REGULAR
MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE
NOVEMBER 5, 2012 – 104 GORE
October 29, 2012
TO: Senators
and Executives
FROM: Katherin Rogers, Vice President
University
Faculty Senate
SUBJECT: Regular Faculty Senate Meeting November 5, 2012
In
accordance with Section IV, paragraph 6 of the Constitution, the regular
meeting of the University Faculty Senate will be held on Monday, November 5,
2012 at 4:00 p.m. in 104 Gore Hall.
I certify that hard copies of the
approval page for each undergraduate and graduate studies academic item on the
agenda are filed in the Faculty Senate Office with the appropriate signatures
of approval up through the Chair of the Faculty Senate Coordinating Committee
on Education. The Agenda will be as follows:
AGENDA
I.
Adoption
of the Agenda
II.
Approval
of the Minutes: October 1, 2012
III.
Remarks: Provost
Nancy Brickhouse
IV.
Announcements:
Senate President Sheldon Pollack
V.
Consent
Agenda
1.
Announcements for Challenge: None
VI.
Regular
Agenda
1. Unfinished
Business:
a.
Recommendation from the Faculty
Senate Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of the
Faculty Senate Committee on Rules (Anu Sivaraman,
Chair) for the approval of a resolution concerning the “Introduction of New
Business” on the Faculty Senate Agenda
Whereas,
Section IV, article 9 of the University of Delaware Faculty Constitution
provides that: “No motion introduced under new business, except a motion to
refer to committee, shall be acted upon until the next meeting of the Senate,”
and
Whereas, the University of Delaware Faculty
Senate previously adopted a rule implementing such provision in the
Constitution; and
Whereas, such rule provides that if a motion
(beyond a comment or observation) is made under the “Introduction of New Business”
on the agenda of a regular meeting then the Senate must vote to either: (i) refer such motion to the Executive committee to
determine the proper committee to consider such motion, or (ii) refer
such motion to a particular committee, or (iii) vote to not refer such motion to any
committee;
and
Whereas, matters under “Introduction of New
Business” are raised at the end of Senate meetings, when often there is
insufficient time for adequate consideration of such matters; and
Whereas, more time is often needed for adequate consideration
of such matters; be it therefore
Resolved, that the rules of the University of
Delaware Faculty Senate be amended to provide that if the presiding officer
determines that there is inadequate time to adequately consider a matter raised
under the “Introduction of New Business,” then such matter will be held for discussion and consideration at the next regular meeting
of the Faculty Senate under “Unfinished Business.”
Current
Rule of the UD Faculty Senate re the Introduction of New Business:
If a motion
(beyond a comment or observation) is made under “Introduction of New Business,”
then the Senate must vote to either: (i) refer that motion to the Executive committee to
determine the proper referral committee; (ii) refer the motion to a particular
committee; or (iii) vote to not refer the motion to a committee.
Proposed
Revision to Rule of the UD Faculty Senate re the Introduction of New Business:
If a motion
(beyond a comment or observation) is made under “Introduction of New Business,”
then the Senate must vote to either: (i) refer that motion to the Executive committee to
determine the proper referral committee; (ii) refer the motion to a particular
committee; or (iii) vote to not refer the motion to a committee. If the
presiding officer determines that there is insufficient time for reasonable
discussion, then the matter will be held for discussion and consideration at
the next regular meeting of the Faculty Senate under “Unfinished Business.”
2. New
Business:
Resolutions:
a.
Recommendation from Senators
Galileo, Buell, Hastings, Heinz, Jebb, Johnson, Morgan, and Morrison with
the concurrence of the Faculty Senate Committee on Rules (Anu
Sivaraman, Chairperson) and the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack,
Chairperson) for the approval of a resolution defining eligibility for Faculty
Senate Officers and Committee Chairs (attachment
1)
Whereas, the Faculty Senate functions as the standing executive
committee of the Faculty of the University of Delaware and, as such, exercises
the powers vested in the Faculty by the Board of Trustees, and
Whereas, Senate Officers (President, President Elect, Past President,
Vice President, Secretary, Parliamentarian, and Chair of Committee on
Committees and Nominations) comprise the Senate Executive Committee, which is
charged with many important Senate duties including consideration of agenda
items for Senate meetings, and
Whereas, Senate committee Chairs also perform leadership roles in
conducting Senate business, and
Whereas, Senate Officers and committee Chairs now can be elected or
appointed from all full-time voting Faculty of the University, and
Whereas, the University exists, in part, to foster the free exchange
of ideas and, thus, this should be manifest in Senate discussions and committee
meetings, and
Whereas, University administrators are represented adequately in the
Senate as non-elected Senators and members of multiple Senate committees, and
Whereas, a Senate Officer or committee Chair would have potential
conflicts of interest if he or she also held an administrative appointment at
the University, be it therefore
Resolved, that the bylaws of the faculty be amended as in attachment 1
above to read as follows: that eligibility for nomination, appointment, or
service as Senate Officers or committee Chairs shall be restricted to full-time
voting Faculty who are not appointed to serve in an official capacity for the
Offices of the President, the Provost, any Vice President, or the Dean of any
College, including but not limited to administrative officers of the University
(including deputy, associate, assistant and vice provosts), academic deans
(including deputy, associate and assistant deans), and department chairs or
academic program directors (as defined in the Policy Guide for Department Chairs and Academic Program Directors). Faculty who serve in a temporary capacity for
an administrative office as a member of a search committee, standing committee,
or ad hoc committee shall not be
deemed ineligible because of this service.
b.
Recommendation from the Faculty
Senate Committee on Rules (Anu Siveraman,
Chairperson) with the concurrence of the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack,
Chairperson) for the approval of a resolution revising the title of the Vice
Provost for Academic Programs and Planning to Deputy Provost in the Faculty
Constitution (Attachment 1)
Whereas,
the University of Delaware Faculty
Constitution provides for twelve (12) non-elected, ex officio members of the Faculty Senate; and
Whereas,
one such member of the Faculty
Senate is the Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Planning; and
Whereas,
such position was re-titled many
years ago and the functions of such officer were delegated to a new position,
the Deputy Provost; and
Whereas,
the past practice of the Faculty
Senate has been to recognize the Deputy Provost as a member of the Faculty
Senate, replacing the former Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Planning;
Resolved,
that the University of Delaware
Faculty Constitution be amended to provide that the Deputy Provost is a member
of the Faculty Senate in lieu of the position previously held by the former
Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Planning as indicated in Attachment 1
above.
c. Recommendation
/from the Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the concurrence of
the Student Life Committee (Mark Parcells, Chair) to approve a resolution of
the University of Delaware Faculty Senate regarding certain amendments to the
Student Code of Conduct.
Whereas, certain faculty
members of the University of Delaware have become aware that students in their
class have entered into agreements with certain commercial websites; and
Whereas, pursuant to such
agreements, said students post their notes and other material from such classes
on such commercial websites in exchange for a fee; and
Whereas, such faculty members
wish to end such practice in their classes; and
Whereas, the Faculty Senate
wishes to provide such faculty members with a practical and effective method
for prohibiting such practice; be it therefore
Resolved, that the Student Code
of Conduct shall be amended to provide that in cases where a faculty member
states on the course syllabus that no student may post notes or other material
from the class on the Internet, whether or not for a fee, and any UD student,
whether enrolled in the class or not, shall thereafter post such material on
the Internet in contradiction of such prohibition, such act shall constitute a
violation of the Student Code of Conduct.
d.
Recommendation
from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the
concurrence of the Faculty Senate Committee on Rules (Anu
Sivaraman, Chair) for a revision to the Bylaws of the Faculty Senate (attachment 1)
Whereas,
Paragraph 9 of Section XIV of the Bylaws
of the Faculty Senate states that the Bylaws of the Trustees of the University
authorizes the Faculty Senate to “adopt regulations governing its own
procedures with authority to enact, amend, and repeal its bylaws by a
two-thirds vote of those present”; and
Whereas,
Section 3.2.4.9. of the Bylaws of the Trustees of the University in fact
authorizes the Faculty Senate to “adopt regulations governing its own
procedures with authority to enact, amend, and repeal its bylaws,” imposing no
requirement with respect to a two-thirds vote of those present for such an
amendment; and
Whereas,
such provision in Paragraph 9 of
Section XIV of the Bylaws of the Faculty Senate is erroneous and misstates the
authority granted to the Faculty Senate with respect to amending its bylaws,
rules, and regulations; and
Whereas,
the Faculty Senate wishes to
correct such error;
Resolved, that Paragraph 9 of Section XIV of the Bylaws of the Faculty Senate shall be corrected to provide that Faculty shall: “adopt regulations governing its own procedures with authority to enact, amend, and repeal its bylaws.”
e. Recommendation
from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the
concurrence of the Faculty Senate Committee on Rules (Anu
Sivaraman, Chair) for the approval of a resolution for amending the bylaws and
rules and regulations of the University Faculty Senate (attachment
1)
Whereas,
the Bylaws of the Faculty Senate
(the “Bylaws”) presently include a provision (Section IV) that purportedly sets forth the voting requirements for amending
such Bylaws as well as the rules and regulations of the Faculty Senate (the
“Senate”); and
Whereas,
such provision of the Bylaws in
fact only sets forth the requirements for amending the rules and regulations of
the Senate, but not the Bylaws; and
Whereas,
such provision of the Bylaws
requires an affirmative vote of two-thirds of those senators present and voting
at a duly called meeting of the Senate in order to amend the rules and
regulations of the Senate; and
Whereas,
the requirement for amendments to
the rules and regulations of the Senate is overly stringent; and
Whereas,
there is no provision in the
Bylaws that provides a procedure for amendments to such Bylaws;
Whereas,
it is important to have an
official procedure in the Bylaws providing for amendments to such Bylaws; and
Whereas,
the prior practice of the Senate
has been to adopt amendments to the Bylaws upon the affirmative vote of
two-thirds of those senators present and voting at a duly called meeting of the
Senate; be it therefore
Resolved, that the Bylaws shall be amended to include a rule in Section IV for amending such Bylaws by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of those senators present at a duly called meeting of the Senate, while the requirement for amending the rules and regulations of the Senate should be changed to require only a simple majority of those senators present at a duly called meeting of the Senate.
f. Recommendation
by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (Sheldon Pollack, Chair) with the
concurrence of the Faculty Senate Rules Committee (Anu
Sivaraman, Chair) for the approval of a resolution concerning a policy for
amending the Faculty Handbook
Alternative 1:
simple majority resolution
Whereas, the policy for changing the Faculty Handbook found in the
Handbook (“Preface: about the Handbook”) is vague; and,
Whereas, it is important to specify the appropriate authority for changes
to the Faculty Handbook; and,
Whereas, the practice has been that changes to the Faculty Handbook
require Faculty Senate approval, with the concurrence of the provost; be it
therefore
Resolved, that the Handbook (“Preface: about the Handbook”) be revised
to read “Policies contained in the Faculty Handbook are official policies of
the University and remain in full effect until changed by the Faculty Senate,
with the concurrence of the Provost.”
Attachment 1 for Alternative 1:
CURRENT VERSION of HANDBOOK
Preface: about the Handbook
Policies contained in
the Faculty Handbook are official policies of the University and remain in full
effect until changed by appropriate University actions. The Handbook is a
revision of the official 1963 Handbook adopted by the Board of Trustees as
University policy, and it has been approved for publication by the Board.
PROPOSED REVISION of HANDBOOK
Preface: about the Handbook
Policies contained in
the Faculty Handbook are official policies of the University and remain in full
effect until changed by appropriate University actions the
Faculty Senate, with the concurrence of the Provost. The
Handbook is a revision of the official 1963 Handbook adopted by the Board of
Trustees as University policy, and it has been approved for publication by the
Board.
*******************
Alternative
2: super-majority resolution
Whereas, the policy for changing the Faculty Handbook found in the
Handbook (“Preface: about the Handbook”) is vague; and,
Whereas, it is important to specify the appropriate authority for changes
to the Faculty Handbook; and,
Whereas, the practice has been that changes to the Faculty Handbook
require Faculty Senate approval, with the concurrence of the provost; be it
therefore
Resolved, that the Handbook (“Preface: about the Handbook”) be revised
to read “Policies contained in the Faculty Handbook are official policies of
the University and remain in full effect until changed by an affirmative vote
of two-thirds of those members of the Faculty Senate present and voting, with
the concurrence of the Provost.”
Attachment 1 for
Alternative 2:
CURRENT VERSION of HANDBOOK
Preface: about the Handbook
Policies contained in
the Faculty Handbook are official policies of the University and remain in full
effect until changed by appropriate University actions. The Handbook is a
revision of the official 1963 Handbook adopted by the Board of Trustees as
University policy, and it has been approved for publication by the Board.
PROPOSED REVISION of HANDBOOK
Preface: about the Handbook
Policies contained in
the Faculty Handbook are official policies of the University and remain in full
effect until changed by appropriate University actions an
affirmative vote of two-thirds of those members of the Faculty Senate present
and voting, with the concurrence of the Provost. The Handbook is
a revision of the official 1963 Handbook adopted by the Board of Trustees as
University policy, and it has been approved for publication by the Board.
g.
Recommendation from Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate (Sheldon Pollack, Chair)
for the approval of a resolution recommending openness in administrative
searches
Whereas, the Faculty Senate functions as the
standing executive committee of the Faculty of the University of Delaware and,
as such, exercises the powers vested in the Faculty by the Board of Trustees,
and
Whereas, it is the privilege of the Faculty to
consider matters of general interest to the University and to make
recommendations concerning the formation of policies governing appointments,
and
Whereas, the University currently is searching
for a suitable candidate to be appointed as Provost, who will serve as chief
academic officer responsible for the quality of the academic programs, the
research and the scholarship of the University, and
Whereas, transparency and engagement of the
University community are important and should be clearly evident in the shared
governance of the University, and
Whereas, open searches have been commonplace at
the University in the past and currently are being done at many other colleges
and universities, be it therefore
Resolved, the
Faculty Senate recommends that the Provost search and other high-level
administrative searches (including Deans) be conducted in a reasonably open
manner, such that the short-listed candidates are announced and brought to
campus where our students, faculty and other concerned members of the University
community may engage them and provide feedback before a finalist is selected.
VIII. Introduction
of New Business
Such items as may come before the Senate. (No motion introduced under new business,
except a motion to refer to committee, shall be acted upon until the next
meeting of the Senate.)
/khs