University Governance
FACULTY SENATE
March 26, 2009 – Room #106, Green Hall
(Immediately following 3:30 p.m. University Senate meeting)Approved: 04/09/09
PRESENT: Mary Berry, Melissa Birch, James Daugherty, Ada Emmett, Mark Ezell, Lisa Friis, Joe Harrington, Robert Harrington, Nancy Kinnersley, Man Kong, Liz Kowalchuk, Brent Metz, Bozenna Pasik-Duncan, Barbara Phipps, Gitti Salami, Iris Fischer Smith, Dan Spencer, Jeff Staudinger, John Stratton, Kelli Thomas, Donna Tucker, Lisa Wolf-Wendel. Ex-officio –Danny Anderson, Vice Provost (designee for Provost Richard Lariviere).EXCUSED: David Brackett, Matt Burke, Marta Caminero-Santangelo, Ben Eggleston, Mohamed El-Hodiri, Doug Huffman, Allen Ford, Alice Lieberman, Chuck Marsh, Steve Maynard-Moody, Joyce McCray-Pearson, Jim Orr, Jean Peterson, Jean Phillips, John Staniunas, Rodolfo Torres, Stacey S White, Tony Walton.
(Please let Molly Mulloy know if you were indeed present or excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Molly Mulloy, Governance; Kathy Reed, Governance; Prof. Town Peterson; Prof. Jennifer Church-Duran.
President Nancy Kinnersley called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.
MINUTES for March 12, 2009 were approved.
VOTE: FACULTY SENATE RULES 5.4.4
Lisa Wolf-Wendel/Liz Kowalchuk moved to approve the amendments. Passed. The final text is:
Section 4. Regulation of Enrollment Procedures:
5.4.4 A student may enroll in a course or change class sections after the semester has been in session for four weeks only if the course has met fewer than 25% of the class sessions. The College or a school may adopt a policy setting a shorter period for courses/classes offered by the College or School, provided that the policy is announced in the Timetable Schedule of Classes for the affected term. Students may enroll in courses with rolling start dates (KUCE, independent study, seminars, and internships) with the permission of the instructor at any point in the semester
DISCUSS: AMENDMENTS TO FACULTY SENATE RULES, ARTICLE VI
Kinnersley invited Prof. Mark Ezell, chair of the SPPT Committee (Standards and Procedures for Promotion & Tenure) to explain SPPT’s suggested amendments. Ezell stated that the new language in FSRR 6.1.5.1 and FSRR 6.4.3.4 are meant to clarify that a person denied tenure may not go up again in the 7th (terminal) year. The amendments to FSRR 6.3.2 and 6.3.3 clarify that eligible faculty in a unit should vote on their unit’s promotion and tenure procedures. Kinnersley stated that the amendments will be voted on at the April 9th Senate meeting. The proposed text is as follows:6.1.5.1. Pursuant to Board of Regents policy, the probationary period for tenure track faculty may not exceed seven years. Under this policy, if a faculty member does not receive tenure, the seventh year becomes the terminal year. Consideration of tenure must therefore occur no later than the sixth year, which constitutes the “mandatory review year”. In cases of mandatory reviews resulting in the denial of tenure, no further reviews for tenure shall occur. …
- If a faculty member is denied tenure during the mandatory review year, the decision constitutes a decision of non-reappointment, and the notification of the denial of tenure serves as notice of non-reappointment. In these instances, no further reviews for tenure shall occur. …
6.3.2. Criteria for Review. Each department, college or school, or other administrative unit with responsibility for conducting promotion and tenure review shall adopt by vote of eligible faculty or faculty body written criteria consistent with the university promotion and tenure standards set forth in section 2 of this Article, for evaluating a faculty member’s teaching, scholarship, and service. …
. . .
- Procedures for Review. Each department, college or school, or other administrative unit with responsibility for promotion and tenure review, as well as the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure (UCPT), shall adopt by vote of eligible faculty or faculty body written procedures for the conduct of review. …
Ezell noted that copies of the SPPT Committee’s “General Interpretations of Article VI” guidance document were included in the handouts for today’s meeting.
PROPOSED OPEN ACCESS POLICY FOR KU SCHOLARSHIP
Nancy Kinnersley welcomed Prof. Town Peterson, chair of the Research Committee’s subcommittee on Open Access, as well as subcommittee members Librarian Ada Emmett and Prof. Jennifer Church-Duran. Kinnersley distributed a handout summarizing the comments she had received from more than twenty faculty about the proposal, as well as an email from Prof. Bill Tsutsui expressing concern about certain aspects. She said the proposal would be discussed - but not voted on - today.
Peterson noted that an open access policy is relatively new; KU would be only the 5th or 6th university to develop such a policy, which is modeled on those at Harvard, MIT, and Stanford. He emphasized that it is a faculty initiative that would only apply to articles submitted to academic journals, not to books or to the performing arts. He pointed out that a faculty member can “opt out” for one article or for an entire year. If a publisher accepts the Open Access Addendum form, then the paper is published and appears also in KU ScholarWorks. If the publisher declines, then the paper does not go into ScholarWorks and the faculty member simply “opts out.” Asked why everyone is “in” unless he/she opts “out,” Peterson said this encourages broad participation and provides the advantage of a collective voice. Assisted by a Powerpoint slide presentation, Peterson addressed concerns about copyright, plagiarism, and academic freedom and described the benefits of an Open Access policy.
Unclassified Senate President Paul Farran stated that many unclassified staff do research at KU and might like to have input on the proposal. Ada Emmett responded that at the present time the intention is to include only faculty and their journal articles, not staff or students.
In response to a question, Peterson said units would be asked to report the number of papers published in the Open Access system and the number who opted out. He stressed that there is no compulsory enforcement. Vice Provost Danny Anderson said we need to develop a system that encourages faculty to participate.
Following much discussion, Nancy Kinnersley thanked the guests for their excellent presentation today.No further business.
Respectfully submitted,
Molly Mulloy