Faculty Council Minutes

FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

Bartels called the meeting to order with the following members present: Atekwana, Baeza, Barnes, Clarke, Cornell, Dare, Emerson, Fisher, Grafton, Harris, Holcomb, Holyoak, Jones, Kennison, Krehbiel, Lovern, Luttbeg, Materer, McBee, Meek, Miller, Page, Stamper, VanOverbeke, Walker, Wu, Yetter and Young. Also present: Bird, L., Campbell, C., DeGuzman, M., Dixon, D., Elliot, K., Fry, P., Hargis, B., Lewis, D., Miller, B., Pybus, N., Rashdan, N., Robinson, M., Rogers, S., Sternberg, R. and Weaver, J. Absent: Chung and DeSilva. HIGHLIGHTS

Report of Status of Faculty Council Recommendations …………...……………………………... Remarks and Comments from President Hargis….……………………………………………….. Reports of Standing Committees ………………………………………………………………….. Academic Standards and Policies …………………………………………………………. Athletics …………………………………………………………………………………… Budget ……………………………………………………………………………………... Campus Facilities, Safety and Security …………………………………………………… Faculty …………………………………………………………………………………….. Long-Range Planning and Information Technology ……………………………………… Research …………………………………………………………………………………… Retirement and Fringe Benefits …………………………………………………………… Rules and Procedures ……………………………………………………………………… Student Affairs and Learning Resources ………………………………………………….. Reports of Liaison Representatives ……………………………………………………………….. Women’s Faculty Council…………………………………………………………………. SAC ………………………………………………………………………………………..

Ken Bartels asked those in attendance to remember those events that occurred 11 years ago. Please consider the impact on our country as well as the lives lost on 9-11, consequently in Iraq and still in Afghanistan.

Bartels called the meeting to order and asked for a roll call. Bartels did comment that the minutes are a transcription and is taken to the best of our ability from the way the person talking speaks. The minutes are an effort to always have as coherent a message as possible. Just remember that things may appear different in the transcription. Handouts are a good option. Bartels asked for approval of the August 14, 2012 minutes. Rodney Holcomb moved and Ed Harris seconded. Motion passed.

Bartels asked if there were any changes or additions to the September 11, 2012 agenda. Bob Miller moved for approval of the agenda. Rodney Holcomb seconded. Motion passed. FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

Report of Status of Council Recommendations:

Provost Sternberg gave the status of the following recommendations:

11-12-01-FAC: Revision to OSU Attendance Policy Pending – Instruction Council recommended modifications to the revision proposed by Faculty Council. Policy remains under consideration. (See12-05-01-SALR regarding Absence due to Military Service). 12-05-01-SALR: Revision of OSU Attendance Policy to Clarify Absence due to Military Service Pending – Modifications related to military service were considered by Instruction Council at their September meeting. The Council recommended deleting “and granted only in the most extreme circumstances” from the new Sec 1.11. The modified policy will be reviewed by the Council of Deans at their September 13 meeting. 12-02-01-ASP: Veterinary Research Scholars Pending – Proposed designation was approved by Instruction Council on April 13 and will be reviewed by the Council of Deans at their September meeting. 12-05-02-FAC: Revisions to the Policy on Research Professorships. Pending- Proposed modification is accepted. The P&P will be updated and routed for approval by the Council of Deans and the Executive Team. 12-03-01-FAC: Revisions to OSU Policy on Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Process for Ranked Faculty Pending – Will be discussed by the Council of Deans at their September 13 meeting.

Most of these recommendations are pending. This is due mainly to the fact that the Deans Council meeting is Thursday, September 13th. The Deans Council will review these recommendations at that time. Provost Sternberg expects at least four of these recommendations to likely be resolved on Thursday. Barbara Miller asked, in regards to the Promotion and Tenure recommendation, if the Deans Council will also be considering the idea of a college level review committee. Provost Sternberg stated that what was typed on the handout was a very short summary of the proposed recommendations.

Remarks and Comments from President Hargis:

President Hargis mentioned that enrollment is up and administration was worried there would not be enough space in the residence halls and are glad they did not have to exclude anyone from residing in the dorms. There were some beds set up in the lounge areas but no one had to use them. Hargis believes there was approximately a 100 bed surplus. This will be an issue next year and administration is working on a strategy. This year, freshman who lived in close proximity to Stillwater were asked if they would live at home instead of the dorms. If they did so, they FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 received some money back or received a small bonus. Hargis does not want this to happen again next year. He feels that all freshmen who want to live in the dorms should.

Hargis stated that construction on Monroe Street should be completed around Thanksgiving. Hargis reminded everyone that the completion of the project was originally planned for fall of 2013. When the decision was made to completely close Monroe instead of leaving one lane of traffic open the completion date was moved up dramatically. It was agreed upon that Monroe would be open from University to the parking lots as well as from Hall of Fame almost to Farm Road for parking lot access prior to school starting in August. This will be a wonderful addition once it is completed.

Hargis stated that the Branding Success Campaign is going well. They are hopeful that the Billion dollar mark will be met long before the 7 year period that was assigned. A nice match is expected for endowed chairs as a result of the last legislative session. The exact amount will be decided at a later date.

Construction on the Student Union is almost finished. The Ballroom should be finished by the end of this year. The Athletic village is moving along. The dirt piled up at McElroy and Washington is for the new indoor tennis facility. A new track will also be built. A residence hall will be built on the old track site. This will hopefully enable OSU to move forward with taking down Kerr/Drummond. Hargis was asked where the new track facility will be located. Hargis said it will be on the north side of McElroy. The indoor tennis facility as well as outdoor tennis facilities will also be at this site. Currently the tennis team plays on the old courts by the Colvin but the team has to go to Oak Tree in Oklahoma City to practice in the winter.

Barbara Miller stated that someone had told her that one of the hoses on Monroe had lost a sand bag and was spraying water everywhere. Someone had asked her if the water that is being wasted could be used to water the lawns or something. Joe Weaver said that when you do construction, sometimes lines get broken. This was an unfortunate event and the situation was fixed as soon as it was called in. The best way for faculty, staff and students to help is to call the physical plant action desk as soon as you notice something amiss who in turn will contact the appropriate people to fix the problem. Miller asked if the water is supposed to be redirected somewhere? Weaver explained that it was necessary to flush some of the water system to meet EPA standards. This water must go through the storm sewer system.

Hargis wanted to mention as a precautionary note that there was a pretty bad accident yesterday at the intersection of the main walk way across Library Lawn and at the Student Union. This was a skateboard/bicycle accident. Both students were in the wrong lanes, going too fast and collided. A Life Net Ambulance was called. The skateboarder received a broken nose and the girl on the bike had some lacerations and some head injuries but administration is not sure if it was a concussion. Hargis would like to get more bike lanes around campus but the trouble is people abuse them. Pedestrians will wonder into the bike lanes and cause a dangerous situation. Hargis urged all those present to be careful and alert as you are walking around campus. Joe Weaver stated that for the core of campus the landscape master plan committee states that dedicated bike lanes next to sidewalks are a bad idea. They are recommending that they be done away with and FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 widen the sidewalks in the core. In this case, bicyclists and pedestrians will have to coexist. Then everyone knows they need to watch out for each other. When you have a dedicated bike lane, the bicyclists feel that they can go full speed ahead, the pedestrians are texting and this can cause accidents. In the core of campus the plan is to have one wide lane for all traffic. Bob Miller said at UC Davis (the home and birthplace of bicycling) they completely separated the bike lanes. The bicyclists were sent on a completely different path than the pedestrians. Weaver replied that this would be a significant expense to OSU. Hargis asked everyone to be alert.

Bartels thanked President Hargis and let the council members know that at future meetings there will be name tent cards so everyone gets to know the new faces. Bartels stated that the Council members will try to sit at the table with the new name tent cards.

REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES:

ACADEMIC STANDARDS & POLICIES – Ed Harris – Update

Harris said that before moving into his committee report he wanted to pick up on some things the Provost said regarding task forces. A lot of the task forces go to the Faculty Council Executive committee where they are then divided up among the committees who would be best suited to review the issues. The AS&P committee seems to have been given quite a few of these and Harris feels very fortunate that his committee has hard workers who are bright, talented and productive. Some of the items that have been given to his committee will be divided into subcommittees from the AS&P members. Harris said if any Faculty Council members wish to be on any subcommittee to please contact him at [email protected]. He will make sure you are included. The 7 task forces that will be divided into subcommittees are: Assessment of Student Learning, General Education, Math Curriculum, Outreach (dealing with revenue, the 60/40 split), E-Vision/E-Learning, Undergraduate Retention and Test Optional. If any of these task forces appeal to you, please contact Ed.

Harris presented the following recommendations (which were attached to the agenda) and stated that Celeste Campbell was in attendance at the meeting to answer any questions.

12-05-01-ASP: Residence. This is a new policy that was attached to the agenda. This policy is not changing anything but rather it explains and formalizes processes of establishing residency. Harris asked for comments or questions. Seeing none Bartels called for a vote. Motion passed.

Harris remarked that the next 4 recommendations are modifications/clarifications of current policies. These are not new policies.

12-09-02-ASP: Minimum hours for graduation. The current policy has the term 50% which is a bit unclear. This recommendation clarifies that for Bachelor degrees the minimum number of upper division credit hours required in the major field is 15 out of 30. The recommendation also offers clarification of terminology for Physical Education changing Physical Education activity to Leisure Activity Courses. Harris asked for questions/comments. Seeing none, Bartels called for a vote. Motion passed. FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

12-09-03-ASP: This recommendation deletes the portion of Regulation 7.2 that requires prior approval from the Academic Dean. This is not a change in Regents Policy but a clarification of the wording. Bartels asked if there were any questions. Melanie Page asked how the Spears School of Business policy was different than the general policy. Campbell replied that the Spears School of Business policy is more restrictive. The Spears School of Business has an “and” instead of an “or” in their policy. Campbell stated that several years ago, the original policy was an “and”. The State Regents changed it to an “or”. Bartels called for a vote. Motion passed.

12-09-04-ASP: The recommendation adds clarification or definition of course waiver. This distinguishes between substitutions and waivers. The recommendation also provides clarification that credit hours are not earned through a waiver. It removes the reference to waive cards that are not the only mechanism used to document waivers. It also clarifies that Academic Affairs approval is necessary for waivers that involve general education requirements. Bartels asked for questions. Seeing none asked for a vote. Motion passed.

12-09-05-ASP: Modification to Academic Regulation 3.6 to add a definition of course substitution, clarify the authority to substitute in undergrad degree plans, reference other regulations that govern substitutions and remove the implication that colleges may allow a lower division course to substitute for an upper division course. Bartels called for questions. Seeing none asked for a vote. Motion Passed.

Harris presented the following PowerPoint presentation and report which was attached to the agenda.

TCC Task Force Findings.pptx

At the April 10, 2012 Faculty Council meeting a concern came from the floor regarding a dual enrollment program at Tulsa Community College (TCC). The Arts & Sciences Faculty Council was concerned and wrote a letter with three concerns. 1. The first concern was that the dual enrollment program offered classes to high school students on their HS campuses. These classes were made up completely of high school students implying they were not getting a collegiate experience which is what they are supposed to be getting through this particular program. 2. A second concern dealt with faculty qualifications of those teaching these courses. The concern was that these were actually HS teachers teaching their own students. 3. The third concern was lower admission criteria. Which they felt was reduced from the standard admission requirement for typical dual enrollment programs.

Faculty from OSU were concerned because the implication is in the near future OSU will be receiving students from this program and because of the prior articulation agreements, they would have a lower ACT score than other dual enrollment programs. They will not have the collegiate experience that other dual enrollment programs offer. In some cases, is was felt that FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

OSU would be getting inferior students where OSU in good faith thought we were getting much better students that were going through the program.

The Chair of Faculty Council asked the AS&P committee to form a task force to look into this issue. The task force reviewed: 1. The 18 articulation agreements between TCC and OSU; 2. The EXCELerate website (the name of the program is EXCELerate); 3. The committee looked at current TCC enrollment program guidelines; 4. The Regents approval of the pilot (the correspondence involved in the approval); 5. Teaching standards, records and courses that were taught in this program; 6. The committee paid close attention to pertinent correspondence for faculty members from TCC who were and were not in favor of this program; 7. Via a phone call, the committee met with Vice President of TCC.

Harris stated that the EXCELerate program is a pilot program. In 2009 the Tulsa P20 Council (consisting of a group of community members and educators from a variety of fields) liked the dual enrollment programs and thought they were a good fit for the type of students. Since they work so well, let’s broaden the pool of eligible students to allow a larger number of students to become involved in a dual enrollment program. TCC administration was approached by the P20 Council and asked them to write a proposal to the higher Regents asking for an exception of the current dual enrollment guidelines to test this pilot program. The Regents accepted the proposal. The acceptance letter was attached to the agenda. The TCC administration brought the pilot program before their Faculty Association. It was reviewed. Some faculty liked the program while others did not. A lot of discussion and concern was expressed regarding the program. The President of the TCC Faculty Council at the time established a subcommittee to look into this program. They made a few modifications before accepting the program. These modifications were made and a letter was sent to the State Regents. TCC requested a letter from the Regents which included the modifications for the 2 year pilot. The pilot program was supposed to end in the spring of 2012. But because of the review delays, the program will not end until spring 2013.

Some of the courses taught include: Freshman Comp I and II, Humanities, Speech, College Algebra, Government and intro to Psych. Harris reviewed the current policies in his PowerPoint presentation, see slide #7. Harris called the council members attention to number 5 – enrolled in course taught in HS with HS faculty member who meets qualifications of the higher education institution providing credit for the course. This point was stipulated in the letter from the Board of Regents. The task force asked other regional institutions if they ever go by number 5, the answer was yes sometimes they do. Since this is happening on HS campuses (courses being taught on HS campuses by HS faculty) do they meet qualifications? For this particular pilot program no classes have been or will be taught by HS teachers. This is one concern that can be relieved. It is not occurring and there are no plans to hire HS teachers. There were some that applied but none of them meet the qualifications so these courses have been taught by TCC adjuncts or full-time faculty. This covers both the first and second concern. The third concern – lowered admission criteria is occurring. The admission criteria has been lowered especially for ACT scores. The pilot program allows for a 19 to be accepted. The grade point has also been lowered. It’s typically a 2.5 but the pilot program allowed a 2.0 and on occasion below a 2.0. However this was stipulated as being ok by the Board of Regents in their letter (attached to the agenda). FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

An external assessment team has been asked to assess this pilot program and their results will go to the Board of Regents. The Board of Regents will determine whether or not it will become the norm or just be a one-time pilot. Harris opened the floor for questions and comments. Karen McBee asked for clarification on the external assessment team – who is on it, etc. Harris stated that the assessment team is the school administration program at OU Tulsa. They have some preliminary findings but the task force has not contacted them for the results. Laura Barnes asked that since having HS teachers with the proper credentials was already an accepted part of the program, is the only concern the lowering of the ACT requirements and what was the rationale for this? Harris responded that it would allow more under privileged kids to become involved in collegiate experiences and to possibly get them into college where they typically would not go to college. Barnes asked if these courses were for college credit. Harris replied yes, they are. Barnes said that whatever they get in this course would be on their college transcript? Harris replied, yes. Harris also stated to keep in mind the articulation agreements do not require OSU to accept students. Each student is accepted as an individual student regardless of pre-requisites. So if they don’t meet OSU criteria and they are not accepted, this is a mute issue. However, if OSU does accept them, because of the articulation agreements the credits will also be accepted. Reed Holyoak asked if there are any outcome assessments on these students from the program. Harris replied that this is the last year of the pilot program. There has been an increase in the number of students participating each year. As far as the outcomes, that is still part of the assessment team’s task. They are just starting to put this together. Harris believes in the near future their report will be completed. Harris knows that the TCC administration is making a presentation to the P20 Council either this week or next week about some of the outcomes. Harris’ task force stopped their investigation in July. Provost Sternberg stated that he thought it would be important, if/when OSU accepts student that have been through this program to do our own evaluation. Christie Hawkins office can do this so we know if it works here at OSU. Evaluations from TCC could present a conflict of interest since it is their own program. Harris stated that the evaluators of the program are from OU, not TCC. Page thought it would be important to ask for the raw data of the evaluators. Data sharing is becoming more common place and she feels that there is a lot of political overtones to this project so maybe what’s presented in a bullet point presentation to the P20 Council in Tulsa could be very different that how OSU might look at the data. Page feels it would be important for OSU to have data on the students as well. Harris agrees and believes the information would come from the Regents office if they are willing to share the data. Daniel Dixon asked which courses were being offered by the program? Harris stated that Freshman Comp, Humanities, Speech, Algebra and few more. There may be a few others but it’s not an extensive list. David Lewis asked if the students who are being admitted that do not have the appropriate admission requirements are being admitted to TCC, not OSU? Harris replied that these requirements are for all dual enrollment programs across the state. Campbell believes this is correct. She stated that these are requirements for HS students to take college classes before they graduate from HS. Campbell does not believe that TCC has an ACT minimum requirement. Stephen Rogers asked for clarification on the admission standards for the EXCELerate program for concurrent students are diminished from the state standard for a concurrent student. Harris said it is his understanding that this is correct. That was the exception for this pilot program. Harris stated that this is not setting precedent per say, it is a pilot program. As the assessments and evaluations come in Harris believes the Regents will make a decision on whether or not to FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 continue the program. Bartels asked if there were any more questions.

Bartels stated that this was report from the AS&P committee and Faculty Council has received the report. At this point there is no recommendation on the floor. Bartels appreciates the hard and extensive work the committee has done. Also the collaboration that has been established with TCC. TCC should keep OSU apprised of what is happening so OSU can evaluate the raw data and follow through how the articulation process can work if these students are admitted.

ATHLECTICS – Robert Cornell – No Report

BUDGET – Rodney Holcomb – No Report

CAMPUS FACILITIES, SAFETY AND SECURITY – Robert Emerson – No Report

FACULTY – Matt Lovern – Update

Lovern stated that the Faculty committee is working on revisions to the policy that governs faculty workload and on a new policy that defines and gives procedures for overload pay. These were documents that came to Faculty Council over the summer and were given to the Faculty committee from a task force that was set up and completed their work in late spring 2012. At this point, the Faculty committee has met and has suggested some revisions to the documents. They are now in communication with the chair of the task force. Lovern will be meeting with him later this week to discuss these revisions and get these to the Council for consideration. The committee is also working on other issues that remain from last year. The Faculty committee will also be setting up subcommittees to help with these issues.

LONG-RANGE PLANNING and INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – Nick Materer – Update

The Long-Range Planning committee also has some work and would appreciate any type of input from faculty members. The committee’s first meeting is on September 20th at 9:30 in the Deans Conference room. They would welcome anyone who is curious to attend. Representation from IT and ITLE will be at the meeting and can address any problems.

The committee is currently looking at four issues (some of which overlap with other committees) – Evaluation of Teaching, Outreach, Outreach – Vision or E-Learning, Visioning and Copyright.

A Faculty Council task force was established last semester and the Phase I report is finished. The task force consisted of representatives from ITLE, the Library, Vet Med, Gary Shutt’s office and from legal counsel. Phase I is about Copyright especially Copyright in an e-distance learning environment. The task force focused on the TEACH Act. The Phase I report is included in the minutes for review prior to discussing recommendations so that OSU can be compliant with the TEACH Act and be able to do more distance education with protection offered by the TEACH Act. Materer pointed out that Faculty members have their own lectures; they use PowerPoint from publishers (important if the publisher has a copyright over the PowerPoint). See below. FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

Teach Act and Internet Streaming Task Force

Phase I Report The task force is being steered by Nicholas Materer, currently the chair of the Long-Range Planning and Technology Committee. It includes representation from a variety of areas at OSU that are concerned with copyright and distribution of materials. The other members are as follows: Shelia Kennison represents the Faculty council, Chris Ormsbee represents the Institute of Teaching and Learning Excellence (ITLE), Anne Prestamo represents the Library, Brad Njaa is from the Center for Veterinary Health Sciences, and Carrie Hulsey-Greene is from Communication Services. We also have John Price from the legal counsel in the Office of the President. Finally, Victor Baeza, also from the library, provided assistance to the task force.

In this first phase (Phase I), we have been working to understand what we need to implement in order to be compliant with the TEACH Act and copyright laws. We initially planned to understand policies which must be implemented for compliance, what informational materials should be developed regarding copyright usage and how to distribute these materials to the students. In doing so, we have drawn on many comprehensive examples from peer universities.

Background Nearly every activity on campus, especially teaching, research, and publication functions, is affected by copyright law. Universities, through their faculty and staff, are enormous consumers and producers of intellectual property. Under current copyright law, every original work created is automatically copyrighted once it is fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright law has special exceptions for the use of material in the traditional face-to-face classroom. There is an inherent difficulty in monitoring or enforcing what happens in a traditional classroom and we have become accustomed to using any materials and technology without thinking about copyright and possible repercussions.

Copyright law that allows the use of material in the face-to-face classroom is not as forgiving if the same material is transmitted over the web or via streaming video. Not only is copyright law different and possibly more restrictive, the infringing acts are more visible and simply hiding the infringing materials behind passwords will not protect the potentially infringing acts from litigation discovery processes. By providing Internet access and publishing capability, OSU can be held liable for copyright infringements of faculty, staff, and possibly students. Thus, a comprehensive copyright policy is critical to prevent and mediate allegations of infringement.

TEACH Act The copyright limitations on what can be performed over the internet resulted in the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH Act), which became law in late 2002. The TEACH Act endows the rights to perform and display works over the internet or other FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 distance education media closer to those for face-to-face teaching. However, there are certain obligations required by the institution, by the technology used for distribution and by the instructor for lawful compliance with this act.

In many cases, faculty and staff can rely on Fair Use for compliance with the copyright law. However, the TEACH Act clarifies what compliance measures must be implemented with regard to distance education. This act permits instructors to transmit performances and displays of copyrighted works as part of a course if certain conditions are met. If these conditions are not or cannot be met, the instructors can examine if the materials qualify as a fair use or if they should obtain the permission of the copyright holder.

Requirements and Recommendations for Lawful Compliance with the TEACH Act. The requirement of the TEACH Act can be separated into Institutional Requirements, Technological Requirements and Instructional Requirements. Each requirement will be discussed in turn along with recommendations. We expect that these recommendations will be developed into a TEACH act policy, a general policy on copyright and a policy detail with specific cases in Phase II.

Institutional Requirements and Recommendations OSU is an accredited nonprofit educational institution and encourages that all copyrighted protected instructional materials are legally purchased or licensed.

OSU has policies with respect to copyright ownership, but needs policies regarding copyright usage. Such policies need to be developed and will be the Phase II focus of this committee. Copyright usage policies of other universities are either short policies referencing the relevant law or very large policies which include complete legal explanations and detailed descriptions of its application in various scenarios. Our committee is leaning towards short policy, leaving the complexity of legal explanations and examples for an on-line resource (see below). Links to copyright policy at different institutions are given in the appendix.

OSU needs a central location to provide copyright information to the academic community. Notices are provided from interlibrary loans, at copy machines and when downloading material from the library. Recently, the OSU library has sponsored a two part lecture on copyright and the use of copyrighted material. OSU also has a tutorial developed at BYU and licensed by the Institute for Teaching & Learning Excellence (Copyright 411 – http://itle.okstate.edu/copyright/start.htm). Nevertheless, a centralized resource is required. The committee has discussed possible locations for the dissemination of this material. We have concluded that the library, with support from legal counsel, should implement, at a minimum, a web page discussing copyright. Initially, this web site could contain links to several sites (see References) that contain comprehensive information regarding copyright, fair use and the TEACH Act. In this way, OSU will satisfy the requirement that copyright information and compliance materials are available to the academic community. Links to web sites at other FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 institutions are provided in the appendix.

Copyright information (possible via a link to the library web site) must to be provided to the faculty, staff and students. We propose that the following should be implemented as soon as possible.

1. That the email sent by OSU Information Technology to all students about copyright and illegal downloading be modified to include a paragraph on copyright and course materials. We suggest that this email should be also sent to all faculty and staff at least once a year.

“In addition to the illegal downloading of music and movies, copyright law applies to course material. Course material that is available to faculty, staff and students may not be copied, redistributed, published, given, leased, or sold to others, or used for any purpose other than for the specific course unless written permission of the faculty member in charge of the course and other copyright holders is obtained. Additional information on copyright can be found at .

2. That a notice be visible to students before or after logging into all content management sites (CMS).

“Course materials may not be copied, redistributed, published, given, leased, or sold to others, or used for any purpose other than your own individual study unless written permission from the faculty member in charge of each course and other copyright holders is obtained. A limited license granting you access to materials for this course, including PowerPoint slides, audio/video recordings, written, or other materials, is provided for your educational use only. Students should assume that the authors retain copyright. Additional information on copyright can be found at .”

3. That a paragraph be added to the Provost’s syllabus attachment.

“Course materials may not be copied, redistributed, published, given, leased, or sold to others, or used for any purpose other than your own individual study without the written permission of the faculty member in charge of the course and other copyright holders is obtained. A limited license granting you access to materials for this course, including PowerPoint slides, audio/video recordings, written, or other materials, is provided for your educational use only. Students should assume that the authors retain copyright. Lectures should not be recorded without permission from the faculty member and must not be further disseminated or shared. Additional information on copyright can be found at .”

Technological Requirements and Recommendations for On-Line Course Materials OSU’s centrally maintained content management site (D2L) ensures that only students who are FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 officially enrolled in a course are able to view the education material. OSU uses password access to verify enrollment upon access to course materials. Unless permission is obtained from the copyright holder(s), we recommend that all CMS systems implement similar controls. In this way, OSU is able to ensure that copyrighted material is used only for education purposes.

OSU must ensure that encryption or other technological measures to prevent retention of copyrighted material are utilized. We recommend that video should be provided using streaming technologies to prevent easy copying. As per the TEACH Act, we must ensure that any digital versions of our instructional materials are subject to technological protection. Thus, the streaming video server must be protected from unauthorized use. We further recommend that the administrator of any streaming audio or video server be responsible for ensuring that any analog materials converted to digital version are not available in a digital format. In addition, the administrator must ensure posted materials are in compliance with copyright law.

For compliance with the TEACH Act and to prevent unauthorized further dissemination, OSU must carefully manage copyrighted works that are retained past a class session. Unless permission is obtained from the copyright holder(s), we recommend that only the instructor responsible for the course have access to the material once the term ends. Although this is currently the case for content posted on D2L, it is not the case for many video and audio recordings. In cases where the course material is held by a system administrator (for example, material placed on a streaming audio or video server) and permission has not been obtained from the copyright holder(s), we recommend that all access by students to the material be removed at the end of the term and the material be removed from the server as soon as possible. For situations where the instructor desires course material held by a system administrator to be retained or wants to make course materials publically accessible, we recommend that the content be carefully vetted by the instructor for materials provided by third parties and that copyright permission forms be obtained by the instructor when necessary. When in doubt, the instructor should consult the copyright experts at the library. If copyright permission forms cannot be obtained from the third party, the material should either be removed or replaced. For example, illustrations and tables provided by a book publisher may have to be removed from any presentation. For course material held by a system administrator, we recommend that the administrator of the site be responsible for requesting and storing the required permission forms. For information posted on a public site by an instructor, we recommend that the instructor should be reasonable for retaining the required permission forms.

Instructor Requirements and Recommendations for On-Line Course Materials We recommend that all instructors ensure that all selected copyrighted materials are an integral part of the course. Instructors need to ensure that any copyrighted material is directly related to the teaching content of the course. All material posted on-line or streamed must be similar or analogous to material used in a face-to-face classroom. Posting extra video or supplementary materials must be done with extreme caution. In general, ancillary materials are not allowed without permission from the copyright holder. System administrators must ensure that all material posted by an instructor remains under that instructors control. FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

OSU needs to inform all instructors that they must ensure that the posted materials are both relevant and complementary to the course material specifically sold to students for independent use and retention, such as a music track or video. In general, posted materials must not replace the required textbook, coursepack or e-reserves, or digital library resource. We suggest that this warning be added to the copyright information and should be provided along with the Provost’s syllabus attachment to all instructors before every term. In addition, a warning statement should be added to all CMS sites in close proximity to the upload functionality.

Example Statement: “When posting information on this site, you must ensure that the materials are relevant and complementary to the course material specifically sold to students and will not replace the required textbook, coursepack or e-reserves, or digital library resource. You must also ensure that any converted analog materials (either audio or video) are not available in a digital format and that the conversion is authorized and in compliance with copyright law.”

Copyright Permission Forms Recommendation We recommend that permission forms are included on the proposed centralized copyright resource page for download and use by faculty, staff and students. Some examples are attached. In Phase II, specific recommendations will be made to the various constituents.

Future Work (Phase II) The next phase will use the information above to develop usage policies for the following situations:

 Lectures and presentations by outside speakers  Formal public lectures and presentations by university faculty members and academic staff  Less formal or pedagogical presentations by university faculty members and academic staff  Recording classroom and non-"public" lectures  Recordings by student groups  Theatrical, musical, or other performances by students, faculty, staff, or visitors to campus

We will strive to obtain broad feedback for each usage to understand the needs and the impacts of the proposed policies. We will also obtain legal feedback throughout the process. Finally, we will attempt to provide the legal tools (recommended copyright licenses, permission forms, etc.) for each usage to facilitate the legal distribution of content.

References/Appendixes

OSU copyright and intellectual copyright policies FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

OSU has a copyright ownership policy in place (COPYRIGHTABLE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 1-0201 November 2005 (https://stillwater.sharepoint.okstate.edu/Policies/Shared %20Documents/Copyrightable%20Intellectual%20Material.pdf). It is important to understand that OSU does not have a copyright usage policy. Complementing the copyright policy is the intellectual property policy (INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 1-0202 April 2010 https://stillwater.sharepoint.okstate.edu/Policies/Shared%20Documents/Intellectual %20Property.pdf).

Copyright tutorial and informational websites  Georgia State Copyright Case: Resources http://www.educause.edu/policy/campus/resources/gastate  Association of Research Libraries Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries http://www.arl.org/pp/ppcopyright/codefairuse/code/index.shtml  The Univ of Texas Copyright Crash Course http://copyright.lib.utexas.edu/  Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center http://fairuse.stanford.edu/  Columbia University Copyright Advisory Office http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/  Cornell University Copyright Information Center http://copyright.cornell.edu/  Copyright @ MIT http://web.mit.edu/copyright/index.html  University of North Carolina Committee on Copyright http://www.lib.unc.edu/copyright/

Copyright policy examples

The University of Kansas http://www.copyright.ku.edu/

University System of Georgia http://www.usg.edu/copyright/

University of Texas System (A clear and fairly generic policy with definitions) http://www.utsystem.edu/policy/policies/uts107.html

Duke University Students http://studentaffairs.duke.edu/dos/riaa-file-sharing/copyright-law-campus-policies Faculty (specifically addresses electronic course content) FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 http://www.provost.duke.edu/pdfs/fhb/FHB_App_P.pdf

Warner Pacific College (really short policy) http://www.warnerpacific.edu/current-students/library/campus-copyright-policy-and- implementation

University of Rochester – River Campus (another short policy) http://www.library.rochester.edu/copyright/URpolicy

Pittsburg State University (short, address responsibilities as the “online service provider”) http://www.pittstate.edu/office/information-services/policies/?id=108653

Johns Hopkins University This policy incorporates a lot of the language straight from copyright law. It explains consequences and University’s plan for copyright education, including requiring all undergraduate students pass an online test on the University’s technology resources and some copyright stuff. http://webapps.jhu.edu/jhuniverse/administration/minutes_policies_reports/policies/copyright/

University of Maryland (really long policy) http://www.president.umd.edu/policies/docs/IV-320A.pdf

Brigham Young University http://files.lib.byu.edu/copyright/BYU_COPYRIGHT_POLICY.pdf

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill http://www.unc.edu/faculty/faccoun/resolutions/Res98_15.html

Georgia State University – Form for presentations FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

Saint Louis University - Permission form Lecture Capture

Course Name: Course Number: Term: Instructor:

Course Release and Lecture Capture Consent Form

To Whom It May Concern:

I (the undersigned) understand and agree that comprehensive course materials including text, graphic designs, images, video and audio files will be collected and preserved and that I was made aware of this fact by the course instructor at the beginning of the term. I hereby grant to Saint Louis University (the “University”) a non-exclusive license and right to use excerpts or portions of my audio or videotaped graded coursework (e.g., student presentation, small group discussion or comments in a seminar format) in which I am portrayed for educational or related purposes. I further understand that I will receive no money or remuneration of any kind from the University related to this consent and release, or the materials covered by this consent or release. I acknowledge that I do not have the right to inspect or approve any materials developed by the university as authorized below.

This release and consent includes the right to:

1. Make and copyright text, photographs, audio and/or video recordings of my image and voice as part of the University’s lecture capture program. 2. Use, produce, modify, distribute, and disseminate such materials and projects in any form, manner, or mode of electronic transmission for educational or related purposes.

I hereby certify and represent that I am over 18 years of age and have read the foregoing and fully understand the meaning and effect thereof. In the case of a child under the age of 18, I state that I am the parent, guardian, or otherwise legally authorized adult capable of giving consent on behalf of the minor child.

(Student’s signature and date)

(Student’s Printed Name) (Student’s University ID #)

OSU’s Edmond Low library - Permission form for collections

OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY SPECIAL COLLECTIONS AND UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

PERMISSION TO RECORD AND AUTHORIZATION FOR USE

For the purpose of furthering scholarly research and teaching at Oklahoma State University, I, ______, the undersigned, hereby give to Oklahoma State University Library the absolute right and permission to photograph, tape, record, and/or film me and the following lecture presented by me on ______at ______for inclusion in the Special Collections and University Archives.

I further give to Oklahoma State University Library the right to reuse, publish, perform, reproduce, adapt, distribute and/or transmit said video and/or audio recording, in whole, in part, or in composite, through any medium, subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Oklahoma State University Library Special Collections and University Archives established policies and procedures will govern access and use of the same for the purpose of scholarly research, teaching and/or viewing.

2. Proper attribution will be given to me.

3. No commercial use will be allowed, provided however the Library may use some or all of the same for its website.

Copyright. Except as noted above, I, the undersigned, for myself, my heirs successors, and assigns, retain all literary, artistic, and intellectual property rights in the original materials.

Signed:______Name Date ______Address

Acceptance: Oklahoma State University Library

______Head, Special Collections & University Archive FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012

RESEARCH – Dan Fisher – Up Date

The committee met on 8-31 to take a look at what was coming up for the year. From the Research office, the committee looked at pre and post award software selection. There was some concern communicated to Fisher that this software was primarily administrative and could have an impact on research-active faculty in much the same way the p-card software has impacted the research act. Fisher met with Bob Dixon and Tony Shackly to talk about this issue. The committee would like to have Bob Dixon speak at the next meeting - which he has agreed to do. The committee also discussed accounting reports for faculty. This is somewhat of a problem that is handled on an ad-hoc basis by the Academic Units. The PI’s cannot read the information that is received from the accounting system. Melanie Page has agreed to help facilitate a sharing of best practices among the academic units. The committee will be reviewing along with a few other committees the report from the task force on Vision. The committee will be following a new task force, the Graduate Student Support Issues (GSSI). This is a bit of a controversial issue because they are proposing to eliminate quarterly time assistantships. Several colleges rely on these assistantships heavily. Half time assistantships will become the norm. This issue has implications regarding tuition waivers for graduate students in particular. Fisher has met with Dean Tucker to discuss these issues. The committee will be working with the graduate college on this issue.

RETIREMENT and FRINGE BENEFITS – Stephen Clarke - No Report

RULES and PROCEDURES – Kemit Grafton – No Report

STUDENT AFFAIRS and LEARNING RESOURCES – Bob Miller – Up Date

Miller stated that the first committee will be on Tuesday, September 25th in room 333 Willard Hall. The meeting will start at 3:00 p.m. The committee has been assigned to review four different task force activities. One the committee is working on presently is the one on the Test Optional Admissions Policy. The committee will be reviewing this over the next couple of months and hope to have a report with or without recommendation to Faculty Council in the next month or two. The other three task forces that have been assigned to the committee are Undergraduate Retention, Graduate Student Support and Graduate Teaching Assistant Professional Development. If anyone has questions or would like to comment, please email Bob Miller at [email protected] or attend the next committee meeting on September 25th.

Report of Liaison Representatives:

Women’s Faculty Council – Barbara Miller

Miller stated that the committee will be meeting tomorrow, September 12th, at 9:30 in the Poly- Com room at the Library. The committee will be working on campus safety for women, a research week speaker, updating the status of women report and the Research Awards. The committee will vary the times we are meeting this year to try and capture different people and if someone is interested in those topics, they can work on those through sub-committees created for FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 those issues and can contact Melanie Page, current chair, for more info. Meetings will be poly- commed to the Tulsa campus.

Staff Advisory Council – Nani Pybus

No report. Their meeting is tomorrow.

Old Business – Dr. Lee Bird

Dr. Bird wanted to thank everyone for all the help with Welcome Week. It was a great success. There were more students involved that ever before. There were great events thanks to the faculty and staff that participated and held events. There were literally thousands of students who participated and it could not be done without faculty and staff support.

New Business – Wake Up and Dream Project – Melanie Page

Page introduced herself. Page is a professor in Psychology as well as the Arts & Sciences rep. She is also the director for Creativity and Innovation on campus. The Creativity and Innovation committee received an idea from HRAD asking why OSU builds concrete everywhere versus something more sustainable. Page put together a core group of people who tossed around the idea of building an Eco-friendly dorm. What would this look like? At the time, Page thought everyone would dismiss the idea but to Page’s surprise, the committee was excited to look into this idea. From this project was born the Wake Up and Dream Project. This project has recently been funded by one of the Provosts Interdisciplinary grants. Part of what the Institute for Creativity and Innovation does is help facilitate interdisciplinary conversations and grants. Part of the mission of Creativity and Innovation committee is once a grant is received is to get more people involved in the project/process. T-shirts and A-frames are scattered around campus promoting the Wake Up and Dream project. The Wake Up and Dream project is to envision what an Eco-friendly dorm/village would look like. How would sustainability be infused in OSU curriculum? In early conversation of the General Education task force, people were talking about the possibility of a sustainability theme for general education for students to choose from. How would this be done? Would there be classes? Would it be infused like diversity? The committee wants to have a conversation with the OSU campus and this is what the grant is about. It’s a 7 month planning process for how would an Eco-friendly dorm/village look on the OSU campus in terms of curriculum, student activities and designing the actual building. What would this look like in terms of the skill set that would be taught to students? OSU’s push over the past few years has been “we train creative, innovative, entrepreneurial, ethical leaders. These are the students who will be going out and solving the world’s problems. Many of the world’s problems revolve around sustainability. OSU has fabulous academic and research areas around these themes. This project is trying to pull all of this together.

The project committee wants to offer the campus two things: 1. To have any of the 7 speakers come to classrooms to give a guest lecture. For faculty to meet with them individually or have small groups sessions with students if they are appropriate to the class subject area or if the faculty just has a personal interest in sustainability. Page had handouts that she distributed at the FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES Council Room, 412 Student Union September 11, 2012 meeting and will also be sent out electronically via the Faculty Listserv. One of the handouts highlighted 7 speakers who will be available to faculty. These speakers will be on campus for two days. Each speaker or set of speakers will have a public lecture on the on Thursday evening. These lectures are open to the public and will be video tapped by ITLE as part of an online class. These will be available for anyone to share. One Friday a month there will be a core group called the design team that will meet to actually design the Eco-friendly dorm/village. What will it look like from the ground up, how does it work? The College of Human Sciences is sponsoring a locally sourced lunch at the end of these meetings. Page has every college on campus involved in some way so this is truly an interdisciplinary project. Residential Life, the Student Union and Student Government are also involved. 2. Each speaker in the Fall will have a one hour online class in conjunction with their lecture. If faculty do advise students to participate or have students who need a one hour class; the project committee has built a class with a series of readings around each speaker. An interesting thing in online learning is students can actually sign up for the classes after they have started.

Page concluded and told the council that announcements for speakers will be distributed and she hopes that at the end of this year long process that faculty, staff and students have an idea for residential life to move forward on a different kind of dorm. The handouts are attached:

7WakeUp&DreamSpe Scope for Project.pdf akersOSU.pdf

Bartels asked if there was any other new business. Hargis asked if the Faculty Council has been advised about the TedX conference which OSU will host in November, Page stated that the conference will be November 1st from 1:00 to 5:30 at the Seretean Center. TedX is an acronym for Technology, Entertainment and Design. TedX has sub-conferences around the country primarily at universities. A number of speakers have already been lined up, most of whom are faculty who will be discussing a broad range of subjects. The OSU Foundation is taking reservations. Page explained that the TedX website is now open for reservations. TedX covers a wide range of topics and issues.

Bartels had a few faculty members email him regarding what OSU is doing to make sure that what happened at Penn State does not occur here at OSU. Bartels stated that our Board of Regents has taken action. Chairman Lester has created a task force to review policies and procedures. Bartels will be representing the Faculty Council on this task force. He will relay back any information that he can. The first meeting is Thursday and Bartels hope to have some type of review as well as a report by the end of the year.

The meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Faculty Council is Tuesday, October 9, 2012 in 412 Student Union, Council Room.

Respectfully submitted,

Udaya DeSilva, Secretary