Indianapolis Faculty Council (IFC)

Minutes

March 4, 2008 ~ IT 252 ~ 3:00 – 5:00 p.m.

Faculty and Guests Present: William Agbor Baiyee, Hasan Akay, Rachel Applegate, Sarah Baker, James Baldwin, Robert Barrows, Margaret Bauer, Terry Bauer, Anne Belcher, Teri Belecky-Adams, Ed Berbari, Jacqueline Blackwell, Bonnie Blazer-Yost, Polly Boruff-Jones, James Clack, Janice Cox, Jeffrey Crabtree, Andre De Tienne, Marsha Ellett, Mary L. Fisher, David Ford, Danita Forgey, Jay Howard, Marilyn Irwin, James Johnson, Henry Karlson, Greg Lindsey, Anna McDaniel, Mahesh Merchant, Henry Merrill, Sharee’ Myricks, Hari Nakshatri, Bart Ng, Megan Palmer, William Potter, William Schneider, Martin Spechler, Uday Sukhatme, Terri Tarr, Rosalie Vermette, Amy Conrad Warner, Richard Ward, David Westhuis, Robert White, Frank Witzmann, Marianne Wokeck, Nancy Young, Weiming Yu, and Oner Yurtseven

Agenda Item I: Welcome and Call to Order

IUPUI Faculty Vice President Rosalie Vermette called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.

Agenda Item II: Adoption of the Agenda as the Order of Business for the Day

The Agenda was adopted as the Order for the Business of the Day.

Agenda Item III: Memorial Resolution for W. David Bostwick

The IFC adopted the resolution and stood for a moment of silence.

Agenda Item IV: [ACTION ITEM] Approval of IFC February 5, 2008, Minutes

Hearing no objections, the IFC February 5, 2008, minutes stood as written and were entered into record.

(http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/minutes/Minutes_IFC_2-5-08.htm)

Agenda Item V: Updates/Remarks from the Chancellor

Uday Sukhatme, Executive Vice Chancellor and Dean of the Faculties, gave the following report for Chancellor Bantz:

· The Academic Plan is near completion and will be available on the campus website soon. A printed version will be available for distribution pointing to the web for more detail.

· The Signature Centers had a second round of proposals with ten new Centers selected for a total of 29. There will be a review of the first round of Centers.

· Enrollment Shaping is yielding good results and next year we will continue to see the same. There is an enhanced effort for recruiting through printed materials, improved websites, IUPUI billboards, and recruiters going to neighboring states.

· Poetry Contest for high school students: There are 500 entries this year.

· Community Engagement – TRIP Initiative: Lorraine Blackman gave the first TRIP lecture a week ago.

· Dean Search updates: The School of Science dean search did not produce a viable candidate. Bart Ng has been named the Acting Dean for the next two years. School of Health and Rehab Sciences: Four candidates have been interviewed with an announcement expected next week. School of Liberal Arts: Waiting on the recommendations from the search committee. School of Physical Education and Tourism Management: Three candidates were identified with the first candidate on campus today.

· Other searches / fellows: Trudy Banta is chair the search for the Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Dominic Galli and Andy Barth are completing their terms as Faculty Fellows. There will be a Faculty Fellow announcement for the new Vice Chancellor for Research.

· Spechler asked if the faculty will be able to view the academic plan and have a public debate? Sukhatme agreed to have this chance and asked Vermette to schedule time for the debate/forum. This will be placed on the IFC-EC agenda.

Agenda Item VI: Updates/Remarks from the IFC President

IUPUI Faculty President Ng gave the following report:

· The University Faculty Council met today and he reported on the following items. The Intellection Property Policy has been rewritten in regard to the section referring to funding. The proposal returned had 5% taken away from revenue. The second change is to bring the IU policy in line with other Big Ten universities in terms of revenue. There is a proposal for the administration to base this on net revenue. The UFC discussed the policy and the Agenda Committee strongly resisted the idea of the extra 5% and the President is open to discussion. The policy will be reviewed by Dennis Gammon (IUB) and Simon Atkinson (IUPUI) to move further. The President would like to have the plan approved by May.

· The Family Leave Policy was passed a few years ago subject to the evaluation of its true cost. Neal Theobald has finished the computation after a partial study of the cost based on the Bloomington campus. The cost seems to be reasonable and the President will forward the policy to the Deans in March and the Chancellor will review it in April. The President will make determination on the policy by the end of May. The policy does not have to be sent to the Board of Trustees.

· Resolution regarding the Review of Chancellor Bantz: The IFC-EC passed a resolution in regard to the review of Chancellor Bantz, which has not taken place. The following resolution was sent to the President today: “The Executive Committee of the IUPUI Faculty Council strongly urges President McRobbie to conduct a review of Chancellor Bantz at the earliest possible time during Fall, 2008, semester. The Review Committee should be constituted during summer 2008. In the absence of a University level review, it is the intent of the IFC-EC to urge the IFC to initiative its own review.” Schneider moved that the IFC endorse the resolution by the IFC-EC regarding the Chancellor’s review. The motion was seconded. Question was about why the Chancellor should be reviewed. Ng spoke to the policy that administrators are reviewed in their fifth year, and this is the Chancellor’s fifth year. Motion passed unanimously.

· Resolution regarding data assistance regarding the state of funding for the Schools of Science and Liberal Arts: The IFC-EC has received letters from the Schools of Science and Liberal Arts about the state of funding for those schools. The IFC-EC endorsed the following resolution: “The IFC-EC is requesting data by March 18 that discloses the average instructional cost per credit hour for each academic discipline at IUPUI and comparable peer institutions.”

· Schneider asked if the Family Leave Proposal is going to the deans for comment or approval. Ng responded “for comments.” Schneider asked if the current policy stays in effect until the new policy is approved. Ng responded the new policy will be better, but the current policy stays in effect.

· Spechler wished Ng well in his new role as Acting Dean. He encouraged Sukhatme to be generous in his funding of new faculty members. He understands that a number of new faculty have been hired and is hopeful that we can nurture them. He hopes in the research endeavor that Sukhatme can support these colleagues since Purdue University does not.

· Berbari spoke to tuition normalization. He believes this campus should have tuition in line with Bloomington as well as address the state normalization. We can barely support undergraduate education as well as the research initiative. We need to make a strong statement to this matter. Ng said that Berbari’s point is critical as it is good to support the research mission. On the other hand, it is difficult to talk about doing high level research when the core business is being ignored. On April 15, the chairs of Budgetary Affairs and Campus Planning have been asked to make a presentation to the IFC about the budget situation.

Agenda Item VII: Legislative Update

Amy Warner, Vice Chancellor for External Affairs, gave the following report on Indiana Legislation:

· March 14 is the last day the legislature is in session. This year is a short-session and budgetary discussions are not usually held at this time.

· Two issues being discussed is property taxes and immigration bills. The immigration bill reflects policies on hiring immigrants.

· There is a responsibility we have: no harm comes to the community – stopping policies that might curb the rights and responsibilities of faculty and campuses.

· There are conference committees (bipartisan groups looking at bills) that work to come to resolution on bills proposed. The legislature is considering bills on building infrastructure as well as “green buildings.”

· Dual Credit Bill proposes that five courses, instead of two, be available to high school students before coming to the institutions. Concern is where does the income go that would have come to the universities had the students taken the classes here instead of in high school.

· She spoke of the Purple Heart Bill – who is covering the cost of tuition bills?

· Age discrimination bill – bill releases the 65 year old age limit on retirement ages at public universities. IU would like to keep the 65 age limit on administrators.

· IUPUI works with the IU and PU state relations team. Warner and Jennifer Boehm work with the IU team.

· Warner spoke of the legislative days at the Capital Building. Tomorrow is Graduate Education Day which deals with the work we do with graduate education. We have representatives attending.

· Warner said there will be a 7^th District debate this Thursday in the Conference Center.

· Warner’s office is assisting SPEA in finding poll workers this year.

· White said he has lost two valuable faculty members to Vermont where same-sex unions are recognized. He believes that IU should be at the front of this issue and not in the background. We need to be more vocal as some of our neighboring businesses do. Warner said that last year when the “definition of marriage” bill was defeated last year, IUPUI has to follow the universities lead. She said IU works to determine our future. If we have issues we want the university to take on, we need to identify those issues to the President. She pointed out that each of us has the right to write our Congresspersons to help influence their vote. White said that sometimes the institution should take a stand on a public issue. Warner said those issues need to be defined and identified to the President.

· Spechler asked who decides what the position of Indiana University is going to be? Spechler used the 65 year retirement issue as an example. Who decides that is right? Warner said the process is a distributed bill review process. Each campus can identify people who are experts in those areas. 70 people on this campus currently review bills. The comments go to the State Relations Bureau who makes a recommendation to the President based on views of the persons looking at the bill.

· For more information on government relations or to sign up for state or federal relations updates, visit the website for the IUPUI Office of External Affairs (www.iupui.edu/administration/extaff) or call 274-7400.

Agenda Item VIII: Campus Campaign

James Johnson spoke on the Campaign and distributed a handout with statistics (www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/documents/Campus Campaign 20080001.pdf)

The Campaign is similar to the United Way, but all funds raised stay right here on campus. $70,000 has been raised so far. He asked that we act as an advocate to the campaign, thank the coordinators who are doing the work, and consider giving when asked.

Ward mentioned the Dan Wolf Fund (in Liberal Arts) provides emergency loans for students. A similar fund was set up in Campus and Community Life, but to this day, the fund is not able to be used. The delay seems to be financial rules and regulations and he encouraged Johnson to look into this. Fisher said the School of Nursing has a similar fund and is being used. Johnson said he will check with the Foundation about the problem. Wokeck said a report to the IFC would be helpful. He will report back at the April 1 or 15 meeting. Spechler said the attitude of the campus would be better if we knew the IU Foundation funds were coming to IUPUI as well, not just IU Bloomington. Ng said Spechler should address this concern to Bill Heller. Ng said we should invite Heller to the IFC for discussion.

Agenda Item IX: IFC Leadership and Appointment of a President Pro Tempore

Vermette stated from the Bylaws that if the President of the IFC steps down, the IFC-EC appoints the replacement. Ng is stepping down April 1 to take the role of Interim Dean for the School of Science. The IFC-EC elected Rosalie Vermette as President with Mary Fisher (Nursing) as Vice President for a two-month term. Vermette thanked Ng for his work during the past four years with the IFC. The Council gave applause for Ng.

Agenda Item X: Endorsement of Resolution Sent Forward from the IFC Executive Committee for CTE Increase

Vermette read the Resolution as follows: “Whereas the faculty of IUPUI are as committed to excellence as are the faculty of IU Bloomington, the faculty of IUPUI endorses the request by campus administration for a correction in CTE funding which currently amounts to an increase of $200 per student per year in order to fulfill this commitment.” The resolution was unanimously passed by the IFC-EC at their meeting on February 28, 2008.

Vermette said Chancellor Bantz will move the resolution along to President McRobbie. Dean Sukhatme addressed questions.

Rachel Applegate: There is a cap the students can give to the university. Will the new fee be “undesignated” at this point? Sukhatme said the tuition is set in the biennium. The resolution is a correction that should have been made during the last biennium.

Jim Baldwin: Has the student government been asked their opinion? Response was, “no.” The Student Government rep (Myricks) said this is the first time this has been heard.

What kind of impact will this have on lower impact students? Sukhatme said the amount will be phased in over four years. The funds received will be close to $4 million. The IFC-EC spoke that the new funds cannot be used to hurt lower income students. Some extra funds will be designated for students in the form of scholarships or book rewards in order to purchase books. $1 million will be set aside for this with the remainder used for CTE.

Rick Ward said it is important to remember that the student body in Indianapolis does not have the same “deep pockets” as the students in Bloomington. The financial demands are different. Each time we add an initiative, it does impact our students. The impact now is around $30,000 in debt for students. He is happy that a designated portion will go to students, but a portion of the funds would go to supporting faculty positions. He is personally against the resolution as it will hurt the lower income students. Will we price ourselves out of the market someday? Sukhatme said a large portion of CTE funds go to students at risk. As part of McRobbie’s initiative, $2.1 million will go to students who are most at risk – students receiving Pell Grants, etc. This is a quantitative issue.

Schneider said we need to protect our students, as well as take every resource possible to have a great undergraduate program. He does not like the wording of the resolution and suggested it be amended. Ng said the IFC wants to achieve excellence. He believes this body should endorse the resolution.

Vermette and Karlson spoke to the reason why the IUPUI campus seeks the correction – to seek parity with the IUB campus and correct the CTE funding amount that was not assessed correctly with the Board of Trustees.

Spechler said the wording of the resolution is ambiguous. If the campus gave all scholarships on the basis of need, we would have some standing in this area. We need the money. Some students will drop out because they can’t afford to attend. He pointed out the economic status of the students are quite diverse. He supports students who can’t afford their education here, but many can. We need the money, so let’s support this.

Packer suggested changes to the wording. Ng said the resolution gives the Chancellor the opportunity to talk with the President about funding and parity.

Ward asked if part-time students are assessed this fee. The response was no.

Barrows agrees with the proposal but the wording is not good. He feels we should use the word “equalization” instead of “correction.” He suggested the resolution be moved to this change. The motion was a seconded and the amendment passed. The resolution was changed to: “The faculty of IUPUI endorses the request by campus administration for an equalization in CTE funding. This currently requires an increase of $200 per full-time student per year in order to fulfill the faculty’s commitment to excellence.”

Agenda Item XI: Undergraduate Curriculum Advisory Committee

Vermette and Watt reviewed the Committee proposal which was revised per past recommendation. Ward said the proposal is long overdue; however, he is concerned about the role APPC currently plays in new proposals. The committee often have an insight that faculty don’t have. He recommends there be a shared member of APPC to sit on the UCAC and a member of the UCAC serve on the APPC. Vermette said this committee isn’t a decision-making committee, but thinks about programs and policies that may not have been considered. They are trying to get broad faculty base. Ward said the 10^th person on the committee would serve as ex-officio.

Spechler said that when President Ehrlich began RCM, the idea was to gather more students. Dean Plater had suggested having a committee that would see unnecessary duplication of courses. He does not agree that the new committee should recommend new courses. He believes it should review all undergraduates courses “on need” in order to eliminate extra courses and save the university money. He moved to remove the word “new” and “proposed” from item 1. The motion was seconded. Fisher said the original thought of the committee was to review new courses and see what the workload would be. Karlson said leaving the word “all” in item 1 would become a mandate for the university to review all campus undergraduate programs. Packer suggested just removing the word “all.” Schneider is opposed to amending the proposal. Berbari said reviewing the programs could “open a can of words” and suggested leaving the item alone. Vermette said the proposal writers did not see this new committee as policing past courses. It wasn’t meant to review retroactive; but look at new courses. Akay asked if new courses would come for review in this committee. Vermette responded yes. The motion did not pass.

Lindsey asked how this would relate to the remonstrance practice. Vermette said the remonstrance process is not working quickly. If it is working with a committee like this, it should work more quickly. Lindsey asked how the process is not working. Vermette said timing is slow and sometimes there is not answer. Lindsey asked if no one remonstrates to the course, why will there be a review? Porter said remonstrance is handled from the Registrar’s office. When a course comes through, the Registrar’s office distributes the course for review. A year ago, a note was sent to academic unit that they thought might have an issue with the new course – in case the unit is not monitoring. The onerous should be placed back on the person who is to be monitoring the process in the schools.

Akay said there is a counterpart of the committee in the graduate program.

Crabtree asked how item 3 would work. Vermette said it would work to put faculty in touch with each other to encourage them to work together. Crabtree said this is more than monitoring or reviewing.

Vermette called the question of approving the proposal with the amendment of adding the ex officio. The proposal was passed. The revised proposal is as follows:

Undergraduate Curriculum Advisory Committee (UCAC)

Approved March 4, 2008, by the IUPUI Faculty Council

Rationale: Collaboration across disciplines to strengthen both research and teaching is becoming more and more important. Key campus initiatives, such as the IUPUI academic program, the life sciences initiative, and the Principles of Undergraduate Learning, have curricular implications for all undergraduate programs and would benefit from ongoing cross-disciplinary discussions among faculty. Curricular decisions are often made in units without the benefit of conversation with colleagues in other units who might be affected by these changes, and curricular changes often have substantial impact beyond the department or school in which the changes are made. As stipulated in the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty, the curriculum is both the prerogative and the responsibility of the faculty, and since the Campus Planning Committee has recommended the creation of a deliberative body of faculty to deal with curricular issues, a forum to explore collaborative, interdisciplinary programs, to discuss curricular matters that have the potential to affect other units and programs on campus, and to offer advice and recommendations to the Chief Academic Officer, the Dean of the Faculties is being proposed for IUPUI.

Responsibilities of the Undergraduate Curriculum Advisory Committee include the following:

1. Review all new campus undergraduate programs with particular consideration of proposed courses that may overlap with or duplicate existing courses or programs in other schools, and oversee the undergraduate course remonstrance process.

2. Mediate and propose solutions to resolve curricular disputes between undergraduate programs, in particular when remonstrances cannot be resolved between units.

3. Encourage interdisciplinary work in teaching, curriculum development, and research, particularly in the life sciences.

4. Provide collaborative support for the development of IUPUI’s general education program and its guiding Principles of Undergraduate Learning.

5. Review changes in program requirements that have the potential to affect course enrollments in other schools and programs.

6. Screen all activities involved in the creation, revision, and elimination of undergraduate degree programs with a view to upholding the integrity of the Mission and Vision of IUPUI, as well as the value of undergraduate degrees, certificates, and programs at IUPUI.

The UCAC will serve as an advisory body to the Dean of the Faculties on issues of undergraduate curriculum and programs at IUPUI. The Dean of the Faculties retains final authority over all curricular matters. For this reason the Dean of the Faculties or his designee will serve as a non-voting member on the UCAC.

Membership of the UCAC will be a committee of nine (9) tenured or tenure track faculty members constituting a representative group from across the campus, one (1) ex officio member from the Academic Policies and Procedures Committee (APPC – preferably the chair or designee), and the Dean of the Faculties or the Dean’s designee. The ex officio member does not hold voting privilege. New members will be elected annually by the Indianapolis Faculty Council (IFC) from a list of nominees prepared by the IFC Nominating Committee, and a third faculty member will be appointed by the Dean of the Faculties, each to serve three-year terms. Each school on campus with undergraduate programs will recommend to the Nominating Committee candidates for a slate to be prepared by the Nominating Committee. Three members will rotate off the committee every year with three new members replacing them (a faculty member may serve consecutive terms). The initial period will have the nine voting members serving staggered terms.

The members of the committee should be tenure/tenure track faculty who, ideally, chair or serve on a school’s curriculum committee or other appropriate committees. Associate deans or their equivalent from the different schools on campus should not be considered for this committee. Faculty members recommended by their schools will be elected from a slate prepared by the IFC’s Nominating Committee and voted on by the IFC in the spring to serve a three-year term beginning in the Fall semester. The Nominating Committee will slate candidates in such a way as to ensure balance across programs and schools on the IUPUI campus. There will be no more than two committee members from any one unit with undergraduate programs at any one time.

At the committee’s first meeting each year a chair and a secretary will be elected from the nine (9) committee members. The primary responsibility of the chair and the secretary is to schedule meetings, prepare the agenda, ensure an orderly discussion, and maintain minutes.

When needed for purposes of information, representatives from the schools directly affected by a proposed policy or decision will be invited to participate in the discussions of the committee. Representatives can include a school’s dean or associate dean for academics, tenure/tenure track faculty, lecturers, or staff.

Agenda Item XII: Question and Answer Period

There were no questions at this meeting.

Agenda Item XIII: Call for any IFC or UFC Standing Committee Reports.

No reports.

Agenda Item IVX: Unfinished Business

No business.

Agenda Item XV: New Business

Vermette announced the next IFC meeting is April 1, at 3:00 p.m., in IH 100.

Agenda Item XVI: Adjournment

A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. The motion carried. Vice President Vermette adjourned the meeting.

Karen Eckert

IUPUI Faculty Council Coordinator