Faculty Senate

I. Approval of Minutes of 03/12/01

Carried Unanimously
Martin-Troy/Wolff

II. Announcements

1. AAUP Report. Sen. Austad

 Contract negotiations are going very slowly, indeed there is difficulty in even deciding on what areas to negotiate. Thus, on April 26 and 28 a contract facilitator will assist in negotiations. The next edition of Table Talk, due any day, will provide a more substantive discussion of these issues.

2. Graduate Studies Mission Statement. S. Cox

 The Graduate Studies Committee approved the following Mission Statement in their March, 2001 meeting.

 The graduate school is a community of scholars devoted to increasing human awareness and understanding through scholarly inquiry, research, and study in specialized disciplines. The aim of graduate education is to provide students with the knowledge and skills to make contributions to their discipline and to the rapidly changing world. Through an atmosphere of intellectual and personal integrity, an attitude of excellence, and a spirit of creative independence, our graduates develop mastery in their field and become lifelong learners and leaders within their respective professions.

 Professor Cox invited comment and suggestions on the above for the Committee’s consideration.

3. Steering Committee meeting with President Judd April 26. Sen. Abadiano

 Sen. Abadiano indicated there was no set agenda but three issues were covered:

1. An update on construction…all is on schedule and budget
2. The administration continues to explore options for the daycare center and input is possible and encouraged
3. The President was interested in the Senate’s input to the proposal under New Business V (a) below
   
1. Update on HIST 472 & 474 Western/Non-Western designation. Sen. Benfield

 As an update to the last meeting, Sen. Benfield reported that Dr. Mezvinsky and the State consultant responsible for the change of designation of History 472 and 474 had met over lunch (with Dr. Rickard acting as mediator and referee) and the matter was resolved to everyone’s satisfaction(except the person paying the bill).

 III. Elections

Sen. Braverman conducted the elections

Nominees were for the following Committees:

Advisory Committee
Distinguished Service Committee
Excellence in teaching Award Committee
Grade Appeals
Library
Planning and Budget

No Nominations were received from the floor for these committees

Motion to Close Nominations
Martin-Troy/Wolff
Carried Unanimously

Promotion and Tenure Committee

The following nominations were made from the Floor:

Mary-Ann Donofrio
Kathy Martin-Troy (Bio)
Sue Vial (Design)
David Blitz (Phil)

Motion to Close Nominations
Jones/Wolff
Carried Unanimously

Winners to be recorded in minutes upon ballot counting (not even considered…too advanced) and solution of hanging chads resolved and announced at next Faculty Senate meeting.

 IV. Senate Committee Reports

1. Committee on Committees Report (See attached By-laws)

At the March 12 meeting, the senate approved The Committee on Committees acceptance of the bylaws for the Committee on Information Technology (the CIT) and the Faculty Senate designated the CIT a Standing Committee of the Faculty. Apparently Dr. Judd will veto this resolution pending input from the new interim Chief of Information Services, Mr. Robert Yanckello. The CIT have met with Mr. Yanckello and have revised the by-laws to their mutual satisfaction.

Motion for acceptance of (new) by-laws (Attached) requested.

Martin-Troy/Fried
Carried Unanimously

2. Curriculum Committee Paul Petterson

(Minutes of April 4 meeting as amended)

Motion to accept

Martin-Troy/Wolff
Carried Unanimously

V. Old Business

There was none

 VI. New Business

1. School of Technology: Division into two Departments. Dean Kremens and Faculty.

Dr. Judd in letter to Pres. Best is desirous of Senate input into the proposal to divide School of Technology. Presently there are three departments within the School of Technology: Engineering Technology, Industrial Technology and Technology Education. The request is to split of one department, namely Industrial Technology, into two departments:

* Computer Electronics and Graphics

* Manufacturing and Construction Management

Prof. Odesina made the following introductory remarks:

There were School of Technology wide meetings held prior to the 1996/1997 academic year about the possibility of creating new departments in the School. Serious discussion started in the academic year 1996/1997.

In 1998/1999 academic year, we established content areas with coordinators. The various content areas meeting looked at ways to better present the school in terms of reorganization.

The result is the decision to split the IT Department into the Departments of Manufacturing & Construction Management and Computer Electronics & Graphics.

Rational:

Industrial Technology Department has been in existence for nearly 30 years.

We currently offer options within the Industrial Technology program. These options are hidden and as such hard for prospective students to identify the programs we offer. The options are now mature and can stand on their own as majors.

Changing the department names will give us more visibility. It will help to meet the university strategic plan initiative for enhancing the image of the university. It will create opportunities for faculty and program growth. We have external support from our Industrial Advisory Boards and professional Associations.

Prof. Vial of the design department then addressed this issue. The Department of Design wishes to be supportive of such initiatives, but is concerned about the following:

The revised Senate Agenda was the first notice that the Department of Design (Graphic / Information) was given of the SOT's intention to create an academic department of Computer Electronics and Graphics. The Department of Design provides required course work for a SOT program that would be effected (even though Design uses no courses from the SOT programs).

The Department of Design (Graphic / Information) is very concerned that the proposed name of the new department "Computer Electronics and Graphics" could add to the already existing (serious) confusion among the students and parents as they try to determine which department to join if they are looking for a degree in Graphic Design (most students use the term "Computer Graphics" as slang for "Graphic Design"). The two departments are completely different in mission, intent and instruction and confusion by students in the past has been costly and upsetting.

Due to the history of confusion on the part of students, the suggestion was made that the SOT consider changing the name of the proposed department to something like "The Department of Networking and Print Technologies"... or "Computer Electronics and Printing Management and Sciences" which might more closely identify the true nature of the instruction. This precedent has been set (for like reason) by a very similar department at the highly respected Rochester Institute of Technology which is called "The Department of Printing Management and Sciences" in an effort to reflect the nature of the instruction and avoid confusion with their Graphic Design area.

While she wishes to be supportive of such initiatives, this is the first she has seen of the proposal. In particular the inclusion in the title of "Graphics" may be confusing to student wishing to pursue a career in either Technology or Design. She suggested a rename to "Department of Networking and Print Technologies" to remove confusion. Indeed consultation with other institutions, and she exemplified by quoting from the Rochester School of Technology, show that they use " ……and Management Sciences. Indeed "Computer Electronics" alone may also be a better title.

Dean Kremens in response indicated that both Graphic Design and Graphic Arts were in place in the School of Technology and furthermore the term "networking" was too narrow. Moreover "Computer Electronics" is a common term. He sees the key to his Department and Dr Vial’s department as being able to feed both programs to best suit student needs.

Sen. Calvert: Agreed that "Computer Electronics" was too narrow a term and perhaps "Engineering and Graphic Technologies" was a better term.

Prof. Vial…or even "Computer and Printing Technologies" for Design is not the same as Printing

Sen. Walo: The School of Business also has a management department who would probably wish to comment on this proposal.

Sen. Crundwell: Is there a return date on Dr. Judd’s request?

Sen. Benfield: "…advise as soon as possible."

President Best: Suggested a committee comprised of the following be struck to report back on May 7, 2001.

Dean Kremens* * Will convene the meeting

Prof. Vial
Sen. Calvert
Sen. Walo and/or Business School Rep
Sen. Perreault
Sen. Thornton

Prof. DeLaura made the following remarks to assist the deliberations of the committee:

A Graphics program has been in the School of Technology since 1936. The change arose out of advice from one of Technologies advisory groups who wished them to compress existing courses/areas in Graphic Arts and Graphic Design Management, in large part to remove student confusion. Furthermore the suggested change is a result of discussions with the school’s accrediting agency who recommends one Department and to compress the courses and remove the "design" label. Finally, Dr. DeLaura noted that the term printing was no longer generally used, given the significant advances in the interface between computers and the output of graphic material.

2. Report to Senate from University Planning and Budget Committee. D. Blitz

 Prof. Blitz made the following remarks.

The UPBC met on a monthly basis during academic year 2000-2001. The major discussions and proposals are as follows:

 (1) Discussion was held on priorities that members considered important for the university. Among issues raised were the need to increase the number of full-time faculty, the need for more information technology staff, and the current financial arrangements for CSUOnline.

 (2) The Chief Financial Officer presented an overview of the university’s budget, focusing on the "pie chart" of budget allocations for FY 2000-2001, and in particular, distribution of discretionary budgets (i.e. sums over and above fixed expenses such as salaries and benefits), as well as revenue sources and expenditures. (see chart, appended).

 (3) It was agreed by the committee that Kim Chagnon , Budget Director, would be invited to participate at meetings. She has provided essential help in preparing charts and data for consideration at meetings.

 (4) The UPBC discussed its relationship with the Strategic Planning Team (SPT). This group was responsible for, among other things, canvassing proposals and making recommendations for the $250,000 strategic planning item agreed to by the university last year, the result of the process of re-designing strategic planning conducted with the help of Werner Associates. It was agreed that the SPT having served its purpose to initiate the strategic planning award process should be disbanded, and its functions assumed by the UPBC. The SPT agreed to this proposal as well, and it is now submitted for Senate approval. (see charter amendments, attached)

 (5) It was agreed that the committee should discuss budget and planning priorities more fully. In order to do so, its membership should be expanded to include administrators with senior budgetary and planning responsibilities, specifically, the three vice-presidents and a dean from the council of deans (as had been included on the disbanded SPT).

 (6) The UPBC judges that the term of faculty members (teaching and administrative) should be extended to four years, given its dual responsibility for oversight of both budget and planning, and the length of time for new faculty on the committee to become sufficiently familiar with these matters.

 (7) As a result, the budget and planning committee modified its charter to take into account its added responsibilities, membership and terms of service as indicated by (4), (5), and (6) above. This amended charter is submitted for Senate approval.

 Submitted on behalf of the Budget and Planning Committee,
David Blitz, Chair, on behalf of the committee

Attachment following: Modifications to the charter of the UPBC.

3. Technology Use award. Sen. Calvert

Sen. Calvert requested advice on the process of nominating a student for an award in the exemplary use of Technology.

Sen. Altieri: This appears a good use of the Information technology Committee

Sen. Martin-Troy: Was there not a "Committee on Awards" some years ago?

Sen. Crundwell: Shamefully admitted he was on that committee and even more shamefully it had never met.

Sen. Martin-Troy: Then give it to a committee in existence.

President Best charged the Information Technology Committee to consider and report back by May 7. That committee includes Sen. Crundwell.