ACADEMIC COUNCIL Minutes Thursday, September 25, 2008

Present: Mohanned P. Akhter, Bruce E. Aronson, Jason C. Bartz, Olaf E Böhlke, Amy S. Bones, Patrick J. Borchers, J. Christopher Bradberry, Philip R. Brauer, Anthony J. Bull, Susan A. Calef, Murray J. Casey, Eric A. Chiappinelli, Bartholomew Clark, +Thomas F. Coffey, Diane M. Cullen, Joan M. Eckerson, ++Julie A. Eckstrum, Ronald E. Flinn, Mark A. Freitag, Steven W. Friedrichsen, Robert I. Garis, Venkatesh Govindarajan, Natalie Harms, Richard J. Hauser, S.J., Robert P. Heaney, Anthony R. Hendrickson, +++Brian N. Henriksen, Lynne E. Houtz, Eleanor V. Howell, Gail M. Jensen, Margaret A. Jergenson, G. Patrick Lambert, Robert J. Lueger, George W. McNary, Linda J. Miers, Neil S. Norton, James E. Platz, Paul L. Price, Thomas H. Quinn, Russell R. Reno, Christy A. Rentmeester, Enrique Rodrigo, ++++Sonia M. Sanchez, John P. Schlegel, S.J., +++++Margaret A. Scofield, James L. Sheets, + +++++Garrett A. Soukup, Susan Tinley, +++++++Lisa N. Tyler, Meera E. Varman, Guishan Xiao, ++++ ++++David P. Weber, +++++++++Jos V.M. Welie

Excused: +Proxy for Lynn E. Olson ++Proxy for J. Bradley Barr +++Proxy for Victor A. Padrón ++++Proxy for Laura C. Barritt +++++Proxy for Charles S. Bockman ++++++Proxy for Richard J. Baltaro +++++++Proxy for Stephen J. Cavalieri ++++++++Proxy for Sean M. Watts +++++++++Proxy for Shashi K. Bhatia

Absent: Barbara J. Braden, Jean-Claude Desmangles, R. Armour Forse, Robert T. McGonigal, Cecile M. Zielinski

Call to Order: Fr. John P. Schlegel, S.J., President of the University, called the meeting of the Academic Council to order at 4:00 p.m. in Room 404 of the Hixson-Lied Science Building.

Reflection: Dr. Susan Tinley, School of Nursing, offered the reflection.

Approval of the Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the Academic Council of August 28, 2008 were distributed with the agenda. There being no objection, the minutes of the Academic Council were approved as distributed by general consent.

Report of the Faculty Council: Dr. Neil S. Norton, President of the University Faculty, presented the report from the Faculty Council that had met at 3:00 p.m., immediately before the meeting of the Academic Council. The Council discussed issues to be brought up later in the meeting under individual items. It was noted that there would be some faculty members from the Health Sciences chosen to meet with consultants engaged for the search for a new Vice President for Health Sciences. The background for strategic planning was discussed; while faculty members were not heavily involved in the initial stages, a large amount of input has been sought toward the latter part of the process. Under benefits issues, there was disappointment expressed with the representatives from the Principal; for example, some comments about “Jennie Mac” left some people with impressions that were less than favorable. There were concerns expressed about whether or not TIAA-CREF would be allowed on campus, for example, at the Benefits Fair. There was also concern that there is non confirmation process in place for showing proof of receipt of TIAA-CREF “re-enrollment” forms; some process is needed to make sure that people do not slip through the cracks. Dr. Norton expressed his thanks to Deans who forwarded his message about the September 26 deadline for retirement sign-ups. Concern was also expressed about the kind of service that was being given to retirees and other constituents with less access to the active campus engagement, such as those on leave or sabbatical. There was a unanimous motion to revisit the retirement issue in six months. The issue of smoking on campus was brought up. Smoking seems to have gone underground and in some instances seems to have grown worse in this underground existence. It was suggested that it might be better to provide a place to smoke than to have this underground smoking occurring; on the other hand, there have been no reports of violations of the smoking policy. It was suggested that there be a revisiting of this issue possibly by the Wellness Council to assess the effect of the smoke-free work policy. Fr. Schlegel said that a student forum had produced similar comments; common sense will be the rule of thumb for the first year; and indications are that the policy has not been heavily violated. Dr. Scofield said that the second-hand smoking has increased in her area where it appears to be going on in undetectable locations. Fr. Schlegel said to continue to report incidents of second-hand smoke to Facilities Management.

Report on the Non-Tenure Track in the Health Sciences: Dr. Robert P. Heaney, Vice President for Health Sciences, gave a report on the various Schools in Health Sciences. The percentage of full-time faculty on the non-tenure track by school are as follows: Dental School, 22%; Nursing School, 25%; Medical School, 21.5%; School of Pharmacy and Health Professions, 24.7%; and overall, 22.4%.

Update from the Task Force on a Speakers’ Policy: Mr. Patrick J. Borchers, Esq., Vice President for Academic Affairs and Chair of the Task Force, reported that the task force had essentially finished its work. There is a link available to the final report of the task force at http://typo3.creighton.edu/fileadmin/user/president/docs/SpeakersReportFinal.pdf. There were faculty, staff and students and administrators on this. The effort was thorough and tended to clarify more than change the existing policy. There was an attempt to move it away from a previous Student-Services point of view. The proposed policy sets overall minimal standards on how decisions on outside speakers comes into play. The policy applies only to external speakers and not to the internal speakers or classroom speakers. Academic Freedom covers the internal speech and especially classroom speech. There have been relatively few problems with speakers over the years, and there was a desire not to have the policy driven by the exception to the rule. There is no desire to have a clearing-house mechanism for all speakers. The only time an invitation would require consultation is when it would be likely that such an invitation would conflict with the traditional values of Creighton. Controversial topics are welcome within the constraints of institutional values. There are no specific rules, but there are overall concepts in the policy. It is not clear whether the Lamott situation would differ under this policy. The problem was a lack of a mechanism for people to consider a good route to take in inviting a speaker. There are now some contextual principles. In the case of political candidates, speech is largely governed by external constraints that require equal access. Fringe elements as opposed to mainstream candidates might not qualify as falling under these constraints. Fr. Richard J. Hauser, S.J., asked if faculty members would serve on the Vice Presidential Committees to monitor speaker requests. Mr. Borchers responded that there could have faculty representation. Dr. James E. Platz asked if there would be only ad hoc committees established when there a potentially controversial speaker triggered oversight. Mr. Borchers said that this was the general idea, and that the main thrust was that the speaker not undercut the basis of Creighton’s institutional values. There will be no attempt to allow only speakers who embrace the whole range of orthodox doctrine; the idea is to have some sort of filtering mechanism.

Update on the Search for Vice President for Health Sciences and Dean of the School of Medicine: Mr. Patrick J. Borchers, Esq., Chair of the Search Committee for the Vice President for Health Sciences, reported that the search for the position is going well. There was a sentiment to have a search firm help in the process. One of the largest firms with a track record in academic medicine has been chosen. Mr. Borchers had over a hundred phone conversations in deciding on the terms of engaging such a firm. There are some good candidates who have already expressed an interest in the position. The consultant is scheduled to be on campus on September 30 to meet with faculty members chosen from the Health Sciences area by the President of the University Faculty. The process is on-going and will continue until a successful candidate has been found. The time-line has changed because of the decision to have a consulting firm.

Update on Retirement: Dr. Norton reported that the Faculty Council unanimously voted to put forth the following motion Motion: To revisit the retirement issue in six months. There being no objection, the motion passed by general consent.

Strategic Plan Update: Dr. Thomas J. Purcell, III, Assistant to the President for Strategic Planning, gave a presentation on the University’s Strategic Plan. He said that the process started about a year ago. Fr. Schlegel wants this to be a process rather than an event. This process will continue each year. There was a meeting held with various faculty, administrators and other stakeholders in a retreat atmosphere. A draft of the plan has been placed on the web at http://cobacourses.creighton.edu/planningretreat/. Dr. Purcell went over the power point presentation that had been sent out with the Council agenda. At Creighton, strategic planning in the past had very large groups and were very bottom-up. The current plan is a blend of top- down and bottom-up. All faculty and staff will be invited to become involved in the process from this point forward. A large range of information has been incorporated into the plan, from external sources and the University’s Institutional Research group. There was a desire to come to consensus on centers of excellence; being mindful of the role in Health Sciences of the particular standards for using the term “center of excellence.” The mission and vision of the University were taken into consideration. The University’s Mission Statement was left alone, while the Vision Statement was worked on. The web site is very functional without bells and whistles but with lots of information. There will be task forces that are directed by leaders to manage the process of narrowing the focus of the process. Final approvals will be by the Vice Presidents and will need to occur before implementation begins. There should be ongoing plans, implementation, assessment, and then further implementation. The plan will measure across multiple dimensions. The process should be revisited annually, probably in a form of retreat. There should be a major revisiting about every five years. The website is designed with a very bare top level that contains links pointing to the documents that lie behind this higher level. There are a series of reports to be consulted. There are multiple levels of documents with further embedded links. There is a summary of external threats, challenges and opportunities available. This is the result of multiple attempts at acquiring input and filtering. The vision that resulted is not different from that generally espoused over the last few years. The process used an attempt was to capture a large range of vivid descriptions of the University at various points in the future. This method has been used in industry to see where we want to arrive eventually, for example in five years, ten years, fifteen years, and so forth. It offers benchmarks against which to measure ourselves in the future. There are strategic commitments and priorities. The process began with questions and the document was then constructed from the statements that resulted from these questions. There are short term and long-term goals. Three key issues were identified as important and in need of being addressed immediately. It is unlikely that the basic initiatives will be changed. The ways of addressing the initiatives may, however, evolve over time. The implementation will have a freedom of action within the general initiatives. Fr. Hauser said that this was one of the better plans he had seen. Dr. Purcell invited emails be sent to him at [email protected].

At this point, Fr. John P. Schlegel, S.J. left the meeting, and Dr. Robert P. Heaney, Interim Vice President for Health Sciences, took over the chairing of the meeting.

Progress Report on the Mission/Ethics Implementation Proposal in Colleges and Schools: Fr. Hauser said that he had met with several groups about the proposal passed last year. Motion It was moved and seconded that Deans send the 10/25/2007 proposal to all faculty members. The motion passed by unanimous voice vote.

Announcements: Dr. Heaney was there has been a need for bio-statistical support in the processing of data generated by various researchers. He would like an assessment of the size of the need for such a service. It would be helpful to know how much support various areas have for this, as it would be better to pool resources on this. Dr. Heaney asked that information on this be sent to him at [email protected]. He asked that members of the Council spread the information about this to their colleagues. More information needs to be gathered before moving forward on this. Dr. Neil S. Norton, Chair of the University Committee on Rank and Tenure said that Deans should submit the names of candidates for the granting of tenure or promotion in rank to him a [email protected]. Fr. Hauser asked about the update on the mission/ethics. Dr. Howell said that she had sent reports on this to Dr. Norton and that the School of Nursing had given enthusiastic support to this; they have worked on this at retreats and there are a number of initiatives on this. Dr. Hendrickson said that the College of Business Administration has required an ethics courses at both the graduate and undergraduate levels, and all programs have an ethics components; there is also a desire to make social justice prominent in business programs. Dr. Chiappinelli said there is a year-long course that addresses ethics and there are other courses that address social issues, including a professional responsibility course; the scope has increased over the past years. Dr. Bradberry said that all programs in the School fo Pharmacy and Health Professions meet the spirit of the resolution. Dr. Jensen said that the Graduate School has appointed a committee to make suggestions for the School and there is a mission and identity presentation for all graduate students relative to ethics; there will also be seminars for students that address this area. Dr. Heaney asked if the reports on this could be continued at a future meeting because of the importance of the topic.

Old Business: There was no old business

New Business: There was no new business.

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted,

Thomas F. Coffey, Ph.D., Secretary Academic Council