federal grant that Cook recently received, a group will be spending some time in Israel, and associated curriculum development may result. Further updates will be provided if applicable.

C. Secretary (No Report.)

D. Provost (Absent.)

E. ASNMU (N/A)

F. LSC Report of Tuesday 15 February 2011 (Course Recommendations) Prior to discussing the contents of the report, David pointed out several errors in the formatting. This report was dated for the date sent, whereas the formatting method for Senate Standing Committee reports involves dating the report based upon the date it will be first read at Senate.

Concerns were raised regarding whether certain courses were appropriate for World Cultures Credit, specifically the Native American Beadworking course. World Cultures was designed to be a wide expanse of different cultures, but we’ve noticed a substantial portion of recently-approved world cultures courses have originated in the NAS program. We speculated that this might be based upon staffing and/or faculty expertise.

G. LSC Report of Tuesday 15 February 2011 (Division III Assessment) This document is for information only. Senate members will be welcome to ask questions, but there will be no first/second reading. Additionally, no motion is required to accept the report.

V. Unfinished Business

VI. New Business

VII. Informal Consideration A. President Wong Presentation President Wong is tentatively scheduled to address the Senate at the start of the 2/15 meeting; David will confirm with the president’s secretary, Sally Roo.

B. LSC Document: Liberal Studies Program Reform Mitch Klett submitted the final draft of the Proposed Liberal Studies Program Reform. It was sent to David, and he distributed the printed document to executive senate members (which he asked that we NOT distribute yet). David has mentioned to Mitch that we’d like to have a brief verbal summary of the plan with opportunity for questions and discussion at Senate. Certain parties affiliated with NMU are pressing for these changes to happen – at least for some type of action. However, there are other parties that strongly oppose any changes to the Liberal Studies Program. Larry stated that while at some point this proposal will have to come to Senate for a vote, we should think about how we introduce the topic. He proposed that it be distributed at the first meeting following Spring Break. Then feedback should be sought from multiple constituents, including faculty, students, and administrators. Perhaps we should begin with an informal presentation to the Senate, highlighting the proposal. It should be made EXTREMELY clear that the proposal will be informative only. Additionally, David should limit the discussion time for this topic, notifying Senators in advance regarding the time limit for discussion.

Andy said that he was going to suggest an action plans that nearly mirrors Larry’s suggestion. We must keep in mind that this is a major change, and it requires multiple informational meetings where individuals can raise questions and offer criticism on certain areas of the proposal. Because we can anticipate many different viewpoints throughout the campus community, the means in which we disseminate the information must be carefully considered.

Deanna and Ron suggested that the rationale for each of the changes proposed should be provided in the documentation at least at the time of (if not before) the document is introduced/distributed to Senate members.

David will facilitate (with LSC) smaller informational sessions – which we will try to have set up prior to the presentation to the Senate.

Reminder: The handout that David provided is NOT public. Please do not share this information yet.

C. Senate Bylaw Revisions Larry has a written proposal from a committee of graduate students who would like to be represented at Senate meetings. This would require changes to our Master Agreement as well as the Senate Bylaws.

Ron asked whether this issue should be/could be handled internally through ASNMU. It seems that 4 student representatives on Academic Senate are sufficient… Perhaps the student organizations can ensure that at least one of the four student representatives is a member of the graduate student organization.

Remember: ASNMU represents ALL students, both undergraduate and graduate level.

Mike Andary informed everybody that the Master Agreement stipulates criteria regarding ex officio members, but the Senate Bylaws do not reflect the same language (3.3.1.4). Larry will look into this, and possible propose necessary changes to make our bylaws conform to the Master Agreement.

D. New Senator Elections (Wks 9 or 10) Per Senate Bylaws (3.3), departmental elections of Senators should occur in weeks 9 or 10 for the next academic year. Approximately half of the departments should hold an election for their Senate Representative. New Senators should be communicated to Deanna and Jeannie, and are asked to accompany current Senators at the final meeting of the semester.

E. Senate Committee Term Limits Rebecca Ulland communicated with Helen asking about term limits for standing committees. Most committees do not have a term limit. (Helen distributed a document detailing committee term limits as specified for the different Standing Committees, some of which refer to the actual Senate Bylaws.) Can we assume that if no term limit is specified, that the Senate Bylaws will set the term limits? Average terms on committees are three years, where one-third expire every three years. (Keep in mind that individual committees can set stricter term limits if they desire as long as the bylaw regulations are not violated.)

VIII. Good of the Order Andy commended David’s handling of the issue with the portion of the CUP report that was in contention during the 2/1 Senate meeting. Andy didn’t feel that the discussion was considered a staffing issue… No procedures were violated, and the outcome seemed to be overall positive.

Ron asked about the process that occurs after a report gets approved by Senate. Who actually sends the information to the Provost (or wherever it should go next)? David explained that Jeannie writes a memo on David’s behalf to the Provost’s office. Then, upon review by the Provost, Linda writes a reply (on behalf of Dr. Koch) that is copied to several individuals. This ensures that all actions are well documented.

IX. Adjournment (4:19 PM)

Respectfully submitted,

Deanna Pozega, Senate Secretary Northern Michigan University