The
Faculty Senate Meeting
Union Hall of Honors
Members Present:
College of the Arts: Ki. Davis, T. Lewis, S. Nielsen College of Business: D.
Duhon, T. Green College of Education &
Psychology: T. Hartsell, J. Olmi,
J. Rachal College of Health & Human Sciences: J.
Bethel, S. Hubble College of International and Continuing Education: M.
Miller College of Liberal Arts: D. Cabana, P. Gentile, S. Malone, J.
Meyer, L. Nored, J. Norton, S. Oshrin,
B. Scarborough College of Marine Science: J. Lytle College of
Nursing: K. Masters, A. Brock College of Science & Technology: D.
Beckett, P. Butko, B. Coates, M. Cobb, R. Folse, M. Hall, M. Henry; G. Mattson University
Libraries: T. Graham USM-Gulf Coast: D. Alford, Ka. Davis, J.P.
Smith
Members Represented by Proxy:
Members Absent:
College of Education & Psychology:
E. Lundin
1.0
Call to Order [
2.0
Approval of Agenda: S. Ohsrin, move; S. Hubble, second; Vote: passed
3.0
Approval of Minutes for Feb. 21
meeting; S. Hubble, move; J. Lytle, second; M. Henry offered two changes to
appear in the final draft. Vote: passed.
4.0
Officers’ Reports
4.1 President’s Report: D. Cabana:
[Membership list of handbook committee provided to senators. Committee: Jerome Kolbo (chair), Mary Ann Adams, Vernon Asper,
Chuck Bolton, Don Cabana, Blake Hamm, Stan Kuczaj,
Sherry Laughlin, Robert Lochhead, Farhang
Niroomand, Thomas Payne, Maureen Ryan, Jennifer
Torres, Russ Willis. Advisory Group: Angeline Dvorak,
[Transition team roster provided to FS. Membership: Bucky
Wesley, Susan Siltanen, Brad Bond, Cynthia Moore,
David Anderson, Dana Keith, Casey Turnage, Chuck
Knight, Christy Sanders, Joyce Sanders, Pam Posey, Kara Craig, Don Cabana, Jay
Grimes (co-chair), and Tim Hudson (co-chair).] The team had its first meeting
this morning. Its charge is to examine anything and everything that impacts an
orderly transition to the new organization. The stated goal is to have the
major portion accomplished by mid-April.
I have requested in writing and verbally to meet with provost regarding a
number of items, including the activity report, so we can discuss ways for
faculty and the administration to collaborate on improving it. It should
benefit faculty and be of use to the administration.
I've discussed recently and will discuss this week concerns raised about making
economic development one of the categories for faculty evaluation along with
teaching, research, and service. We need clarification on what economic
development means. In essence, everything the university does is economic
development. It remains nebulous because it's still being worked out in
the minds of administrators.
FS submitted 13 questions regarding the budget. I have met with L. McFall and the provost on this. L. McFall
reviewed the questions and put together possible responses, but that
information has not been forwarded to me. When it is, it will be put before FS.
Senators have communicated concerns regarding summer tuition. My understanding
is that--particularly for graduate students--it will remain the same as last
summer. Full-time enrollment will be dropped to 6 hours [confirmed by M. Ryan].
The deans will define minimum enrollments for summer classes.
D. Alford: Which deans? Outgoing?
D. Cabana: I did not ask.
Also, next Friday, March 28, at 2 pm, FS in conjunction with Staff Council will
have meeting at Stout Hall A. Teresa Hannah from the Health Insurance
Management Board will present on health benefits. She will talk about what's
happening in regard to the state employee insurance pool and what can be done
to deal with that. I think you'll find her comments enlightening on what the
legislature has and hasn't done and what it should and shouldn't do in regard
to health insurance.
M. Henry: Will the credit hour amount remain same, but the cap be removed? Graduate students did pay for up to 9
hours, and then there was a flat fee up to 13. A 12-hour graduate student could
pay up to 50% more. We need to know about that cap.
D. Cabana: I did not discuss that with the provost, but my impression is that
there may not be a cap.
S. Hubble: So, they're talking about removing or keeping the cap?
D. Cabana: My understanding is that the cap may be removed. That's unofficial,
because I don't know that it has been decided.
S. Hubble: So, there would be a range?
D. Cabana: Yes, but I don't know that to be true for certain and won't know
until next week.
S. Hubble: So, now we don't have a cap for summer, but do have it for fall and
spring?
M. Henry: I think that for fall and spring, the cap is board policy.
S. Hubble: Our students are registering for summer school starting next week,
and if they make decisions on what they register for based on what's out there,
I think it will impact enrollment significantly.
D. Cabana: I think that what's going to happen is that the tuition rate will be
the same, but that there will not be a cap that keeps it level after a certain
number of hours.
S. Hubble: Which is what they said last time.
D. Cabana: Right.
M. Henry: Which is significantly increased costs for
hours 10, 11, and 12 for summer school students.
S. Hubble: This is what we've been trying to communicate to our students, so
that they're aware of the change.
4.2 President-Elect’s Report: M. Henry: No report.
4.3 Secretary’s Report: T. Graham: See proxies, above.
4.4 Secretary-Elect’s Report: J. Olmi: No report.
5.0
Committee Reports
5.1 Elections: P. Butko:
The election preparations are well underway. We have compiled a list of
eligible voters, eligible people who can be elected, and now we need to print
the ballots. Expect ballots in your mail box by as early as April 1.
5.2 Transportation: B. Scarborough:
Very few people have signed up for the gated lot, which costs $244 initially.
You have a chance to get a guaranteed spot all year. There are only 63 signed
up. Parking isn't too bad now, but it will be next fall.
A. Young: What will change next fall?
B. Scarborough: Parking is tight every fall.
B. Coates: Where is the lot?
B. Scarborough: West of Hearst Hall. It's been on the Internet.
Regarding the Transportation Committee, the group has been
inoperative since Royce Pierce left, but I'm going to try to find out what's
going on.
6.0
Old Business
6.1 Faculty Activity Report: D.
Cabana: I would like feedback about this report, so that I can have a
meaningful discussion with the provost next week. Feel free to do this in
writing, also, if you have ideas on how to make this a smoother process next
year.
A. Young: In regard to teaching, there needs to be a large expansion. We spend
most of our time teaching, and there's nothing that looks at things like: what
kind of exams to you require, how many papers, who does grading?
D. Cabana: Myron, wasn't there something said at last month's meeting about the
teaching portion?
M. Henry: As I recall, the provost had not seen the part that
J. Norton: We were told that that information was being collected through
another mechanism.
A. Young: Grade distribution, student reviews, and other things should go in.
M. Hall: They suggested that we put information not covered elsewhere in the
comments section, but that section is limited in length. Also, they should
circulate an example copy or perhaps add clarifications in the form.
S. Nielsen: There seem to be glitches. They left out department and other
committees. We spent a lot of time as a unit looking at where we should put
activities. Service to the profession really isn't in there, just memberships.
Often our service is workshops, but there was no place for them. It was
confusing the way they had it laid out.
P. Butko: Why isn't there a window within each
category for putting in all other things not covered elsewhere? Also, we all do
our work differently, and units have different missions and things they should
achieve. I don't see why the form can't be branched. The form could ask which
college I belong to, and when I click on the appropriate one, it provides a
form that pertains only to what I do, appropriate questions. Start with the
colleges, and perhaps even by department. Chairs should look at what questions
should be asked for their departments.
S. Nielsen: Great idea.
J.P. Smith: A common complaint is the time it takes. It took me 50 minutes, and
I wasn't trying to be exhaustive. Some people related that it took as long as 3
hours. Peter's suggestion might help that, and it might contextualize things.
It would help matters to compare faculty with people who do like things.
D. Alford: I object to doing this with no way to describe the conditions under
which we're working. I included comments on how in our department 3 of 5
faculty members have left in the past 18 months. They haven't asked about our
having to cover classes of people who left, how many preparations we have,
writing letters of recommendation for those leaving, and evaluating references
for those applying. This doesn't capture the stress that we're under in coping
with all of the changes. Also, it's irritating to have to go back and put
punctuation between each name; [it doesn’t retain the formatting of a list].
B. Scarborough: The fundamental objection is that if this will be used to
evaluate faculty for all of these other reasons, then it has to be done at the
departmental level. For example, a senior faculty member will be on committees,
but not read many convention papers. New faculty will serve on few committees,
and read many papers. Only the department can understand that. If we're officers
in national committees, the people in administration don't know what these
things are. The question on international accomplishments of students that
you've taught in the last year is ridiculous, because it takes many years for a
student to develop and achieve. I taught Jimmy Buffett
back in the late 60s, but I didn't teach him last year.
Ki.
D. Alford: I put every student who got into the honor society.
M. Hall: Are there not some legalities involved in
putting the names of students in a public document?
D. Cabana: Valid question.
B. Coates: Serving as PI for a grant that you didn't write doesn't count. That
is a big gap.
S. Nielsen: In once instance, I wrote a grant and wasn't the PI, on others I
didn't write it and was the PI. The time spent as PI is tremendous.
J. Olmi: Also, unfunded grant efforts don't count.
You spend a couple weeks writing, and there's a 12% probability of funding, so
that should be acknowledged.
M. Henry: If we're going to suggest redesigns, then instead of getting all of
the teaching information on enrollments from PeopleSoft, there should be a
major window right on the form. It should be expansive, since it's most of what we do, and there should be an opportunity
to talk qualitatively as well as quantitatively.
Ki.
A. Young: We prepare students to go deliver a paper. There's no credit
for that.
R. Folse: It may be that the report is accurate in
showing what certain administrators view as the benefit of teaching: the credit
hours/money generated.
M. Ryan: I will share with the provosts the important concerns you've shared.
In terms of the details of design, it would help if you would present revisions
in writing. I would be concerned, however, that if it’s so specific it will
take twice as much work to fill out. I understand that the main question is what's the purpose of it, but I'm not sure that as a faculty
member I would want an instrument that is so discrete in detail that I would
spend 2 or 3 times more time completing it. I'll make sure that the important
things get shared, and the detailed suggestions would be welcome in a written
form.
D. Cabana: We'll forward these concerns in writing to the provost.
P. Butko: It wouldn't be twice as much. I'm working
under the impression that the provost gave that sooner or later it will replace
our department or faculty evaluations. If we reach the level of specificity
that my chair requires, then I hope I won't have to deal with another paper
within the department.
M. Cobb: Under the teaching category under independent studies, the only box
that I saw was for undergraduate students, and we deal almost exclusively with
graduate students in independent studies.
Ki.
J. Rachal: I share Maureen's concern that this thing
could get too complex and discrete. I don't think that it will supercede the
current document, and think that we'll do both for a while. I'm sympathetic to
concerns that there are things missing, but I would rather it be simpler than
it is, and then attach the annual evaluation letter.
Ki.
J. Rachal: I think that Raymond is right: how much
money are you worth to the university?
7.0
New Business
7.1 Economic Development as a 4th Evaluation Category: D. Cabana: This is on the agenda for discussion so
that I can take responses to the provost.
J.P. Smith: This, along with the librarian issue, gives me the sense that young faculty are beginning to feel that they don't
know what to expect and the rug is being pulled from under them. People that
should be staying and building a career here, I'll be searching for again. I'm
concerned about the impact of this one-thing-after-another for junior faculty
who may not wait to see how all of this works out.
B. Scarborough: This is the most outrageous thing I've ever heard of. It is by
my count the 8th event that the administration has done without consulting
faculty. The idea of making economic development equal to teaching, research,
and service is a unique idea among institutions of higher learning. I don't
know what they mean by economic development. If they mean large grants and
inventions, most of us don't do that. To implement this with no input from
those affected by it is outrageous and continues a litany of things that the
administration has done since it came to office.
D. Cabana: Let me read to you what I have written to the provost regarding that
issue: "While I have not seen any written communication, there has been
considerable discussion concerning economic development as now one of four
criteria for evaluating faculty achievement, the other three being the
traditional areas of teaching, service, and research. There is clearly a need
to define 'economic development' in the academic setting. What does it mean,
for example, for someone teaching in the Arts as opposed to someone in the
Biological Sciences? Isn't everything the university does, after all, part of a
continuing process of economic development in the state, from advancing
knowledge of literature to enhancing cultural activities, from engaging in
scientific research to uncovering clues to our anthropological ancestry? This
is an issue that clearly requires meaningful discussion and clarification
before going forward."
My argument will continue to be that everything that university is about is
economic development. To say that Jay Dean's symphony orchestra performances
are not about economic development, to say that the writing project in the
English department is not about economic development is to grossly oversimplify
the process.
S. Nielsen: The problem with this 4th evaluation category is that they're just
looking at grant and other money. That's not what economic development is
totally about, and that's not what I was hired to do. We all have different
abilities and there aren't enough grants. They're trying to make us
carbon copies of one another.
M. Miller: I've been a practitioner and professor of economic development for
25 years, and I don't know what they're talking about. As far as I can
ascertain, it's a very naive view of what economic development is. There's so
much that we don't know about economic development, but one of the true things
we know is that its foundation is education from pre-elementary through higher
education. What faculty members do in their own area is more important than the
relatively small amount of grant money they bring in. Also important is the
community preparation, community foundation to bring in the executives or
highly trained people we need who are attracted because it's a nice community.
Folks in the Arts and those who teach in other areas provide this. I don't see
this [evaluation measure] as an appropriate view of economic development. I
think that we need to communicate to the legislature and population as a whole
how we contribute to economic development. I think that this [evaluation
measure] clouds the issue.
J. Rachal: We should consider some kind of formal
objection to the way it was imposed on us. The things that I see as economic
development (mostly grants) are already covered in research and service. There
are research and service grants. The whole thing stinks, because of the way in
which it was imposed.
D. Duhon: Is this just another rumor? You can't
change the rules of evaluation in mid-stream. Is this for 2003? If so,
then the handbook has to be changed. What stage is this in?
D. Cabana: I haven't seen anything in writing. It's on the agenda because faculty are talking to me about it, and because I'd like to
hear what others have heard. As far as I'm concerned, it is in the
rumor/discussion stage.
Ki.
S. Hubble: According to IHL, there are no state-funded institutions. There are
state-supported institutions. That's everywhere that the state can't provide
all that's needed. The state is just one of the sources of our funding.
Ki.
S. Hubble: There's talk about incentives, but then the focus shifts to
generating money instead of teaching.
Ki.
D. Cabana: The legislatures around the country are cutting the amount that they
devote to supporting public universities. UM saw its percentage of state funding
decrease by 25% in 5 years. This puts increasing pressure on the fund-raising
and grant writing part of the process. Lottery sales have been put to
education, but then previous education money is diverted.
M. Henry: We shouldn't sell ourselves short in regard to instruction.
Instruction is the fundamental revenue generator. Also, it supports
auxiliaries. So, there is fundamental revenue generation done by all of you.
J. Rachal: So, really economic development is in all
three: teaching, research, and service.
D. Alford: I see a shift in values: a board made up of business people who
can't think in terms of a public institution. The only metaphor they know is
how rich the institution is. It's a shift in what education means when we're
being run by business people.
D. Duhon: I need to defend the business people a
little. The board is about half business people and about half other
professions. I not sure that the board is driving as many
changes as we may think. It's not just the board.
M. Miller: We owe
D. Duhon: Is this economic development for evaluation
for real, and if so what does the administration mean by it? Those are
the key questions.
S. Hubble: If the administration needs this information, then we need to define
it ourselves and provide information on how we contribute to economic
development. Then let public relations promote it and help the public
understand what we do.
M. Henry: Most tax support comes to this institution because parents and
students believe that there will be quality instruction here. Tax support,
tuition, and fees almost go hand-in-hand. People come here for instruction.
Ka.
Ki.
J.P. Smith: To evaluate the economic impact of this or any other university, go
to people like Michael Olivier. In
M. Henry: Looking at the linkage between the activity report, economic
development as a 4th category, and librarians as faculty, there's a package
here of process. Somehow, we need to focus on process, more engagement by FS
and faculty at large on some of these fundamental issues. They're all linked.
They're all coming about with virtually no input from FS or faculty at large.
B. Scarborough: Stress that when you talk to the administration [D. Cabana].
7.2 Deans Search: D. Duhon: For the College of
Business and Economic Development, we have 19 applicants. One is internal, and
the other 18 are external. We've had a couple of meetings. It's slow and we're
not making the progress we thought. This is partly because we haven't seen the
quality we'd like. We have permission to run a separate ad in places other than
the Chronicle. The consensus is that it will be very difficult to complete a
successful search by July 1. Most people don't think we can do it, but we're
going to try. The goal of having interviews sometime in April already has been
pushed back. I don't think that will happen.
J. Meyer: I'm on Arts and Letters. I've been surprised by the quality of
applicants and their diversity. There are a number of disciplines represented.
We do wonder how it will happen so quickly. We have a method for evaluating
candidates and narrowing to 3, 4, or 5. We have at least 21 applicants. One
goal is to do this before people leave in mid-May.
S. Hubble: I think that M.F. Nettles is on the
D. Cabana: I am told that the
M. Hall: I'm not on this committee, but what I've heard would support what
you've said. My understanding is that it is hard to get people to apply,
because we are advertising for a fund raiser rather than someone to run a
college.
D. Duhon: There may have been confusion, because
there was one big ad for all of the searches.
J.P. Smith: It suggests something if you're looking for all those deans.
D. Duhon: We thought that we needed separate ads.
D. Beckett: In response to what Margot [Hall] said, the minutes state that
"we won't hire any dean who can't connect with the community and raise
money." There is a paradigm shift.
S. Nielsen: So, what is the Foundation doing if the deans will be fund raisers?
7.3 Faculty Handbook: D. Cabana: The
committee has met twice, and is scheduled to meet on Monday. Tentatively, it
will meet every Monday until the process is finished. The tentative completion
date is the end of June. Because of inquiries directed to me by the faculty, I
inquired of the provost how the committee was resurrected and put together.
Provost Grimes said he was responsible for putting it together. You have a copy
of the handbook committee. [See item 4.1] S. Hubble and M. Forster are on the
committee, but don't appear on list. I added S. Oshrin
and Patsy Anderson to serve. If you look at the committee, at first glance it
looks top heavy with administrators if you consider department chairs as
administrators. The provost and Jerome Kolbo (who
chairs the committee) readily agreed to add additional faculty members. This
Monday we should have a clear sense of where we're going and what we should be
doing in terms of revising the handbook. My sense is that a number of revisions
that S. Hubble and others made were never incorporated into the handbook.
S. Hubble: We were on the fast track to make our changes by the beginning of
last summer, so we could get it approved and on the Web. We could check with
Dr. Hollandsworth to see, but I don't think that
happened.
D. Cabana: That's my impression.
J.P. Smith: I'm not volunteering for this, but they need a couple people from
the Coast on that committee.
D. Cabana: That's a point well taken.
K. Masters: Patsy Anderson is on the Coast.
D. Cabana: Patsy and Tom [Payne] are, but there's good reason to add another
Coast member.
M. Henry: I would hope that we could get a commitment to get this to FS to look
at in draft form. I get the feeling that this is a more important document that
it was a few years ago. It covers a lot of the policy and process, and we need
to understand that.
D. Cabana: Jerome [Kolbo], would you like to speak to
the handbook committee process?
J. Kolbo: I can say that it has been brought up that
we'd bring it back to FS. I intend to to that, and
hope to get the rest of the committee to follow that.
A. Young: The deadline is this summer, and that will be a difficult time.
J. Kolbo: That's a good point. We've set July 1 as a
goal to have a draft, but there is a question of whether all of the chapters
will be complete then. It is a large committee and getting larger (but no
argument about the additions). I don't see a reason why we can't give plenty of
time to FS to review it. We weren't given the deadline by J. Grimes or T.
Hudson.
D. Cabana: It would be Myon's call, but I suspect
that if time did become of the essence, we could come back into session in
August.
J. Kolbo: We do want this to move as quickly as
possible. We don't want it to drag out. But I have no intention of something
like this being pushed through during the middle of summer when people are
gone.
7.4 Summer Tuition: D. Cabana: Other
comments on this?
M. Miller: There are some programs that are almost entirely in the summer.
There are huge impacts on some programs.
J. Rachal: If income is increasing in the summer,
then should we also talk about increases in faculty remuneration in the summer.
D. Duhon: As a whole, we shouldn't be opposed to the
change to no caps. We get no state support for summer; it's totally
self-supporting. We're paying our own way. A person who is taking 12 hours and
paying for 9 is getting a free ride on the faculty. That's the way that private
institutions work, and that's essentially what we are in the summer. We should
be cognizant of the impact, however, and make it gradual.
M. Miller: I agree that it's complicated, but it's another example of an issue
that wasn't discussed and simply imposed with large and irregular results.
D. Cabana: If it results in a decline in summer enrollment then it could be
self-defeating.
A. Young: We were told in our departmental meeting with J. Grimes that summer
tuition would no longer go to the college, but would be pooled university-wide.
If my classes are filled and others' aren't, then I'd like to know how money is
distributed. Can we get information on that? Has anyone heard anything?
D. Cabana: I'll ask on Monday at my meeting with the provost.
S. Hubble: I don't think the time is right to ask for salary increases for
summer. It could result in someone not being allowed to work fulltime.
J. Rachal: My comment was really in jest. I know that
won't happen, but I thought it was an interesting correlation that summer
tuition goes up, but pay doesn't.
7.5 Enrollment Minimums for Graduate Classes: D. Cabana: I've covered this, but if there's other feedback, I'd be
glad to hear it. This is another point to be covered on Monday with the
provost. The issue is whether there will be hard and fast minimums for
enrollment for graduate classes. If that becomes the case, in tandem with the
tuition measure, junior faculty, in particular, will find themselves struggling
if classes do not meet.
M. Henry: With these two together, we have a recipe for reduced graduate
enrollments for summer.
J. Olmi: Graduate enrollments, in general, I would
suggest. With our program, we only have 6 enrollments a year, so it would be
impossible for us to function with any minimum enrollment. Our group travels as
a cohort through the program.
D. Alford: When you have a doctoral clinical program where you have extensive
individual supervision of clinical work, and they say that you have a minimum
of 10 for a graduate class, then you up it to 10 and take on clinical liability
for too many students for a particular period? This is a serious issue, to set
minimums without looking at what the program does. You have to see clinical
students individually as well as in a group for the licensing qualifications to
be met.
M. Henry: It seems like one of the messages ought to be that it's okay to have
average enrollments across the college, but the college or department ought to
have some flexibility to make some choices in averaging. To have one class of
15 and another of 5, and then drop the 5, that's a different approach.
J. Olmi: I think that the decision should rest with
department heads and deans. Under no circumstance would I advocate limit
setting at any level, because that's too potentially restrictive.
D. Cabana: Unofficially, in conversations with the provost, his inclination was
to think that those decisions would be made at the college level. Monday, we'll
talk about it more officially and get a factual commitment.
D. Duhon: Back to what A. Young said, department's
have to have some control over budgets to make it work. You can't have A
without having B.
7.6 Faculty Status for Librarians: D. Cabana: Toby will cover this and
may yield any part of his time to librarians in the audience.
T. Graham: This morning an email was distributed to librarians that came from
one of our colleagues at another institution, and it echoes some of what came
out of a meeting that the librarians on the
I can't think of a single benefit to the university from taking away
faculty status, rank, and tenure from librarians. It won't save any money, but
it will be a real blow to the effectiveness of library services at USM. A few
of the librarians got together this morning to draft a resolution:
Whereas,
it has been reported that Provost Grimes at the March 19 meeting of the IHL
Chief Academic Officers raised the issue of eliminating faculty status for
university librarians; and
Whereas,
high quality information sources and services are essential for supporting
learning and research that take place as a part of the academic enterprise; and
Whereas,
faculty status, faculty rank, and tenure for librarians is key for maintaining
effective library service from the standpoints of: 1) academic freedom, 2)
recruitment and retention of high caliber information professionals, and 3)
providing a platform for working collaboratively with other faculty in
instruction and research; and
Whereas,
librarians at the
Whereas,
the essence of what librarians do is more akin to the teaching, research, and
service activity of faculty than it is to what professional staff do in other
areas of the university; and
Whereas,
starting librarians earn $34K for 12 month contracts (the equivalent of $25,500
for a 9-month contract), and eliminating faculty status would result in
negligible cost savings; and
Whereas,
by July 1 the library will have a 33% reduction in its faculty if no positions
are filled, and a loss in faculty status, rank, and tenure for librarians will
certainly result in additional resignations; and
Whereas,
if and when hiring resumes, it will be extremely important to fill the vacant
positions with the high quality of librarians that the academic community has
come to expect,
We,
the Faculty Senate of the
One
other thing that I would like to share with you is an excerpt from a joint statement
on faculty status of college and university librarians approved in conjunction
by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), American
Association of University Professors (AAUP), and the Association of American
Colleges (AAC): "Where the role of college and university librarians
requires them to function essentially as part of the faculty, this functional
identity should be recognized by granting of faculty status . . . The function
of the librarian in the processes of teaching and research is the essential
criteria for faculty status."
J.P. Smith: Move to suspend the rules; J. Olmi,
second; vote: passed.
7.7 Resolution on Faculty Status, Rank, and Tenure for Librarians
[Audience members invited to join discussion.]
Jim Martin: I'm proud of the
librarians in this resolution. I had nothing to do with it. I think it speaks
well for what we think of our role in the university, and the fact of the
matter is that I'm just too tired to make much of a contribution at this point.
As most of you know, I'm stepping down at the end of June. It's my vote of no
confidence in the administration. I think that librarians contribute in so many
ways to the academic enterprise. It's hard to say what would the most important
argument for this resolution. This group needs to go on record saying that you
want library services, and you expect it as part of the academic enterprise.
Otherwise, we'll keep going down a spiral where one area after another keeps
getting degraded and ultimately will have much less of an institution than we
have now. There's no benefit to changing the status of librarians. I think this
administration has read the book, "if it's not
broken, break it." That's what they're attempting.
Sherry Laughlin: I want to speak to the recruitment issue. I've chaired all
kinds of search committees over the years. It's difficult to recruit people; we
don't have much to offer. Our salaries are extremely low, but this faculty
status is something librarians consider as extremely important.
T. Graham: I would echo that. When I was considering coming to USM about 4.5
years ago, I had other more lucrative opportunities elsewhere. One of the
things that led me to choose to come here was that USM offers faculty status,
rank, and tenure for librarians, and there was an opportunity work with
instructional faculty as colleagues. I'm not the only person who feels this
way, and the kind of librarians that USM wants to attract will have compatible
feelings on this.
D. Alford: Kathy [
T. Lewis: I operate a museum studies program, which has one professor right
now. We would be lost without the support of the library faculty for research
methods and also for exhibitions. The “Faces of Freedom Summer” [photographic
exhibition] was developed essentially by the library, through the research of
the library, and if we were to lose librarians as faculty colleagues, we would
be all the weaker for that.
J. Rachal: What hurts the library hurts us. We need
to stand in solidarity with the librarians on this issue. The fact that as of
July 1 they will be down a third of their total workforce is a frightening one.
If that continues to get worse, it will affect us, generally. I also would
point out that two of the former presidents of FS are sitting in this room, and
they are librarians.
Tom Richardson: From the perspective of the
B. Coates: I guess the most important reason that you have tenure is to protect
academic freedom. I think that academic freedom is as important for the library
as it is for the rest of the faculty, because in collaborative efforts between
faculty and librarians, if librarians don't have academic freedom that's
protected by tenure, that could affect [faculty outside the library]. This
would be a deterioration of academic freedom.
M. Hall: Also, the professional
credentialing, professional development, and education of librarians is more on
par with the rest of the faculty. Would that be something that you'd like to
mention in your resolution?
T. Graham: We could add that to the resolution.
J. Rachal: That's already in the resolution.
M. Hall: I was thinking of educational preparation. These people are experts.
D. Duhon: I thought we put this issue to bed about 5
years ago. Faculty status was granted by Dr. Lucas about 20 years ago, and 4-6
years ago faculty rank was given. Is the question about academic rank or
status? The same thing happened about 5 years ago with traditional non-academic
areas, such as the research institutes at Stennis and
Ocean Springs. We looked at that and decided that these were faculty-type
positions, and we gave people full status. Is the provost looking at other
things besides the library? Why just the library?
J. Martin: We don't know. There's a huge vacuum, between what's going on and
when we find out. We had to find out from a colleague whose administrators
related the information. We don't have real communication right now with the
administration, for whatever reason, so we can only guess. My guess is that
they're looking at further reorganization. They probably want to put the
library outside of academic affairs, and it's awkward that librarians have
faculty status. They make these decisions at the highest level trying to solve
high-level problems, and they have no idea of the reality of what they're
dealing with. I did get involved in December when they discovered that we have
faculty status. They criticized me for having librarians cataloging and on the
service desk. They wanted them all in the classroom and said “let the students
do the other work.” They weren't interested in what we do, how we do it, or any
of the little detail of our whole lives. They were interested in solving big
problems, and [as a result] creating a nest of problems for the rest of us.
B. Scarborough: I agree with everything that's been said, and it doesn't look
like there's much of a debate here. I suggest that Toby move the adoption of
the resolution. I would like to point out that this is the 9th planning of a
dictatorial policy by the administration. I think we need to think very
seriously pretty soon about a resolution of no confidence. I'll introduce it.
M. Henry: So much has been said about librarians, already, but I had personal
experiences working with Bobs Tusa [retired
University Archivist] on the “Faces of Freedom Summer.” If you don't think
that's a real contribution to the university, you haven't looked at it. I know
that other activities go on like that among our library faculty, as well. I've
worked with one or two of them in the uses of technology in the learning
process. These are significant things. I hope we'll support this motion
unanimously. Also, there has to be a message delivered that this is enough of
this type of unilateral approach to activities and issues in the academy. It's
very difficult for something like this [library faculty question] to come out
this way, to hear about our leadership pushing something at the state level
that really affects faculty at large. What do we say? How do we do it?
S. Hubble: To follow up on John's comment, we've had past presidents from the
library and have Toby in the leadership. Those are elected positions by the FS,
and if that doesn't speak for the faculty as a whole that librarians are
colleagues as faculty with the appropriate rank, status, and tenure-track, I
think that needs to be reiterated to the administration. Those individuals have
been effective and were elected representatives and officers.
J.P. Smith: There's a big philosophical issue here. We're having an explosion
of information of varying quality. Every person in the state of
D. Alford: I would like to insert the word censorship along with academic
freedom. There's nothing more fearsome than thinking of, in the state we live
in, censoring the type of books we have in our library. Without tenure, our
librarians are at great risk of being fired immediately for the purchases they
make. That's the bottom line: censorship.
T. Graham: I'm comfortable with making that addition, absolutely.
D. Cabana: If Toby will make a proposal, the chair will entertain a motion for
unanimous consent, which sends out the strongest message possible.
T. Graham: I would like to thank FS for the support communicated today, and I
know that my colleagues in the library faculty feel the same way about that. I
move that we adopt the resolution.
S. Nielsen: Second.
Vote: Passed by unanimous consent. [Text of the resolution as adopted is
available at: reslibrarians03.htm]
7.8 April Meeting: D. Cabana: The April meeting will be on the Coast.
I've talked to J. Lytle about having it at GCRL. I'd like some sense from FS on
whether that would be acceptable. It might be a worthwhile educational venture.
[Senators inquired about the nature of GCRL.]
J. Lytle: The GCRL is the major campus in Ocean Springs. The
B. Scarborough: What time? Same as usual? That's a
problem for people who have a
J. Lytle: If we meet at the MEC, there's the aquarium and you could bring your
children.
D. Cabana: Judy and I will work this out and communicate the details to you by
Tuesday. Acceptable?
7.9 Housing for Provosts: D. Cabana: I wish to include this in the
agenda because of a number of expressions of concern and questions being raised
regarding housing for the provosts. I've discussed this with the president,
both provosts, and board members. The board directed that both houses undergo
renovations. There is a house for the director of the Marine Science Institute
(J. Grimes). There is the house that traditionally has been the
vice-president's house on the
B. Scarborough: This is the renovation cost?
D. Cabana: Yes. These houses are university/board property, and the board
directed that they be renovated. It directed and agreed to housing being
provided for the provosts. The
B. Scarborough: If T. Hudson will live in the
D. Cabana: J. Grimes.
M. Henry: It's common to provide housing for presidents, but rare for provosts.
In a time when we have to sacrifice, it should come at all levels. We should
share the sacrifice. On the surface, it appears that you have a different kind
of sharing going on here, where certain individuals get to live rent-free. This
is not the rule at most universities; it is the exception, let alone for
two.
J.P. Smith: The rationale is that the house at
D. Alford: With a $4K bath tub? There's $1K for plumbing to put the tub in and
all brass fixtures. The style of this renovation is so outrageous; it is
absolutely unacceptable. Our students eat their lunches in a log cabin and are
told that there's no money for a decent cafe.
D. Duhon: The director of the research center has
been provided housing for a long time. J. Grimes happens
to be in that house. [The
D. Alford: Again, it's how these decisions are being
made. We had $72K turned down for a simple addition of 6 rooms for clinical
meetings where privacy is required. I was told that the money wasn't available,
even though there's $85K available [for the provost's house].
B. Coates: Maybe the house should be a faculty club.
Ki.
M. Henry: The house at the GCRL did have other uses, before Dr. Grimes moved
in. But there has been a lot of reorganization going on. Maybe the university
should look at other types of reorganization, including use of university facilities.
J. Olmi: Point of clarification: the board directed
this activity?
D. Cabana: Yes. The board members visited both houses and directed that the
houses be renovated and made available as part of the perks package for the
provosts. To clarify, the houses are not rent-free, because they have to be
occupied compliance with IRS regulations. It does impact the provost salary to
comply with federal tax law.
R. Folse: They're using the Enron model. That's
number 10.
Ka.
D. Cabana: I will continue to pursue the appropriate data concerning the house
for Provost Grimes, if FS continues to be interested in that process.
8.0
Adjournment [