Attending: Ruth Allen (Chair), Ray Chin (CSCI), Dring Crowell (Bio), Phil Fastenau (Psych), Gabe Filippelli (Geology), Marvin Kemple for BDN Rao (Physics), Joe Kuczkowski (Assoc Dean), Jon Luke (Math), David Malik (Chem), Kim Nguyen (Assist Dean), Kathryn Wilson (Assoc Dean), Fritz Kleinhans for Kathy Johnson (Sec).
Dean's Report (KW):
The SOS has just participated in the Annual Budget Hearing (campus wide). A hard copy of DS's Budget Hearing Report was distributed to the SOS Steering Committee (SOS SC). As a first step DS prepares an electronic report which he believes contains many ambiguous questions vis-a- vis the SOS, and should be taken with a grain of salt. DS requests the SOS SC meet ASAP to review his budget and give input. At IUPUI, the Sciences do not get more money per Credit Hour than other schools. At some Universities they do and DS has been trying to make this point on campus.
The State Budget Cuts will cost IUPUI about 7 million. The SOS share of this might be 10%.
The SOS will also have a new expense of 225k$ for People Soft to put student information on line. There are the usual problems of inflationary increases in many items e.g. health insurance and utilities.
DM pointed out that useful budget information is available on the web, containing data from Bob Martin. DM will share this with us. There has been some discussion of a flat 26% assessment (tax) in the future for university services to the SOS.
Discussion of results from <Survey on School of Science Lecturer Policies>:
The eventual objective is to rewrite our By-Laws to take into account Lecturers. Changes to the By-Laws require a 2/3 yes mail vote by the SOS faculty. There were some quibbles about the format and wording of questions. These were politely attributed to 'cultural' differences between fields.
Survey Questions
<Should Lecturers be included in the definition of SOS Faculty and be permitted to attend SOS Faculty Assemblies?>
Departmental responses ranged from mixed to a strong yes. The consensus is YES.
<Should Lecturers be permitted to vote on (Any #2/All #3) issues in Faculty Assembly?>
There were a wide range of departmental responses from moderately in favor to strongly against. The SOS SC consensus was NO.
<Should Lecturers participate in voting for SOS Faculty President?>
Departments were largely split or opposed. The SOS SC consensus was NO.
<Should Lecturers participate in Administrative Reviews of Deans and Department Chairs?>
Departmental responses were mixed to in favor. The SOS SC consensus was YES if carefully implemented.
The final question concerned Lecturer participation on the eight standing committees of the SOS. The SOS SC consensus was that it only makes sense if lecturers have full voting rights on committees on which they serve. It was agreed that we are not addressing/trying to change current practice of allowing a Lecturer to substitute for a regular faculty representative.
<Lecturer Committee Participation?>
SOS SC? Consensus NO.
Educational Policies? Departments mixed. Consensus NO.
Nominations and Awards? Consensus YES.
Library Committee? Departments mixed, consensus YES.
CLAS? Consensus NO.
Academic Appeals? Consensus YES.
Technology Committee? Consensus YES.
(The Technology Committee already has two voting student representatives and substantial staff participation.)
Ad Hoc Committees (appointed by Dean)? Consensus YES.
In summary, four standing committees:
Nominations/Awards
Academic Appeals
Technology
Library
have support for Lecturer participation and these will be put to a faculty vote to modify the By-Laws.
There was some discussion of allowing each department to decide whether they want to be represented by lecturers but the consensus was NO if other departments objected. Thus, only the above four committees will be voted on.
The IU Faculty Handbook specifies that non tenure (or tenure track) persons have no more than a 40% vote on University issues. There were mixed views on whether/how this should be implemented for SOS Committees. The consensus was that this is not an issue.
In summary: The faculty should vote on Lecturer (i) SOS Faculty Membership, (ii) Administrative Reviews, (iii) and membership on the four above named committees.
An SC subcommittee of Ray Chin, Dring Crowell, and John Luke was formed to work out the actual language of the proposed By-Laws revisions. They will need an MS Word version of the By-Laws.
Other By-Law Changes:
RA and the SOS SC want to review the cycle of administrative reviews. There was much discussion of whether this should be brought to the faculty at the same time as the Lecturer Questions or later. RA argued for bringing the two issues to the faculty simultaneously in order to get the administrative reviews considered this year. A consensus on this was not reached at the meeting.
We adjourned at noon.
_______________________
Submitted Jan 17, 2003
Fritz Kleinhans for Kathy Johnson
Secretary to the SOS Faculty