Oakland University Senate
Thursday, February 14, 1980
Sixth Meeting
3:15 p.m.
128, 129, 130 Oakland Center
MINUTES
Members present: Beardman, Bieryla, Boulos, Brown, Burke, Cherno, Christina, J. Eberwein, R. Eberwein, Evans, Feeman, Grossman, Hammerle, Hetenyi, Heubel, Houtz, Jones, Kingstrom, Kleckner, Matthews, McMahan, Moeller, Mourant, Partmann, Pettengill, Sayre, Scherer, Schmidt, Schwartz, Shepherd, Stevens, Torch, Tower, Williamson
Members absent: Berger, Bertocci, Chipman, Coon, DeMont, Edgerton, Felton, Garcia, Gardiner, Ghausi, Hitchingham, Horwitz, Jaymes, Johnson, Karasch, Kohn, Liboff, Miller, Obear, Otto, Pak, Riley, Russell, Shantz, Stransky, Strauss, Twietmeyer
The sixth meeting of the University Senate for the 1979-80 academic year was called to order by President George T. Matthews at 3:30 p.m.
The minutes of the meeting of January 17, 1980, were approved without opposition, correction or discussion.
President Matthews commented to the Senate on the following topics of interest:
1. The Governor's budget recommendation for Oakland University exceeds all expectations. He has called for an increase of 8.6% over last year's allocation. The fear now is that the legislature may trim this increase to provide more adequately for other state agencies to which Governor Milliken was less generous.
2. The Married Student Housing Project seems to be moving ahead. With architectural plans reformulated after the first round of construction bids revealed excessive costs, the second round of bidding has resulted in budget projections only slightly in excess of the original HUD allocation for the apartment units.
A. Old Business: None
B. New Business:
1. Resolution of Commendation for Mary Sue Rogers and the 1979 University Congress (Moved, Mr. Tower: Seconded, Mr. McMahan ).
Mr. Tower thanked Ms. Garcia for her help in rewriting last month's resolution to achieve the precision and clarity demanded by the Senate. The improved and more elegant resolution was then approved unanimously, as follows:
WHEREAS Ms. Mary Sue Rogers has served with distinction as President of the University Congress: and
WHEREAS under her able leadership the University Congress has Initiated and completed several activities of value to the University including both the Student Library Donation and the Oakland University Twentieth Birthday Celebration; and
WHEREAS Ms. Rogers and her colleagues in the University Congress have made considerable efforts to involve the student body constructively in the activities of the university community; therefore be it
RESOLVED that her former colleagues in the University Senate take this means to thank Ms. Rogers and her fellow Congress members for their productive efforts over the past year.
2. Resolution from the Steering Committee on presidential search procedures (Moved, Mr. Tower; Seconded, Mr. Williamson).
Mr. Tower moved the following resolution from the Steering Committee responding to Mr. Russell's request at the January meeting of the University Senate that this body go on record as urging the Board to provide for faculty participation in the final interview stage of the presidential search:
WHEREAS the Steering Committee of the University Senate last July recommended that the Board of Trustees of Oakland University consider the presidential search procedures recently used by the Regents of the University of Michigan; and
WHEREAS the Board of Trustees announced in October a presidential search procedure modeled after that used by the Regents of the University of Michigan; and
WHEREAS the Board of Trustees requested the Steering Committee to appoint a Faculty Advisory Committee to the Presidential Selection Committee and other appropriate bodies to appoint administrative-professional employee, alumni, and student advisory committees; and
WHEREAS the University Senate considers an essential feature of the University of Michigan model to involve the participation of some members of the Faculty Advisory Committee in all interviews of finalists: therefore be it
RESOLVED that the University Senate urges the Board of Trustees to attempt to select a set of finalists who are endorsed by the four advisory committees; and be it further
RESOLVED that the University Senate requests that the Board of Trustees of Oakland University include this provision for faculty participation in all interviews as an integral part of the search and selection procedures and that these procedures be established and publicized as soon as possible.
Mr. McMahan expressed concern that all members of the University community represented by review committees should be included in the final stages of presidential selection. He therefore, proposed an amendment to add the words "student, administrative-professional, and alumni" following faculty in the final paragraph of the resolution (Moved, Mr. McMahan: Seconded, Ms. Bieryla). Mr. Tower explained that, as only the faculty had specifically raised the issue, only they were mentioned in the resolution; i was his understanding, however, that student and alumni representatives had been included in the final interviews at the University of Michigan.
Mr. Hammerle hoped that the Board would, indeed include selected members of all reviewing groups but wondered whether a formal resolution by the Senate might not make the desired result less likely rather than more so. Mr. Hetenyi offered his purely personal impression that the Board's concern with maintaining confidentiality through-out the search and selection procedure might make it unreceptive to formal Senate demands for inclusive representation. The amendment was approved by voice vote.
Mr. Hammerle and Mr. Hetenyi then suggested the merit of stylistic revision somewhere in the resolution to clarify the Senate's awareness of the need for confidentiality. Mr. Feeman. seconded by Mr. Heubel, rose to the occasion by offering an amendment to add the words "recognizing the need for confidentiality in the search process'' between "Senate" and ''requests" in the final paragraph. The amendment carried by voice vote. Mr. Torch. seconded by Mr. Schmidt, then moved to delete the penultimate paragraph. He felt that the Senate's advice that the Board attempt to select a set of finalists acceptable to the four advisory committees might strike the Board as gratuitous. He and Mr. Schmidt found the paragraph superfluous as it urged the Board to do what it must surely want to do in any case. The amendment striking the fifth paragraph passed unanimously. The main motion, trebly amended, was then unanimously approved, as follows:
WHEREAS the Steering Committee of the University Senate last July recommended that the Board of Trustees of Oakland University consider the presidential search procedures recently used by the Regents of the University of Michigan ; and
WHEREAS the Board of Trustees announced in October a presidential search procedure modeled after that used by the Regents of the University of Michigan; and
WHEREAS the Board of Trustees requested the Steering Committee to appoint a Faculty Advisory Committee to the Presidential Selection Committee and other appropriate bodies to appoint administrative-professional employee, alumni, and student advisory committees; and
WHEREAS the University Senate considers an essential feature of the University of Michigan model to Involve the participation of some members of the Faculty Advisory committee in all interviews of finalists: therefore be it
RESOLVED that the University Senate, recognizing the need for confidentiality in the search process., requests that the Board of Trustees of Oakland University include this provision for faculty, students, administrative-professional, and alumni participation in all interviews as an integral part of the search and selection procedures and that these procedures be established and publicized as soon as possible.
3. Resolution from the Steering Committee to establish a standing Senate committee to be known as the Academic Computing Committee (Moved, Mr. Tower: Seconded, Mr. Heubel). Mr. Tower proposed that the Senate replace the existing Academic Computing Committee, appointed by the Provost, with the standing Senate committee having the following charge and membership;
MOVED that the Senate approve the formation of a new standing committee to be known as the Academic Computing Committee with the following charge and membership specifications:
CHARGE: The Academic Computing Committee shall be responsible for advising the University Senate on all matters pertaining to the use of computers for instruction and research. It is expected to define and be responsive to the needs.of students and faculty using the university for devising and directing the implementation on of plans to develop appropriate levels of computer literacy for all students and faculty of the university. It is required to prepare annually a recommendation to the Provost and President on requirements for improvements and additions in computer facilities (both hardware and software) to meet the anticipated academic computing needs for the subsequent five year period. The Academic Computing Committee shall advise the Director of Computing Services as necessary and shall assist him In developing services, schedules and priorities for academic computing usage in relation to total university computer usage. It should, periodically, examine patterns of use and charge systems, and make recommendations for such modifications as may be necessary.
MEMBERSHIP: Six faculty members, one appointed as Chair Two students, one appointed by the University Congress and one by the Oakland University Programming Society Manager of Academic Computing Services, ex officio and voting Director of Research and Instructional Services, ex officio and voting.
Mr. Tower explained that this committee is intended to protect academic access to the computer in the event of conflict with administrative uses. Its membership, though similar in size and balance to the existing ad hoc committee, will be named by the Steering Committee and approved by the Senate- it will have a faculty chair. Mr. Mourant, seconded by Mr. Grossman, proposed an amendment to add the coordinator of the School of Engineering Computer and Information Science program to the ex officio membership of the new committee, bringing faculty membership to seven. He felt that the CIS program was so important as to justify guaranteed seating with this group. Despite Mr. Tower's assurances that the Steering Committee would try to balance membership reasonably and equitably among the various schools and centers, Messrs. Mourant, Christina, and Schmidt insisted on the need for the Senate to monitor committee seats to assure representation for all concerned faculty groups. Mr. Schmidt argued against the Mourant 'amendment as a spotty process for defining membership and called on the Steering Committee to designate seats in advance for the whole Academic Computing Committee. The amendment, like the main motion, is scheduled for final vote at the next Senate meeting.
In another discussion of membership, Mr. Stevens wondered whether precedent allowed the Senate to designate one student chair for a member of the Oakland University Programming Society. Mr. Matthews assured him that there is a limited history of such decisions, although the Steering Committee usually asks the University Congress for all student nominations.
Messrs. Feeman and Cherno noted an odd statement in the Charge to the effect that the committee "is expected to define and be responsive to the needs of students and faculty using the university for devising and directing the implementation of plans to develop appropriate levels of computer literacy for all students, and faculty of the university.'' This scheme, seemingly revolutionary in its implications, turned out to be a harmless clerical error. Mr. Tower filled in a missing line following university: "computer facilities. It is given primary responsibility for.'' The committee directs usage of the computer, therefore, rather than the university.
Mr. Beardman then objected to the idea that any group should be responsible for developing appropriate levels of computer literacy for all students and faculty. He thought visual literacy more appropriate than the computer variety for an artist. Mr. Heubel, seconded by Mr. Hetenyi, suggested amending the charge by deleting the language "for all students and faculty of the university."
Mr. Feeman proposed adding the words ''or her' to the second paragraph of the Charge following the words "and shall assist him.'' He wished to acknowledge that the Director of Computing Services might be of either gender. Mr. Hetenyi suggested that the Steering Committee should take account of recommended stylistic perfections of the proposal before the March Senate meeting. The substantive amendment on membership would still be eligible for a separate vote.
C. Good and Welfare: Private Resolutions
There were no resolutions proposed, but several items of Information were exchanged.
1. Mr. Hetenyi announced that many presidential nominations have come in since his January report to the Senate. He now has over 200 names under consideration and feels optimistic about the search process.
2. Mr. Cherno thanked the Steering Committee for responding so carefully and capably to his concerns about the resolution for Mary Sue Rogers.
3. Mr. Tower called attention to the revised class schedule on the Senate Agenda.
Upon motion by Mr. Hetenyi, the Senate adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Jane D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate