Oakland University Senate
Thursday, January 17, 1980
Fifth Meeting
3:00 p.m.
128, 129, 130 Oakland Center
MINUTES
Senators Present: Bertocci, Boulos, Burke, Cherno, Chipman, Christina, J. Eberwein, R. Eberwein, Edgerton, Evans, Feeman, Garcia, Gardner, Ghausi, Grossman, Hammerle, Hetenyi, Hitchingham, Horwitz, Jones, Kleckner, Kohn, Matthews, McMahan, Miller, Moeller, Mourant, Obear, Otto, Partmann, Pettengill, Riley, Russell, Schmidt, Shantz, Shepherd, Stevens, Strauss, Torch, Tower
Senators Absent: Beardman, Berger, Bieryla, Brown, Coon, DeMont, Felton. Heubel, Houtz, Jaymes, Johnson, Karasch, Kingstrom, Liboff, Pak, Sayre, Scherer, Schwartz, Stransky, Twietmeyer, Wllliamson
The fifth meeting of the University Senate for the 1979-80 academic year was called to order by President George T. Matthews at 3:25 p.m.
The minutes of the meeting of December 6, 1979, were approved by voice vote upon the motion of Mr. Ghausi, seconded by Mr. Strauss.
President Matthews commented to the Senate on the following developments:
1. This semester's enrollments have established a new record for winter term student count, and the numbers continue to mount. Enrollment projections for the Spring also look good. The optimism we feel in setting this record should be tempered by awareness that the demographic peak in numbers of high-school graduates will come in 1981-82. Oakland will have to be imaginative, resourceful, and committed to educational quality in order to maintain enrollment stability.
2. Difficulties with glass suppliers, glaziers, or both have slowed construction progress on the new building. Although the lecture halls may be available for use in the Fall, 1980, semester, offices and classrooms in O'Dowd Hall will probably be unfinished until the Winter 1981, term. In other words, past experience again sets a precedent.
Having concluded these remarks, Mr. Matthews introduced Ms. Eberwein as the new Senate Secretary and turned over the Chair to Mr. Obear, who presided until adjournment.
A. Old Business:
None.
B. New Business:
1. Mr. Tower moved the following procedural resolution from the Steering Committee. Ms. Garcia seconded the motion:
WHEREAS Ms. Mary Sue Rogers has graduated as of December 7, 1979; therefore be it
RESOLVED that her former colleagues in the Oakland University Senate take this means to thank Ms. Rogers for her fine efforts in leading the University Congress through a most productive period in its history.
The ensuing discussion focused on two issues: the setting of a precedent for such commendation of Congress leaders and the specific justification of this action. Although Mr. Cherno's reservations against setting a precedent for routine Senate acknowledgment of Congress officers found support, Mr. Gardner called attention to the Library Council's unprecedented but amply justified commendation of Ms. Rogers for her work in raising student funds for the Library, and Mr. Strauss advocated the resolution as an appropriate acknowledgment of a very able woman. Several senators felt that the resolution should commend the Congress itself if its accomplishments last year justified such attention. Mr. Tower pointed out that the Steering Committee intended to honor Ms. Rogers directly and: through her, the Congress.
UPON RESOLUTION of Mr. Torch, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Senate acted by voice vote to return the motion to the Steering Committee for perfection of its wording: specifically for itemized listing of the Congress achievements and of Ms. Rogers' distinctions.
2. Discussion of Presidential Selection Activities
a. Chairs of the various Advisory Committees on Presidential selection informed the Senate about the activities of their groups and the response each committee made to the Board's request for statements on recommended future needs of the university.
I. David Shantz reported that the Faculty Advisory Group has circulated its report among the faculty and has met with David Lewis to clarify the report and discuss its implications for leadership. His committee has received names of presidential nominees from faculty members and forwarded the names to Mr. Hetenyi.
2. Pamela Marin announced that the Administrative-Professional Advisory Committee has held meetings with A P's and invited their suggestions orally or in writing. The committee has written to six persons to invite them to consider the position and has given names of nominees to Mr. Hetenyi, who will circulate them among the various selection committees. Ms. Marin summarized her committee's lengthy report on future needs for Oakland University in six major areas: need for humanization; need to address system, policy, and organizational issues; need for new academic programs; need for University development and advancement philosophy; need to serve our community; need to prepare for uncertain times ahead. In view of these needs, the A-P Advisory Committee urges the Board to seek a president with scholarly background and reputation and a proven mastery of executive political, and communication skills.
3. Eric Baar distributed copies of the Student Advisory Committee statement and indicated that his group has not yet decided whether to submit names of candidates. In response to questions, he emphasized student concern for recognition of the University Congress as the official representative of the student body and urged that the new president find ways to enhance student morale by developing a distinctive image for the University.
4. Ann Arner was unable to attend the meeting to distribute and discuss the Alumni Advisory Committee report.
b. Mr. Hetenyi explained the selection criteria the Board has adopted and explained the procedures it has agreed upon and begun to implement.
The criteria, reached by a process of abstraction from advisory committee documents, stress four major categories, regarded as equivalent values with hierarchically arranged subcategories within each. The new president should have demonstrated the following qualities: an understanding of and commitment to the nature and mission of a university; sensitivity to the needs of a heterogeneous community; effectiveness in dealing with the communities beyond the confines of the home institution; and effective managerial skills.
Procedures for the first stage of the selection process have developed. As soon as a nomination is received, the nominee is informed in writing of the opportunity and asked for expression of interest. Those willing to be considered are sent vita forms, and packets of information about Oakland. Completed vitae will be circulated among the advisory committees for consideration. In cases where a nominee declines candidacy, the nominator(s) may develop a vita for consideration in the early stages of review to keep a candidacy alive.
The timetable for the selection process recommends a February 15 deadline for advertising. the position and soliciting nominations. Mr. Hetenyi hopes to circulate vitae among the committees during the winter term so that they can review the information before classes adjourn. He then plans to submit names to the Board in groupings which demonstrate varying levels of advisory committee support. He stressed that his primary interest is still in the submission of names, now that response to our advertisements has tapered off and the list of possible candidates seems to be stabilizing at about seventy names.
Senate discussion focused on ways of increasing the initial list of nominees and on procedures for cutting the list at an early stage of review. Only the Board can eliminate a candidate, but Mr. Hammerle expressed the hope that the Board would reject the names of any persons judged unacceptable by several advisory committees Mr. Russell requested that the Steering Committee formulate a resolution for the next Senate meeting to call for an open review process when the Board narrows its list to the last few candidates.
C. Good and Welfare: Private Resolutions
Mr. Eberwein renewed attention to problems of class scheduling, asking that a realistic ten-minute interval be designated between classes. Mr. Kleckner announced referral of the matter to the APPC, and Mr. Russell reported that the APPC is formulating a proposal on the matter. Mr. Tower mentioned the corresponding problem at establishing the official time on a campus where clocks generally disagree.
On the motion of Mr. Hetenyi, seconded by Mr. Jones, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:46 p.m.