|
 |
Minutes for November 9, 2005
A meeting of the University Senate was held at 4:15 p.m. on Wednesday, 9 November 2005, in Maxwell Auditorium.
Present were: Vice Chancellor Freund; Senators: Anderson, Behm, Bender, Bennett, Biklen, Boujerdi, Carter, Chan, Chen, Cihon, Cleary, Cohan, Crawford, Crowston, Diaz, Doyle, Erdman, Elin, Engstrom, Faiola, Feree, Ferguson, Flusche, Freund, Gabel, Gensemer, Glauser, Himes, Himley, Hogan, Hollenback, Horacek, Horlings, Hurd, Jeneault, Jensen, Johnson, Kasowitz-Scheer, Kelly, Kenn, Khalifa, Kornfilt, LaGraff, Lantier, Lasch-Quinn, Letterman, Lipson, MacInnes, Mager, Masrouri, Middlemiss, Moore, Murphy, Notas, O'Rourke, Pasqualoni, Patteson, Phelps, Potter, Rosenzweig, Samson, Sauer, Senecah, Sharp, Shipley, Smith (C.R.), Sokolf, Sternlicht, Strodel, Thompson, Urtz, Van Gulick, Wallace, Walter, Ware (B.), Ware (E.), Webber, Wells, Wilcox, Willett, Wolf, Zhang.
Presiding Officer: Vice Chancellor Deborah Freund
In the absence of the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor Freund called the meeting to order, and proposed that the minutes of the October 12th meeting be approved, with the following clarification: the pronoun "she" should be substituted for "he" in referring to the Chancellor (bottom of p. 3779). The minutes were approved. The Vice Chancellor then called Prof. Carter to report for the Agenda Committee
Prof. Carter said that he had no formal report, but he made a motion to change the order of the day's agenda, placing the report of the Academic Affairs committee last, and renumbering the other reports appropriately, so that the Budget committee report was IV and the Committee on Instruction V. On motion duly made and seconded, the body voted to change the order of the agenda.
The Vice Chancellor then asked that all non-senators wait outside the auditorium while the Senate discussed and voted on the nominations for honorary degrees. She called Ms. Judith O'Rourke to present the report of the Committee on Honorary Degrees, which included a motion to approve the names on the list. A Senate member rose to praise the committee for its good work. The motion carried.
The Vice Chancellor called Prof. Mager to present the report of the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Affairs, which included the fall budget revision, information about the budget process as SU migrates into RCM, and an update on the activities of the Budget committee. A senator asked for an update on the plan for shadow budgets for the 2005-6 fiscal year. Prof. Mager said that as of November 14th the 2005-6 budget would be displayed in RCM format for the first time in the Budget committee, and that it would then go to the deans. He said that on March 29th a full meeting of the Senate would be devoted to a presentation of the RCM budgeting process. In response to a question about what happens in the committee vis-a-vis the RCM committee, Mager said that the Senate committee invited various persons from departments, colleges, and auxiliaries, to discuss their needs, but that the RCM committee was a separate entity.
The Vice Chancellor called Prof. Hemphill, chairman of the Committee on Instruction, who asked Prof. Elet Callahan to briefly report on the progress of the Vice Chancellor's committee on Academic Integrity (VPCAI). Prof. Callahan reviewed the committee's work, and directed senators to the committee's materials on the web available at http://myslice.syr.edu/. She said that Senate members and others could also make comments via http:://provost.syr.edu/integrity_commentform.asp She urged Senate members to read the materials prior to the January Senate meeting, at which the Committee on Instruction would be bringing recommendations for action.
The Vice Chancellor called Prof. Louise Phelps to present the report of the Committee on Academic Affairs, which included a motion, as follows:
The Syracuse University Senate approves changes in the language of
the Faculty Manual regarding timing for tenure review as shown in the
chart comparing the current language [left column] with the proposed language,
to be effective immediately for all untenured faculty, with the exception of
those currently under formal tenure review.
She gave a brief history of how the motion evolved into its present form, and said that the changes would permit all tenure-track faculty members to choose when to initiate a tenure review, provided the review be completed at least by the end of the sixth year of tenure track service at SU.
Prof. Sari Biklen rose to read a statement from Prof. Don Mitchell, Chairman of the AFT committee, as follows:
The AFT committee takes no position on the proposal as a whole. The committee is concerned that a new form of exploitation, quite similar to what already exists, is licensed by this proposal--it licenses unfair comparisons: those being reviewed after 5 years against those being reviewed after more (up to 11). This does exist now (because faculty do come here from outside with uncounted years of service), and so the current proposal addresses one inequality (difference between faculty coming from outside or "converted"). The Senate should be charged with developing guidelines for tenure review that protect the interests of those hired directly by SU without service elsewhere.
The AFT committee is deeply concerned about the ongoing possibilities for exploitation of non-tenure track, part time and similar faculty and about the development of permanent non-tenure track positions (e.g., the Professor of Practice). We call on the Senate to formulate strict guidelines for the employment and treatment of non-tenure track temporary faculty and to ban the hiring of non-tenure track permanent faculty.
She commented that women were particularly vulnerable in this situation
In the discussion, the comments made and questions raised included:
- that the staff rank of professor of practice [3/4 academic] has been used for many years;
- that the issue of the professor of practice rank got mixed in with the tenure timing issue, and that this was misleading;
- comment that tenure was not wedded to a particular status, e.g., some universities have tenured pti's;
- suggestions that the deadline be specified in the policy, if it was going to be published in the Faculty Manual.
After considerable discussion and clarification, the motion carried. A senator rose to ask for a division of the house [55 in favor; 7 opposed; 3 abstentions], and it was noted that the motion passed without a quorum.
Under new business, a senator asked that the following resolution be put on a future agenda:
The SU Senate hereby reaffirms the unwavering commitment of Syracuse University to the freedom of expression and the rejection of any content-based forms of censorship;
The Senate acknowledges that there may be restrictions on speech that goes beyond mere speech to concrete action, such as incitements to immediate violence or verbal threats directed at specific individuals employing clearly understood 'fighting words';
However, the Senate reaffirms Syracuse University's long tradition of protecting the intellectual and artistic expression of all ideas without restriction on their content, even ideas that other members of the University may find not only wrong but deeply repugnant. The Senate affirms that the correct response to such ideas is vigorous and reasoned opposing speech rather than sanctions or prohibitions on their expression.
The chairman of the Agenda Committee said that the matter would be taken up at a future meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Teresa Gilman
University Senate Recorder
|
