UNH Faculty Senate
Summary Minutes from 21 February 2000
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
FACULTY SENATE
FEBRUARY 21, 2000 MINUTES SUMMARY
I. Roll - The following Faculty Senate members were absent: de la Torre,
Hiller, Macieski, and VonDamm. Absent as work to rule were Barretto,
Carr, Christie, Echt, Garland, Givan, Kaye, Planalp, Reardon, Roh, Stine
and Williams. Excused were de Alba, Draper, Finn, Hopkins, and Malarte-
Feldman.
II. Communications with the President - The president said that hazing by
sports teams has been a problem at other universities and that she is
reviewing the situation here as well. She suggested that the senate's
Student Affairs Committee look at how the patterns of alcohol use differ in
the various UNH colleges and also freshmen versus upper-class students.
The president said that the UNH dance company recently gave an excellent
performance entitled Murder on Smuttynose and Duke Ellington meets
Sherlock Holmes. A professor asked if regular updates could be given
about the current informal contract negotiation discussions, and the
president replied that she will inquire about that. Discussion ensued about
whether another fact finder report, which may be the next formal step in the
negotiations, would be useful.
III. Communications from the Vice Chair - The senate vice chair said that
a motion for a constitutional amendment on the election of senate officers
has been sent to the senators on email. In addition, the Agenda Committee
has prepared an alternate amendment and distributed copies at today's
meeting. Three options on the election of senate officers will be discussed
at the next senate meeting: the current wording of the senate constitution,
the first amendment, and the alternate amendment.
IV. Minutes - The minutes of the last Faculty Senate meeting were
approved unanimously.
V. Transportation Policy - The chair of the senate's Campus Planning
Committee said that the committee recommends, in a motion attached to
today's agenda, that no significant transportation changes shall be made
until after an origin and destination study. Estimates for such a study run
from $20,000 to $50,000 or more. Today a professor said that she had just
been notified by an administrator that a study was done in 1992. However,
this study had not been given to the committee by the administrators with
whom this issue was discussed in recent weeks. The professor said that she
is not convinced that an origin and destination study would be cost effective
or give faculty the information needed, and she asked that the motion be
tabled. Another faculty member said that the 1992 report may not have
adequate information and would not be current. He added that having to
park in outlying lots would cost each of us 45 to 60 minutes or more a day,
which mounts up to a very large loss. Asking for more data may not be the
appropriate next step, and this motion would not help us to participate
effectively in the process of deciding about transportation policy at UNH.
The 9/15/99 Sustainable Transportation Trip Report and Recommendations
call for transportation demand management, but what that might be is not
at all clear. Many faculty fear that changes might be made which would
cost them many hours per week in additional commuting time, and faculty
feel that the transportation changes should not be made unless people's
needs can be met.
A motion was made by Deb Winslow and seconded by Ken Appel to
table the motion. The motion to table passed with 20 ayes, no nays, and
6 abstentions; and the transportation motion will be brought to the senate
on March 6. The 1992 report would not reflect the large amount of
construction that has been done on campus since then. The Campus
Planning Committee should find out what the study is and whether or not
it would meet our needs. A student member of the university's
Transportation Policy Committee asked that a member of the Faculty Senate
be appointed to sit on that committee. A certain number of parking spaces
per lot are supposed to be reallocated for handicapped parking, in spite of
the fact that the current handicapped parking spaces are under utilized.
Since 200 to 300 faculty/staff parking spaces would be lost, this should be
considered very carefully.
VI. University Curriculum and Academic Policies Committee - The slate
for this committee will be presented at the next Faculty Senate meeting.
The senate chair is asking faculty members whether they would be willing
to serve, and the provost will work to help faculty be able to do so. Those
faculty who set up the plan for this important committee knew that service
on it may be time consuming, and they asked that some course release be
provided. The provost and the president responded that they needed
flexibility and would negotiate with faculty individually regarding how to
compensate them for service on this committee. Senators should tell their
constituents that such negotiation is expected and that the committee may
be labor intensive. Other faculty said that leaving compensation to be
individually negotiated is unfair, but the faculty who planned the UCAPC
had tried hard to set up a formula for course release and were unable to get
agreement from the administrators. A department chair said that, when the
department has fewer faculty than are needed to teach the necessary
courses, the department would not be able to provide course release with its
own funds.
The Agenda Committee had told the provost that, in the assessment of
faculty performance, there should be a more comprehensive policy
regarding service; and the provost agreed. Following up on that was one of
the charges of the senate's Academic Affairs Committee this year; but since
so many of the committee members have invoked work to rule and refused
to serve, the committee chair said that the Academic Affairs Committee will
not be able to work on this issue. The committee chair noted that the
committee has a very full agenda and is represented on six other committees
and that several of the departments who told their members not to serve
have brought forward proposals to the various committees on which the
Academic Affairs Committee is represented. A faculty member noted that,
although the union contract specifies what faculty pay raises will be,
department chairs might sometimes be able to modify teaching loads and
promotion and tenure to recognize meritorious service but that changing
teaching loads would be difficult in the departments which are short
handed. Perhaps faculty who serve on the UCAPC could be relieved of
other departmental service requirements. Concern was expressed that
individual negotiation might lead to the administration arranging to seat
faculty members favorable to its agenda.
VII. University System - A professor said that we should not recognize the
purview of the university system to review decisions made at UNH.
Another faculty member said that the provost has recently arranged that the
system will not review new programs proposed by UNH.
VIII. Report on Distance Education, Intellectual Property and the
Academic Computing Advisory Committee - The trustees set aside $1.2
million for technology needs at UNH, and the Academic Computing
Advisory Committee is distributing its recommendations and requesting
input at this time. Faculty are asked to review the information on the
committee's web site (http://www.unh.edu/acac), for the details of the
technology plan and the minutes of the committee's meetings. The charge
of this committee, which is chaired by Professor Kent Chamberlin, is to
advise the president and others regarding technology. The committee has
set up five subcommittees on distance education, a technology report card,
student interests, intellectual property rights, and technology access. If any
faculty member is interested in becoming a member of one of the
subcommittees, please contact the subcommittee chair who is listed on the
web site.
The University Policy Manual says that all electronic data, information and
email communications stored on any computer by university students,
faculty and staff will be governed by the same privacy policies pertaining
to telephone conversations and to sealed postal mail. If there is a non-legal,
institutional need to retrieve any form of electronic information, the UNH
President will review the justification of need and will make the final
decision on campus access to private electronic information. Today faculty
expressed concern about what the definition of institutional need is and who
defines it. Faculty also asked whether the statement on privacy applies to
voice mail messages as well, and the Academic Computing Advisory
Committee chair said that he would check on those issues and also on what
would happen if there were a violation of the policy.
The CIS Director of Academic Services said that the academic technology
plan is expected to include enhanced student access, workload changes to
help faculty integrate technology into their classes, better technology in
classrooms, replacement of faculty office computers every four years,
distance-learning projects, and academic technology liaison staff within the
units. Since the legislature rejected the university's request for two percent
of the overall budget to go to technology needs, a $100 student technology
fee may be instituted for both undergraduate and graduate students; and
perhaps technology-based course fees will be waived. Some faculty asked
that more licenses to distribute software be included in the technology plan.
A faculty member asked what safeguards there are for intellectual property
rights in the black-board project. He said that some companies pay students
to take notes, and then faculty lose control of both the quality and the ideas.
A seminar is being planned on intellectual property rights. When course
information programs are interactive, the professor can set up a program to
collect data on how the students have accessed the program.
IX. Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned.