The University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College

Academic Senate Minutes

November 14, 2003

 

 

 

 

 

I.            Call to Order

 

Ms. Cantu called the November 14, 2003 meeting of the Academic Senate to order at 1:10 p.m. in the Fortress Room at Fort Brown. 

 

Members of the Senate in attendance included:  Mr. Steve Benton (s), Ms. Ethel Cantu (*), Dr. Luis Colom (s), Mr. Roberto Cortina (s), Mr. Doug Ferrier, Mr. Victor Fuhro, Mr. Bill Harris (ex-officio), Dr. Gerald Hollier (s), Dr. Edward Hysmon (*), Mr. Joe Lacher (s), Ms. Julie Larson (*), Dr. Jose Martin, Mr. Domingo Molina (s), Dr. Eldon Nelson, Dr Rafael Otero (s), Dr. Sylvia Pena, Ms. Cheryl Phelps (s), Mr. Jay Phillips, Dr. Olivia Rivas, Dr. Renee Rubin (s), Mr. Pat Wade (s), and Mr. Tom Welther (s).

 

Visitors included:  Mr. Hector Castillo, Ms. Karen Fuss-Sommer, and Dr. Marilyn Woods.

 

 

 

II.           Review and Approval of the Minutes from the October 10, 2003 Academic

               Senate Meeting

 

Ms. Cantu asked the members of the Academic Senate to review the minutes from the October 10, 2003 Academic Senate meeting.  Hearing no objections, the minutes were approved as distributed.

 

 

 

III.          Senate Treasurer’s Report

 

Dr. Hymson presented the Senate Treasurer’s report.  Dr. Hymson reported that $464.78 was spent from the Maintenance and Operations (M and O) account, leaving $1,285.22 in that account.  He also reported that $1,222.16 was spent on travel, leaving $492.84 in the travel account.  Dr. Hymson reported that the total balance in the Senate account is $1,778.00.

 

 

 

IV.           Presentation:  Futures Commission- Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo

 

Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo, from the President’s office, provided the Senate with information regarding the Futures Commission.  Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo began their presentation by identifying what the Futures Commission is.  According to them, the Futures Commission is “a group of community leaders and UTB/TSC representatives who will focus on helping guide the University as it moves to its next level of excellence.  The Commission will be made up of six task forces of 30 to 50 people who will spend time helping our university leaders envision what the Community University of the future might look like.  The six task forces will include:  Academic Programs headed by Dr. Jose Martin, Student Life headed by Dr. Hilda Silva, Campus Planning headed by Dr. John Ronnau, Financing headed by Ms. Rosemary Martinez, Fund and Friend Raising headed by Dr. William Strong, and Workforce Training and Continuing Education headed by Dr. Tony Zavaleta.”  Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo then talked about what the Futures Commission will be doing.  They said the Futures Commission will “be charged with helping the university develop goals and priorities through 2020.  The discussions will focus on the these and other ideas:  the kind of academic programs that should be developed; aspects of student life that should be expanded; how recent property acquisitions should be integrated into the overall campus plan; how continued growth should be financed; how to increase external support for scholarships and research; and how expansion of workforce training and continuing education programs should occur”.  Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo next addressed the reasons behind why UTB/TSC is forming the Futures Commission.   They said that the ‘‘while UTB/TSC has grown in enrollment, student services, graduates, and degree programs, there is still much work to be done.  UTB/TSC can play a large role in that work for the region and the state.  Consider the following statistics: 

 

  • During the last decade, the overall participation rate in Texas higher education declined from 5.3% to 4.9% of the total population.  Without intervention, projections indicate that the rate will drop to 4.6% by 2015, below the national average.
  • Texas trails the average of the ten largest states as well as the national average in median household income.  If the trend is not reversed, by the year 2030 the state will experience a $30-40 billion per year loss in annual household income.”     

                                                                         Texas Higher Education Coordinating

                                                                         Board, 2002

Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo then explained the ways in which the Futures Commission will help UTB/TSC.  They said that the Futures Commission will help develop, with the University of Texas System, a Compact that prioritizes the goals and objectives of the university over the next two years, update our Academic Strategic Plan to 2010, update our Master Facilities Plan, prepare for the 2005 Legislative Session, and prepare for the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools’ (SACS) reaffirmation of accreditation site visit which will occur in 2007.  Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo then answered questions from the floor.  In response to several questions, Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo said the TSC Board of Trustees are committed to this project and that the first meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, November 19, 2003 from 6-8 p.m. so the Trustees could attend.  Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo said that volunteers will be asked to commit to attending five meetings, with one each in November, January, February, March, and April.  Dr. Martin interjected that the Compact referred to by Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo has been prompted by the Chancellor- Dr. Mark Yudof.  Dr. Martin said that the Compact will be used to judge how effective the institution is over several years.  Dr. Martin said that we need input from faculty as well as the community.  He also said we can’t be everything for everybody.  He urged people to volunteer for the Futures Commission.  With that, Ms. Cantu thanked Dr. Woods and Mr. Castillo for their presentation.

 

 

V.            Presentation: Executive Summary of Noel Levitz Retention and

                Recruitment Study- Ms. Fossen

 

Ms. Cantu reported that Ms. Linda Fossen was unable to attend this meeting as she is in Austin, Texas attending meeting in place of Dr. Martin.  Ms. Cantu said that Ms. Fossen’s presentation will be rescheduled at later date.

 

 

 

VI.           Presentation: Pilot Study, Annual Workload Conference (SHS)-

                 Dr. Nelson

 

Dr. Nelson reported on a pilot study conducted by the School of Health Sciences (SHS)

Because of the increasing demands on each faculty member and administrator, the SHS Portfolio/Workload Taskforce has requested that SHS be permitted to explore an innovative and more efficient design to conduct annual workload conferences and review of the calendar year 2002 (January 1, 2002 - December 31, 2002).

 

PILOT STUDY: Modification of Faculty Annual Planning (Workload) Conference

 

Design: Workload Conferences for all probationary and tenured faculty will be conducted by the Chairs of each of the Departments in the SHS. Each review will be approximately an hour in length and involve all the components of faculty review defined in HOOP 7.3.1 Sections E and F, with the following modifications:

 

Modifications:         1) Each Fall Semester, a Faculty Workload Planning  Calendar shall be published by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Workload conferences may begin in the late Fall and extend into the Spring semesters. (Modification of HOOP 7.3.1.F. Subsections 1. and 2.)

 

2) The Department Chair shall meet with all probationary and tenured faculty members during the late Fall and Spring Semesters of each year to develop the faculty member's instructional workload for the following year, and to review and discuss the faculty member's instructional workload and mix of other responsibilities for the coming year and review the accomplishments of the preceding year. (Modification, Subsection 2.)

 

3) Following the meeting with the Department Chair with the probationary and tenured faculty member, the Dean and the Department Chair shall meet in an Annual Planning Conference to determine each faculty member's instructional workload and mix of other responsibilities for the coming year and review the accomplishments of the preceding year.

i.                     The Dean of SHS will meet with the Chair in an Annual Planning Conference with: a) each Department Chair, b) each Director of an SHS Program, c) any faculty member desiring such a meeting with the Dean, d) any faculty member having a negative report by the Chair, and e) any faculty member that the Dean calls to review their past or future activities or accomplishments. (Modification, Subsection 3.)

 

4) The Faculty Workload Plan will be filed upon acceptance by the Dean and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Plan may be amended at the request of the faculty

Procedures:

member and the chair.  (HOOP 7.3.1.F.4)

  1. In conduct of the faculty review by the Chairs, each faculty member will submit a Workload Plan in the form of a standard Workload Manual that will contain the essential components proposed by the Provost (See Attached.)  The Workload Manual will be the single agent defining the Workload performance for the year of review and that planned/agreed for the subsequent year.  The Workload Manual will be filed upon acceptance by the Dean and Vice President for Academic Affairs.  The Plan may be amended at the request of the faculty member and the chair. (Hoop 7.3.1.F.4.)

2.      The Annual Planning Conference may be conducted for any/all non-tenure-track faculty contracted with the SHS for student education and training.

3.       

4.       

 

 

 

 

5.       training.

3.       As the HOOP Policy 7.3.1., defines the right of a faculty member to meet in a

       conjoint conference with both their Chair and the Dean, each Faculty member will  

       be given the opportunity to defer that conjoint meeting by submitting a statement

       yielding that right for this review year (2002). 

 

 

Evaluation:

 

1.      A survey instrument will be completed by all faculty members within a working day following their individual Workload Conference with their Chair to determine their satisfaction, dissatisfaction, and comments relating to the new Workload Conference design.

-         A second (identical) survey instrument will be completed by all faculty members at the end of the Annual Planning Conference between their Chair and the Dean to ascertain any change in perspective or perception of the process during the interim period.

 

2.      Subsequent to completion of the Annual Planning Conference with the Dean, each Department Chair will submit to the Dean a written review of their summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the new Workload conference design.

 

3.      A Review Conference will be held involving the Department Chairs, the Personnel Committee Chairs, faculty representatives from each Department to review the design and conduct of the modified Workload Conference and Annual Planning Conference design.

 

4.      The Dean will submit a final report to the Provost/VPAA regarding the conduct of modified Workload Conference design, and will make specific recommendations regarding the successes and shortcomings of that design, and whether it should be encouraged as a standard modification of HOOP 7.3.1. for The University.

 

 

SHS Workload Pilot Study (2002/03) Evaluation Results

Allied Health:    11 tenured/probationary faculty

                                 5/11 optioned NOT to meet with the Dean

                                 6/11 met with the Dean (6 Program Directors)

 

 Nursing:             22 tenured/probationary faculty

13/22 optioned NOT meet with the Dean

9/22 met with the Dean (4 Program Directors)

Survey

Summary:                        Of 33 tenured and probationary faculty, 15 met with the Dean, all faculty were surveyed and all reported:

i.                     annual planning conference was fair

ii.                   that the process would not be improved by (being required) to meet with the Dean

              iii.         the option of having to meet with the Dean should be continued next year

Comments:       Generally indicated that the process was fair, that they appreciated the option of meeting with the Dean, and that perhaps the design could be improved if the Program Directors were not required to meet with the Dean for the Workload Conference; there was a suggestion to begin the faculty review process in November 

 

Modifications:   - Do not require Program Director to meet with Dean

                      -Any faculty up for Personnel action should be required to meet              

                      with the Dean.

     

The Net Savings in Time to the Program:

Assume Chairs meet one-hour with faculty, then 90 minutes with faculty and Dean:

(Chairs) 27 hours of meetings

Assume the Dean meets 90 minutes with faculty & Chair, plus Notes of meeting (30 min):

 

   (Dean) 27 hours of meetings,

                 9 hours of notes

Post-Workload Summary Review meeting with each Chair, 2 hours each, 4 hours;

Net Savings in time:  Chairs =          23 hours

                      Dean =               32 hours

 

A discussion followed Dr. Nelson’s presentation.  Dr. Martin made the following comments.  Dr. Martin said that he understands that the workload conference is a source of discomfort for many.  He said that the rules governing the workload conferences were intended to be helpful and not a hindrance.  He said that the workload conference should be interpreted as a right rather than a duty.  Dr. Martin also said that he authorized the pilot study to continue for another year in the School of Health Sciences.  Dr. Otero said he is in the process of analyzing the data from the Faculty Satisfaction Survey and he would like to see how the data plays out in terms of faculty satisfaction of work performance.  Dr. Hymson asked for a sense of the Senate regarding the pilot study.  The Senate felt that it was important to look at the data from the Faculty Satisfaction Survey and not do anything beyond the pilot study at this point.  Ms. Cantu thanked Dr. Nelson for his presentation.

 

 

IV.           Discussion of Core Values- Dr. Dameron

Dr. Dameron was asked by Ms. Cantu to lead a discussion of core values.  Dr. Dameron said in discussing core values in perhaps best to begin by asking, why look at core values?  Dr. Dameron said he believes that two issues are at stake here:  the large number of faculty who will be retiring in the next 5-10 years and the number of faculty who stay any a few years and move on to something more attractive.  Dr. Dameron said the partnership between the university and the community college make us unique and we need to bring in colleagues for which this arrangement is a good fit.  Dr. Dmaeron said he was discussing these issues with President Garcia and she saw this not just as a issue of losing faculty but rather as a broader issue concerning how we value the institution.  Thus Dr. Garcia has called together administrators, staff, trustees, and faculty to discuss this issue at a retreat on Friday, November 21, 2003.  Dr. Dameron said that he would like to hear what the Senate has to say on this issue of core values and the mission of the University.

Dr. Colom asked if Dr. Dameron had any statistics on how many faculty leave.  Dr. Dameron said he did not.  Dr. Pena said it is important that we understand our core values.  She pointed out that students at Baylor University in the College of Education took two years to understand what the College of Education was about and then once they understand the programs, the curriculum was changed.  She said our core values affect who we are.  Dr. Rivas said we have an organizational climate and culture.  New faculty add to that culture but we still have the same core values that define the culture and climate of the university.  She said in an attempt of new faculty to learn these core values they gravitate toward old faculty.  They are hungry to know about who the university is.  How do we embrace new faculty and welcome them into the family.  Mr. Benton said he had two observations:  75% of us will be gone within the next ten years and faculty don’t stay because we have no facilities and resources.  We are poor.  He said he stayed because of the support he received.  How do we keep people here?  Mr. Harris wondered what will happen when there is not senior faculty to gravitate to.  He said we need to transmit values but first we must decide which ones are worth keeping.  Dr. Hymson asked what our core values are.  Dr. Dameron said he wasn’t sure.  He said center to our mission is teaching, research, and service.  Dr. Dameron said his sense is that we need to have a dialogue about values.  Dr. Colom said we are poor and will continue to be poor but if we continue to think along that line, we will be dead.  Dr. Colom said that our working environment is challenging but not cut-throat.  He said there are other institutions where if you don’t get grants you are out.  Dr. Rubin said the idea that faculty will contribute equally is a misconception.  She said we should allow for different strengths and differences. She said core values are important but may be applied differently.  Dr. Rivas said our philosophy statement speaks to these comments.  She suggested we have a discussion about our philosophy statement.  Mr. Harris said that everyone has different contributions but there is a gap between the printed page and reality.  He said we need to practice what we preach.  Dr. Rivas said that we want to treat others humanely.  Mr. Harris said we are beating a dead horse.  He wondered how much we want to preserve.  He said that currently our emphasis is on teaching but he feels that will change.  Dr. Pena said if you take a look at our mission statement you will find that students are at the center of our mission.  She said we need to put more emphasis on students.  After a very lengthy discussion, Ms. Cantu concluded the discussion.  Ms Cantu thanked Dr. Dameron for leading this discussion.

 

VIII.         Senate President’s Report

Ms. Cantu had six items in her report.

  • TSC Board Meeting Oct 23

After meeting in executive session to discuss real estate acquisition, the TSC board met in open session to announce the sale of Duffey Plaza to the City of Brownsville and the purchase of a condominium at Ft. Brown and the CPL Training Center located on 18 acres in Bayview. The Bayview property will become the site for a Teacher Training Center that will provide continuing education for RGV teachers. A contribution of $1 million from Charles Butt will help purchase the property. Dissent was expressed by trustee Eddie Campirano who thought we already had facilities to accommodate the continuing education needs of teachers. He also expressed concern about the maintenance costs for this property. The board also heard a briefing on the Center for Civic Engagement from Joe Zavaleta and Fr. Armand Mathew. The board passed a resolution to work with the City of Brownsville to develop the College Park. Plans are underway to apply for a TX Parks and Wildlife grant to create a greenway along the resaca with trails and recreational areas from the new University Blvd to Elizabeth St.

 

  • University Council

Dr. Garcia presented a new initiative to comply with the chancellor’s directive to develop a campus plan for the next 3-5 years. This initiative is the Futures Commission and will involve campus and community members in visioning the future of UTB/TSC. Dr. Dr. Garcia presented a new initiative to comply with the chancellor's directive to develop Martin led the group in a discussion exercise that mirrored the six task forces and gave a preview of what might come from the Futures Commission.

 

·        Master Plan Nov 7, 10

I served as the faculty representative on a committee chaired by Wayne Moore to hear presentations from five firms who submitted proposals to update the current master plan to include the new properties at the Ft. Brown Village and the former Amigoland Mall. The presentations helped the committee to understand the importance of urban planning and not just building construction. The firms presented innovative ideas about adapting the former mall, linking the main campus to the student housing and ITEC, and increasing energy efficiency. The committee recommended two firms to President Garcia: 3-D I and Dover-Kohl.

 

·        Nominees for faculty participation in Retreat on Nov 21 for Core Values

The Executive Committee with the assistance of Chip Dameron recommended several faculty members from each college and school to President Garcia. She will select faculty from that list to invite to a day-long retreat on Core Values to be held Friday, November 21 at the Inn at Chachalaca Bend. There will be 2-3 faculty representatives from each college and school, with one being a veteran of several years and the other more recent.

 

·        Faculty absences

At the last senate meeting the senators from the School of Education requested that faculty absences be placed on the agenda for this meeting. I conferred with the senators and discussed the concerns with the department chair, dean and provost. The provost reviewed the protocol for handling faculty absences at the Deans Council. These actions seem to have addressed the concerns, so no action is needed by the senate.

 

 

·        University Undergraduate Curriculum Representative

The Chair of the, University Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, Pat Wade, and the Dean of the School of Health Sciences, Eldon Nelson, recommend Shamina Davis, Associate Professor, Allied Health to sit on the University Undergraduate Curriculum Committee as the representative of the School of Health Sciences. Faculty membership on this committee consists of the chairs of each college and school curriculum committee. Shamina Davis has been recently selected as chair of the SHS curriculum committee and replaces Joe Lacher who has served ably for several years. This appointment is to a University Standing Committee and must be confirmed by the Senate. Motion to confirm.  Dr. Hymson so moved, with a second from Mr. Welther.  The nominee is confirmed.

 

·        Web site update

The academic senate website is now fully operational and linked from the UTB/TSC site. Please explore the site and send your comments for improvement to me. Also send pertinent information to me that can be incorporated into the site.

 

 

X.            Academic Senate Reports

A.  Budget Formation- Dr. Hymson reported on the Budget Formation Committee.  He said the members of the committee include:  Dr. John Sutterby, Dr. William Davis, Ms. Carol Collinsworth, Dr. Edward Hymson, and Dr. John McCabe.  The committee will meet on Tuesday, November 25, 2003 and will meet with a consultant.

B.  Social Committee-Ms. Fuss-Sommer reported on the Holiday Tropical Social.  She said the Holiday Social will take place on December 17, 2003, starting at 7:00 p.m. in the ITEC Center Foyer.  A light dinner will be served between 8:00 and 9:00 p.m.  Tickets are $10.00 per person. 

Ms. Larson reported on the First Wally Pierce Memorial Symposium.  This social event will take place on December 5, 2003 at 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. in the Fortress Room, Fort Brown.  Dr. Sullivan, Dr. Beale, and Mr. Sorenson will speak on Thailand.

 

XI.           Partnership Committee Reports

A.  Academic Affairs Partnership Committee-  Ms. Cantu reported on the November 6, 2003 meeting of this committee. 

Dean Phillips reported on the Texas Success Initiative. The legislature abolished TASP and replaced it with the Texas Success Initiative. Before enrollment, students must take one of four exams: ASSET, COMPASS, ACCUPLACER or THEA. Scores on these exams will be used to place students into developmental or regular college classes. Students will be able to progress through the developmental curriculum and be declared college ready based on their performance in the courses. Students who pass the developmental course with a B or better will not have to retest. Dean Phillips also gave an update on developmental education by comparing incoming students to graduates relative to developmental courses. 63.17% of incoming freshmen from 1996 - 2000 were in developmental coursework (the average for community college freshmen) and 63.69% of the graduates receiving associate and baccalaureate degrees from 2002-2003 had taken developmental courses. This certainly attests to the success of our developmental program.

Peter Gawenda and Eldon Nelson gave an update on the BAT Bachelor of Applied Technology, which allows students to earn a bachelors degree by building on to their occupational or technical degree. The Armed Forces and some large companies such as GM have expressed interest in this degree, which is offered online.

Provost Martin recognized the accomplishment of the School of Education in achieving a 92% pass rate on the state certification exams.

Suzanne Acevedo reported a 2000% increase in grant funding, so that grants are now more than 6% of the budget.

RuthAnn Ragland explained the UT System Strategic Plan, which requires each campus to plan for the future, including addressing the goals of Closing the Gaps. UTB's strategic plan will be developed in consultation with the campus and community in an initiative called the Futures Commission. She reminded the committee that the SACS visit for reaccreditation will take place in 2007 and that this plan will lay the groundwork for our self-study.

               

B.  Student Affairs Partnership Committee- Ms. Cantu reported on the November 12, 2003 meeting of this committee.

The Student Affairs Partnership Committee reviewed the compulsory and incidental fees that will take effect in Fall 2004. UTB and UTPA are the only components to not raise tuition in spring 2004. Both will raise the designated tuition from $32 to 38 and will be the lowest among the component schools. The increase is expected to yield 1.5 million to be used for 10 faculty, 10 staff, equipment and scholarships. Increases in the computer use fee will provide funds to upgrade or replace computers in the labs. Charging a 25 advising fee to all students will provide the funds to hire 11 academic advisors. A myriad of other fees are charged for being late or taking specific courses. The Student Fee Advisory Committee unanimously recommended these increases. The student representative voiced strong student support for these increases because students want to see better equipment and services. The Student Affairs Partnership Committee recommended these fees.

Student Activities Director Vince Solis reported on the visit to several wellness and educational sports complexes at Texas colleges. The group, comprised largely of students calls themselves the REC-ing Crew. This facility will probably operate from 6am to 12 midnight and could be the largest employer of students on campus. To make this facility a reality, students will have to vote to support it and then the legislature must approve it. The timeline is for a student vote in the spring and if successful then a proposal to the legislature in the fall.

 

C.  Business Affairs Partnership Committee- Dr. Hymson reported that he was unable to attend the meeting of this committee. 

 

XI.           Faculty Advisory Council (FAC) Report

Mr. Welther and Ms. Cantu attended the October meeting of the Faculty Advisory Council (FAC) in Austin, Texas.  Mr. Welther gave the following report.

  1. Orientation Session with Chancellor Yudof (lunch on Oct. 16)

1.      Five finalists for president's position at UT Arlington

2.      President of UT Dallas is stepping down.

     3.   As far as tuition is concerned,

                           Each campus has had a consultation plan.

                           There is a system-wide committee involving all campuses.

   There is also a small advisory group to look at various tuition models.

                           Yudof has met with all campuses.

                           Generally, there are modest tuition increases.

                           Access for students from lower social segments has to be continued.

   Tuition plans should include options, such as discounts for quick

     completion of study programs.

          There is a pilot program for academic assessment involving 200  

            students on each campus, all anonymous; reports are due early 2000.

                           The price differentiation between undergrad, grad, & professional   

                             programs continues to be a major discussion issue.

   There is no $ for System campuses to bridge 90-day wait period

     created by insurance dilemma; there is no pot of gold, according to         

    Yudof.

 

II.   Vice Chancellor Jerry Malandra: Accountability

Yudof and the Board of Regents have taken a new perspective on accountability. It now involves:

1.      Internal management to a greater extent to inform the public and policy makers.

          2.   A focus on ongoing improvement of the education process.

  In the past: Info collected has often not been usable or relevant; as a result,   

  lawmakers and the public think that higher ed is broken and needs to be fixed.

  3. The new framework will be a more strategic apparatus that will

                     Evaluate the system as a system,

                     Examine affordability,

                       Scrutinize student success,

                       Focus on the impact of UT universities on economic development, and

                       Involve every level of administration in the system.

The result, it is hoped, will be a single accountability system to respond to all inquiries, whether from the public or law makers.

 

III. William Shuite: Office of Federal Relations, a Systems office, in Washington, D.C.

Opened in 199, staffed by 9 people

Mission: The Washington voice of all things UT

Some of its goals:

      Secure $100,000,000.00 in research annually

      Be a voice in policy matters concerning the System and all of its 15       

       components

·        They have a visitors' office, which can be used as a base for work if you ever

                   happen to be there.  Phone: 202-955-9091.

      Undertake congressional visits & testimony

                  Participate in Federal Agency meetings

                  Form task forces and peer review panels

                  Offer Fellowship opportunities

                  Publish a newsletter for high level federal agencies

                  Assist with research and grants

                  The Bill Archer Fellowship Program, which is system-wide and involves 15 students per semester. The hope is that it will grow.

 

IV. Dr. Thomas W. Sager, professor of statistics in the Department of Management Science and Information Systems in the McCombs School of the University of Texas at Austin analyzed the recent Faculty Satisfaction Survey. Some of his comments included:

      The survey was reasonably well constructed,

      Well executed, and

      Involved enough time.

      A 38 %participation rate is respectable Some reservation concerning the data:

      The respondents may not be representative of the larger faculty population, as women, Hispanics, and untenured profs had lower participation rates.

      Since participation was voluntary, only certain individuals may have opted to participate

      Because the instrument was long, busy faculty members may have opted not to participate.

   An average satisfaction level of 4.5 means one thing if half the scores are 4s and the other half 5s, but it means another thing if half the scores are 2s and the other half are 7s. Thus, polarization may be hidden.

      Measurement scores measuring differences between groups are unclear: The average satisfaction level of UT Group 1 respondents is 4.43/7 vis-à-vis 4.74/7 for Health Institutions. The difference between the groups is 0.31. In light of the different populations, it is unclear what that difference means.

Bottom line: It is difficult to say with assurance what the survey results say about the faculty population generally.

 

V. Dr. McKinney reported about Medical Billing in the six health institutions:

    Their big problem is that doctors don't send out their bills. Thus, they don't get  

    collected. In other words, the institutions are losing out on payments from patients.

 

VI. Dan Stuart, Executive Director of Benefits Administration and Laura C. Chambers, Manager of Insurance Benefits discussed the following problems/issues:

   The program is in a better position than previously. There are new options

    compared to when there was only Sigma; vendor mistakes are now more quickly 

    uncovered; there was no rate increase last year.

   Unfortunately, the 90 day wait period is unsavory as the UT system may be

     disadvantaged when competing with other universities for faculty, as it will have

     a harder time attracting and retaining faculty, due to the fact that benefits are

     crucial in selecting employment.

    The only way to save money for the benefits program is having higher premiums

      or restricting access.

    There is an Amnesty Program under way right now for employees to report

     dependents that they shouldn't carry on their plan; no penalty if they "fess up"

     now. A total of 40,000 letters were sent out. In the first hour of the program, 15

     people came forward, and in the first two days 100!! The Amnesty Program will

     last till the end of November 2003.

 

VII. Some interesting bits of info from the university reports:

   UT Arlington: will be offering differentiated tuition; attempt at streamlining

     tenure, post-tenure review

   UT Austin: lost 800 students from fall 02 to fall 03; retention rate stands at 91 %;

     71 % of students graduate within 6 years; due to budget cuts, 700 positions were

     eliminated, including TA positions; no salary increase for faculty and staff

         El Paso: Struggling with ballooning freshman class and faculty hiring freeze

         UT Galveston is having problems with People Soft, because they only have the

           academic version of this program, which is essentially a data warehouse. They  

           realize that they need to add in-house mechanisms to make it workable.

      Pan American: $6.00 tuition increase to provide for 50 to 60 faculty positions; they have had an 11 % increase in their student population, which now is at 16000; they are also looking at evaluating administrators, including deans, the provost, and the president; if found lacking, these individuals will have to undergo a 3-year remediation program.

      Southwester: Trying to figure out how to charge for distant ed.; they feel that distant ed. students shouldn't be charged the typical fees; there were no raises and no firings due to the 7% budget cut.

 

 

XII.          HOOP Policies

 

A.     HOOP 5.2.6- “Information Resources Committee”- This was the second reading of this policy before the Senate.  In a letter sent to members of the Senate, Dr. Mario Diaz expressed his concerns about this policy.  Dr. Diaz said “I am concerned about the proposed medication of HOOP 5.2.6 for the following reasons:

 

1) The document is changing the name of the UNIVERSITY COMPUTING AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE to INFORMATION RESOURCES COMMITTEE. The name that we give to a committee has a particular meaning. In my opinion the new name is diluting the significance and scope of a major educational resource at our institution: computing resources. This is particularly critical because we are first and foremost an educational institution.

2) Secondly the committee is changing its membership from 16 members to 19 members while the number of faculty members stays the same and it is further diluted. The way that this committee is increased in numbers and administrative units represented looks dangerously closed to an organizational vision that resembles corporativism.

3) A major cause for concern in our department is the apparent lack of a mechanism to represent the community of researchers and scientists at our institution that rely very heavily on computing resources.”

Ms. Cantu responded to Dr. Diaz’s concern regarding the membership from 16 members to 19 members by explaining that the Director of the Library, Information Resources, Distance Education, and Media Services are all one person.  Mr. Ferrier has multiple titles.  Thus the membership remains the same.  Ms. Cantu also pointed out that in terms of faculty membership there are currently vacancies on the committee.  She said Dr. Diaz is welcome to nominee someone to sit on the committee.  Dr. Pena said she agreed with Dr. Diaz in terms of the number of faculty who sit on the committee.  She felt the faculty should have more voting power, suggesting that perhaps the committee should be nine and nine.  Dr. Hymson said the number of faculty members should change so faculty has the same number as administration.  Dr. Hymson moved to table.  Mr. Welther seconded the motion.  HOOP 5.2.6 was tabled.

                               B.  HOOP 5.2.9- “Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee- This policy was tabled.

 

XII.          New Business

  There were two items of “New Business”.

·        Ms. Cantu reported that the Information Resources Committee has seven faculty members sitting on the committee.  Two of these members. Bill Berg and Diamond Freeberg would like to continue to serve on the committee. Ms. Cantu entertained a motion to reappoint Bill Berg and Diamond Freeberg to the Information Resources Committee.  Dr. Hymson so moved, with a second from Mr. Welther.  The motion carried.

·        Mr. Welther had a concern regarding degree plans.  He said he had an advisee who started under one degree plan but has not completed his/her degree and eight years have elapsed.  Now he/she is being told that he/she must complete his/her degree under a new degree plan.  Mr. Welther wondered how many students may find themselves in this situation.  Mr. Welther is concerned because in some cases more courses have been added.  Mr. Welther wants to see an expiration date printed on the top of the degree plan.  Dr. Hymson moved to place this issue on a future agenda.  Mr. Welther seconded the motion.  The motion carried.

 

XIV.          Provost’s Report

Dr. Martin had six items in his report.

·        Dr. Martin said he would like to thank those of you and other faculty who have volunteered to participate in the Futures Commission.  All delegates will to the Futures Commission will convene Wednesday, November 19, in the Gran Salon.  Dr. Martin also thanked Ms Ethel Cantu for her willingness to serve as co-facilitator for the Academic Programs group.  The community facilitator will be Dr. Rose Marie Gowan, a physician in our community and a member of the Academic Affairs Partnership Committee.

·        Dr. Martin reported that a total of 35 faculty members have been nominated for the Chancellor’s Council Outstanding Teaching Award.  Actually, about 60 nominations forms were received but some faculty received several nominations.  These faculty members will be receiving letters soon asking them if they wish to accept the nomination.  A distinguished committee of former Chancellor’s Council Award recipients will be appointed early next year to recommend the 2004 recipient.  You will recall that last year’s recipient was Dr. Bill Adams, chair of the History Department.

·        Dr. Martin reported that he just returned from the UT Board of Regents meeting in Austin.  Dr. Martin said the theme of this meeting was tuition deregulation.

·        Dr. Martin reported that the Search Committee for the Dean of Science, Mathematics, and Technology has been appointed and will begin work soon.  Dr. Sylvia Pena has graciously agreed to chair this committee.  Other members are:  Dr. J.R. Iglesias, Dr. Manuel Blanco, Dr. Taeli Yi, Ms. Blanca Lozano, Mr. Pat Wade, Mr. Alfredo Munoz, Dr. Elizabeth Heise, Dr. Michael Lehker, Ms. Rogenna Provenzano, Dr. Manuel Campanelli, Ms. Laura Villarreal, and Dr. Jack Southard.  Also, the Search Committee for the Director of Institutional Research and Planning is hard at work.  Dr. John Ronnau is heading up this committee.  The other members are:  Mr. Doug Arney, Mr. Doug Ferrier, Ms. Natividad Hinojosa, Ms. Cynthia Lerma, Dr. Marilyn Woods, Mr. Terry Jay Phillips, and Ms. Norma Ramos.

·        Dr. Martin reported that the University of Texas Law School Dean Bill Powers will be on campus Wednesday, November 19, at 10 a.m. in the SETB 3rd Floor Conference Room to talk about admission to law school at UT Austin.  Please let your students know and encourage them to attend.  Dr. Martin also said that we plan to have our second Filemon B. Vela Pre-Law Academy this summer, and you’ll be hearing more about this later.

·        Last, Dr. Martin reported that students who have completed 60 hours of coursework are eligible to earn $30 for taking a 45-minute test as part of a pilot study by the UT System.  The top scorer will receive a $1,200 scholarship.  The test will be given on Tuesday, November 25 and Wednesday, November 26, at 1 p.m., 2 p.m., 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. each day.  To register, students can go by the Testing Office, Tandy Hall 216 or send an e-mail to Dr. Pat McGehee at pmcgehee@utb.edu.  Encourage your students to participate.

 

Following the Provost’s Report, Mr. Benton expressed his concern over faculty members who received promotion from associate to assistant professor but only received a 5% raise.  He, as well as others, were under the impression that promotion come with a 10% raise.  Dr. Martin explained that faculty receiving promotion from associate to assistant receive a 5% raise.  All other promotions receive a 10% raise.  Mr. Benton suggested that faculty should be told about this because right now people do not know this. 

 

XIV.          Announcements

 There were no announcements.

 

XV.           Adjournment

The meeting stood adjourned at 5:00 p.m.