|
Members present: Andersen, Berven (D), Berven (K), Bhargava, Condic, Connery, Debnath, Doane, Dulio, Dvir, Eis, Frick, Goslin, Grossman, Halpin, Howell, Ingram, Keane, Khattree, Larrabee, Latcha, LeMarbe, Machmut-Jhashi, Medaugh, Meehan, Mitton, Moore, Moran, Moudgil, Murphy, Nixon, Pelfrey, Preisinger, Rammel, Russell, Shablin, Spagnuolo, Thompson, Townsend, Voelck, Wharton, Williams
Members absent: Brown, Das (for Polis), Eberly-Lewis, English, Giblin, Graetz, Hawley, Hightower, Lombardo, Mili, Mittelstaedt, Penprase, Polis, Sudol, Tanniru, Wiggins
Summary of Actions:
1. Informational Items:
Provost's Update - Mr. Moudgil
2. Roll Call. Approval of minutes of 9-18-08. Mr. Latcha, Mr. Goslin
3. Motion to approve the revised Constitution of the School of Nursing. First reading. Ms. Howell, Mr. Frick.
4. Motion to revise the charge of the Campus Development and Environment Committee. First reading. Mr. Murphy, Ms. Andersen
5. Motion to change the membership of the Campus Development and Environment Committee. First reading. Mr. Murphy, Mr. Latcha
6. Motion to approve staff on Senate standing committees. Ms. Williams, Ms. Moore. Approved.
Calling the meeting to order at 3:15, the Provost began with an update on the School of Medicine (SOM). He noted that the new SOM is the third attempt in Oakland's history to establish a medical school, and offered a detailed history of those previous efforts going back to the involvement of Moon Jae Pak. Biomedical research has been strong at OU since the early 80s. Mr. Moudgil noted that researchers in the ERI in particular have always had a bit of a handicap in obtaining grants because of the lack of affiliation with a medical school. In 1997 the Center for Biomedical Research was established, with about 56 investigators. Colleagues from a variety of disciplines now contribute to biomedical research at OU, many with substantial external grants. Six years ago Mr. Russi and Mr. Moudgil explored the possibility of a medical school, first speaking to leaders of medical education at Providence Hospital, who advised them that it was impossible to pursue an allopathic medical school, since no new allopathic schools had been approved in 27 years. It was suggested that an osteopathic school would be a more viable option. Talks then began with the provost at MSU, first in terms of research collaborations between faculty at OU and MSU, then as a partnership in osteopathic education. Oakland was disappointed to learn that MSU was courting seventeen other possible partners, and voluntarily withdrew its interest.
At that time William Beaumont Hospitals (WBH) showed great interest in OU. Connections with OU faculty and programs have been strong for some time, including the highly lauded Nurse Anesthesia program (ranked 6th in the nation), among several other successful collaborations and partnerships. A number of OU faculty have been funded to work with WBH physicians and researchers over the years. Moreover, Mr. Moudgil noted that our distinguished colleague, Professor Jane Eberwein, spoke at a Senate meeting a few years ago and strongly supported the establishment of an allopathic, rather than osteopathic, medical school.
According to Mr. Moudgil, the state of Michigan funds the large universities with medical schools more generously than it does the other institutions. A medical school lends strength and prestige to the university. It will allow a platform for OU faculty to engage in medical education, and it will be inclusive of every unit on campus, for example, through a required capstone project in which medical students can pursue interdisciplinary topics, ranging from the humanities to business.
An affiliation with a university will be advantageous for William Beaumont Hospitals. All top hospitals in the country are affiliated with a university, so the profile of WBH will be raised. WBH has recognized in OU a partner that can be of great benefit to their mission. Mr. Moudgil then recounted the reasons that led to establishing a privately funded medical school that will be another professional school of the university, with all the implications of shared governance. Budget issues are significant. He referred to the rumor that 100 million dollars are needed to start the SOM. That amount may be needed over a ten-year period when there may be 500 students, but not for the launch of the first fifty students. Resources (through gifts and donations) are in place currently that will allow the SOM to be launched (this includes the compensation for the new dean and associate dean). In addition, many OU faculty have indicated an interest to move into the SOM for their primary teaching appointments. Fourteen faculty members are required to launch the SOM as per the LCME requirements. Mr. Moudgil reiterated that the general fund will not be used to fund the SOM.
Mr. Moudgil then pointed out that paragraph 41.a.7. of the bargaining agreement, which lists the academic units at Oakland University, needs to be amended to include the School of Medicine so that faculty can be added to an administrative unit. A formal request has been made to the AAUP Executive Committee to consider the amendment. Mr. Moudgil remarked that he received questions from the Executive Committee that went beyond the purpose of his request, but has agreed to work with the membership of the AAUP to provide the information that they seek. Mr. Moudgil promised to present at the next Senate meeting SOM budget information as well as the affiliation agreement with William Beaumont Hospitals. He observed that this may be the last chance for a medical school at OU and that support is crucial at this moment.
Mr. Berven inquired whether the recent announcement of state approval for a new Human Health building was spurred by the establishment of the SOM, and offered his observation that it appears our image is already changing in Lansing. Mr. Moudgil commented that there is a state-wide movement to focus on healthcare, and that, in his view, prompted the approval of a new building for Nursing and Health Sciences at OU.
Mr. Latcha offered a different perspective on the meeting that was held between the Provost and the AAUP Executive Committee. Noting that Mr. Moudgil asked for an exception to the agreement to add the SOM as an academic unit, he also clarified that the AAUP is obliged to take that to the faculty, who will have questions on the ramifications of making the medical school an academic unit. The AAUP asked for the governing documents already in place for the SOM to be reviewed by the Senate Budget and Planning Review Committees. Mr. Moudgil replied that those committees are activated to review proposals for new programs that have a curriculum and budget to evaluate. At this time, there is no curriculum for those committees to review, because faculty members need to be appointed to create a curriculum. Despite this, Mr. Moudgil will send the information requested by the AAUP to the SBRC and SPRC so that they can report back to the Senate.
Mr. Grossman asked about the Senate Constitution as a governing document, which refers to organized faculties, and whether the BOT has approved the organized faculty of the SOM. Mr. Moudgil explained that the BOT is able to approve a structure (a school or department), but that it does not become an academic unit unless it works through the governance process. Mr. Grossman then observed the need for faculty representation, as per the Senate Constitution, and wondered when that might happen. Mr. Moudgil replied that appropriate representation on the Senate will be possible when there are faculty to appoint. He added that the formation of the SOM is unprecedented at OU as there are no faculty members already in place in the unit; when the SON and SHS were established, faculty were already in place.
Mr. Dvir commented that the establishment of the SOM is not so much a transition as it is a revolution. The external perception of OU is changing dramatically, and he would like to see the process move forward as smoothly as possible. He noted that it is a monumental effort for the university, but that he has been inspired by the commitment of faculty from both OU and WBH. He believes that OU faculty are overwhelmingly in support of the new school. Mr. Dinda also offered his support for the SOM, remarking that OU has a commitment to its students. He noted that many top students will remain at OU for medical education, and requests that the AAUP works out the process so that ultimately students will benefit.
Mr. Russell remarked that what we have before us is a chicken-or-egg situation. We need faculty to produce a unit constitution, a review statement for the school, work-load statements and more. The issue is how to get those faculty. He observed that the requirement for faculty in the SOM is different from the faculty we currently have, in that we don't have the right fourteen for the LCME requirements. Some will need to come from outside the institution. In addition to proposing the contract amendment to add the SOM as a separate professional school at OU, the administration proposed a way to get the initial faculty in. It was proposed not as a contract exception, but as a letter of agreement that would require ratification by the entire AAUP membership. The rest of the letter of agreement provided a mechanism to allow the transfer of primary appointments to the school. According to the AAUP agreement, the receiving unit has to make a recommendation to the administration for each person. Currently, there is no receiving unit, so there is the problem of who makes the recommendation. The provost and dean of the SOM proposed that the recommendation come from the unit in which the faculty member currently serves, in lieu of the medical school. There is the need to hire one or two associate deans. For those positions as well as for the new faculty members coming in, the provost and dean identified at least four current faculty in closely related areas to make the recommendations regarding the academic credentials of those individuals. As soon as there are six people in the unit, those six would form the organized faculty of that unit. They would produce the unit constitution that would be ready for review by Senate committees in the winter term. This is the proposed mechanism, then, according to Mr. Russell, to get the initial people in the unit, and thereafter all the standard rules and policies of the Senate and AAUP contract would be adhered to.
Mr. Latcha noted that the discussion at the AAUP Executive Committee meeting was not whether the SOM should be established or approved. The point made at the meeting was that the faculty need to be asked to approve the amendment to the agreement, and that faculty know exactly what they are approving.
Mr. Doane recounted a story on the formation of the School of Business Administration in 1969, the year he was hired. That year the SBA was formed and approved with a faculty of a half dozen economists, including some people who were new to OU. There were no accountants, no people to teach all the core courses, but somehow it all got off the ground as a business school with the overall structure roughed out. Something was created out of nothing, and it all worked. He added that he was very disappointed in 1980 when Joe Champagne and John DeCarlo torpedoed the medical school. The SOM is probably the biggest thing to happen at OU during Mr. Doane's tenure, and he would hate the thought of it getting lost or getting bogged down because of bureaucratic reasons. He views the SOM as enhancing a wide variety of disciplines and opportunities at OU. He would encourage everyone to do whatever necessary to get around all the problematic circularities.
The secretary proceeded with the roll call, after which Mr. Latcha's motion to approve the minutes from the September meeting, duly seconded by Mr. Goslin, led to approval by the Senators.
New Business
The first item of new business involved a motion to approve a revised Constitution in the School of Nursing. Moved by Ms. Howell, seconded by Mr. Frick.
MOVED that the Senate recommend to the President and the Board of Trustees approval of the new Constitution of the School of Nursing.
Ms. Newton offered a brief presentation on the key revisions to the SON document, first noting that the School is required to convene a committee every five years to review the Constitution and make recommendations for changes. The current revisions were approved by the SON faculty assembly on April 24. The majority of changes are editorial in nature, with primary emphasis on the revisions necessitated by the addition of the doctoral program. The font was also changed to be consistent with other university documents.
Mr. Grossman asked for clarification in Article IV, Sections xi. and xiii., regarding the number of tenure-track faculty appointed to the Undergraduate and Graduate Committees on Instruction. He wondered whether the number of faculty listed is meant to be at least that number or exactly that number (two in one case; three in the other). Ms. Newton described situations in the past where not enough tenure-track faculty were represented on the committees, and that the idea is that there will be a minimum of two on UCOI and a minimum of three on GCOI. She wondered whether this wording change required that the document be sent back to the SON for approval.
After a discussion about procedure (including a motion to waive the first reading and move to the second reading), it was clarified that the document indeed needs to go back for approval and that a Constitution must stand on its own for approval. The motion to waive the first reading was withdrawn with unanimous consent.
The second motion under new business involved changes to the charge of the Campus Development and Environment Committee. Moved by Mr. Murphy, seconded by Ms. Andersen.
MOVED that the charge of the Campus Development and Environment Committee read as follows:
To consider the aesthetic, ecological, and public safety effects of both present practices and future plans for the physical maintenance and development of the campus, to recommend policies in these areas, and to advise the administrative officers responsible for campus development. Such issues as new construction, location of utilities and parking facilities, aesthetic accouterments, maintenance practices, public safety environment, and the identification of areas for outdoor education shall fall within the purview of this committee.
Mr. Moudgil pointed out that the Steering Committee brought this forward because of the concerns raised by Senators at the last meeting regarding security measures on campus. There was no further discussion.
The next motion of new business also dealt with changes to the CDEC, with the issue here being the addition of the Chief of Police, ex-officio and non-voting, to the membership roster. Moved by Mr. Meehan, with a second from Mr. Latcha.
MOVED that the membership of the Campus Development and Environment Committee consist of the following:
Five faculty, four students, four administrative professionals; and the Vice President for Student Affairs (or designee), a representative from Campus Facilities and Operations, the Associate Vice President for Facilities Management, and the Chief of Police, ex-officio and non-voting.
Without discussion on this motion, Mr. Moudgil then turned to the final item of new business. Moved by Ms. Williams, duly seconded by Ms. Moore, the motion to approve staffing Senate standing committees was approved.
MOVED that the persons listed below be appointed to Senate standing committees:
Honorary Degree Committee
Tom Lauer (School of Business Administration) - 2008-2010
University Research Committee
Carol Liu (School of Business Administration) - 2008-2010
Without items of old business, Mr. Moudgil then opened the Senate floor for the Good and Welfare. Mr. Moran followed up on his suggestion to Chief Lucido at the previous Senate meeting that more police officers walking through campus would be a good thing. In the past few weeks he has noticed more officers around campus and in the OC talking to students and is pleased by the increased visibility of the public safety department.
Mr. Larrabee's motion to adjourn the meeting at 4:20 was met with general consent.
Respectfully submitted,
Tamara Machmut-Jhashi
Secretary to the University Senate
|