FC970206 Minutes:

Approved FC970501.

 

Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis

Faculty Council Meeting

February 6, 1997

School of Dentistry, Room S115

3:30 - 5:30 p.m.

 

Present: Administration: Chancellor Gerald L. Bepko, William Plater.  Deans: John Barlow, Lawrence Goldblatt, P. Nicholas Kellum, H Oner Yurtseven. Elected Faculty:  Charalambos Aliprantis, W Marshall Anderson, Susan Ball, Joseph Bidwell, William Blomquist, Kenneth Byrd, Nancy Eckerman, Julie Fore, Karen Gable, Paul Galanti, Richard Gregory, William Hohlt, Sara Hook, Nathan Houser, Robert Keck, Raymond Koleski, Miriam Langsam, Thomas Luerssen, Najja Modibo, David Peters, Richard Peterson, Richard Pflanzer, Rebecca Porter, Terry Reed, Frederick Rescorla, Virginia Richardson, Bernadette Rodak, Beverly Ross, William Schneider, Erdogan Sener, Martin Spechler, Kathleen Warfel, Jeffrey Watt, Robert Weetman, Karen West, Harriet Wilkins, Charles Yokomoto.  Ex Officio Member: James Baldwin, Steven Mannheimer, Bart Ng, Carl Rothe,. Alternates: Deans: J. M. Kapoor for Roberta Greene, Shirley Ross for Angela McBride.  Elected Faculty: Nancy Badia-Elder for Janice Froehlich, Bethany Neal-Beliveau for Soren Svanum.  Ex Officio Members: Donald Humphress for Virgie Montgomery, Subir Chakrabarti for Rosalie Vermette.

 

Absent: Administration: Trudy Banta.  Deans: A James Barnes, Paul Bippen, Trevor Brown, Robert Holden, Continuing Studies Dean, Norman Lefstein, John Rau, Robert Shay, David Stocum, Philip Tompkins, Donald Warren, Charles Webb.  Elected Faculty: Merrill Benson, Ulf Jonas Bjork, Jana Bradley, Thomas Broadie, Lynn Broderick, Paul Brown, William Burke, David Canal, John Eble, Naomi Fineberg, S Edwin Fineberg, Patricia Gallagher, Bernardino Ghetti, Sanjiv Gokhale, Robert Hall, Robert Havlik, Dean Hawley, Antoinette Hood, Elizabeth Jones, Henry Karlson, M Jan Keffer, Michael Klemsz, Colleen Larson, Joyce Man, Rebecca Markel, Byron Olson, Fred Pavalko, Gerald Powers, Richard Rogers, Mark Seifert, Jay Simon, Stephen Stockberger, Jeffery Vessely, Marianne Wokeck, Mervin Yoder.  Ex Officio Member: Henry Besch, Michael Cochran, Richard Fredland, Stuart Hart, Dolores Hoyt, Juanita Keck, William Orme, Marshall Yovits.

 

Visitors: Erwin Boschmann (Faculty Development Office), Mark Grove (Registrar), Patrick Rooney (Chancellor’s Office).

 

Agenda Item I: Call to Order

 

Porter: The meeting will come to order, please.  We have a very full agenda this afternoon.  We did not indicate on the agenda any time limits, but in view of the number of the number of items that we want to try to complete, we will be looking at completing the discussion in relationship to the Trustees’ action on Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday in a 30 minute time frame.

 

Agenda Item II: Approval of Minutes: December 5, 1996

 

Porter: Our first order of business is approval of the minutes of December 5, 1996.

 

Langsam: I so move.

 

Watt: Second.

 

Porter: We have a motion to approve and a second to approve the minutes.  All in favor, say “Aye.”  Opposed? [none] The minutes stand approved.

 

Agenda Item III: Administrative Report: Chancellor Gerald Bepko

 

Bepko: Since there is a full agenda I will just say a couple of words.  Perhaps most importantly, a word of introduction.  This is the second meeting that our host Larry Goldblatt, the new Dean of the School of Dentistry, has attended.  He was at the January meeting, but those of you who were here remember that was a meeting that was not very well attended.  Some people had to leave early because of the bad weather and Larry was among those.  So, we didn’t get a chance to introduce him.  I am pleased to say welcome Larry Goldblatt, who many of you know because he was a member of the Indiana University School of Dentistry faculty here at IUPUI for about 20 years before the Case Western Reserve University School of Dentistry was successful in recruiting him away to be their dean.  We countered that just a couple of years later by recruiting him back to be our dean.  It was to our great good fortune and to the great misfortune of Case Western.  Their President argued with me on the telephone  quite a bit about whether it was fair to offer somebody a job after he had only been there a couple of years.  Actually, he was very gracious about it after he realized that we had all of the aces. [laughter]  We are delighted that Larry is now back as Dean of the School of Dentistry.  Welcome Larry! [applause[

 

We have a report on the TERA.  Bill will bring us up to date on that.

 

Plater: I think everyone has been waiting for the Trustees’ action on the Teaching Excellence Recognition Award (TERA) that has been much discussed.  At their last meeting the Trustees adopted the recommendation of the committee that had been working on this proposal -- with a few slight modifications.  The next step is for us to implement the policy on our campus.  There were a few particular issues that require resolution before funds can be allocated to the schools for their implementation of TERA.  We just appointed today the campus committee to advise us on those broad policy issues.  The committee will be composed of three deans, two representatives from the Budgetary Affairs Committee, and two members of the Faculty Affairs Committee.  Erv Boschmann will chair the committee as a non-voting member and provide logistical support in the event that information or other supporting materials are necessary for this committee.

 

We think the issues to be addressed are important, but probably can be resolved in one or perhaps no more than two meetings.  We expect to have the guidelines available for schools to implement TERA within a matter of just a few weeks.  At this point, we can’t give many more details but we wanted you to know the process is under way and we will soon be able to issue these recognition awards for excellence in teaching.  I would be happy to answer any questions.

 

Langsam: Can you tell us if the major thrust of the revision was to go ahead with the award with 25 percent of the faculty?

 

Schneider: The 25 percent was recognized as a cap.  The amount of the award was decided to be between $500 and $1,500.  There was to be no average computed.  The question of faculty development monies was decided to be handled in a separate manner.  In other words, all funds that were earmarked would go to teaching awards, but a separate source of funds equal to 15 percent of those teaching awards will be available yearly, at least for the next three years.  The exact manner in which that is to be determined will be handled later on this spring.


 

Warfel: My understanding that the pool for the TERA awards is one percent of under-graduate tuition.

 

Plater: That is actually one-half of a percent.

 

Warfel: One-half of a percent.  How much is that?

 

Plater: Approximately $350,000 -- a little less than half but very close.

 

Warfel: So, in terms of deciding if all of that is in one IUPUI campus pool there are interesting questions about how it is subdivided.  Is it this committee that is going make those decisions?

 

Plater: It is going to make a recommendation on that issue.  That is the first issue for them to take up -- the distribution of funds to the units.  Actually, it is the second issue.  The first issue we have asked them to take up is the eligibility because there is some latitude, but that is left to the campuses as to whether to include lecturers, part-time faculty, or associate instructors within the award recognition.  The next biggest issue is the actual distribution of funds to units.

 

Warfel: Will this committee be doing assessment on the effect of TERA awards?

 

Plater: We have been asked to conduct an assessment after three years.  I am not sure that this committee will be the one to do it.  We will have to conduct an assessment.  However, we have asked the committee to advise us on the kind of information that we should begin collecting from the very outset so that in three years we will have the basis for making some assessment.

 

Bepko: You all remember the Strategic Directions Charter, which is our constitution for the future of Indiana University -- How to become America’s New Public University.  I hope you remember our campus plan --  Mission, Vision, Aspirations, Goals, and Strategic Initiatives -- from which flows the proposal for  the University College.  Putting learning at the center of our missions is IUPUI’s approach to the Strategic Directions Charter plan and the first entry under that heading in our campus plan is a University College.

 

There has been a lot of attention paid to University College here in recent weeks.  We hope you are fully engaged on that issue and will be prepared to talk about it in a subsequent meeting.  We hope you don’t forget that this flows from this campus planning document.  It is only one of the entries in here but we will continually return to this campus planning document and add to it or comment on it as we go along.  To show that we were in the forefront in developing the campus planning document as we did, about 10 days ago the Bloomington campus published its campus planning document.  Be careful you don’t get the wrong one.  It is very similar in design and that was established by our campus plan.  We think that this is a healthy kind of development across the university.

 

Mannheimer: I notice that the Bloomington document has the word ‘excellence’ on the cover.  Are we to assume the IUPUI approach favors more balanced case? [laugher]

 


Bepko: No.  But, if you are looking for symbolism, the responsibilities of excellence on our document is carried in the highest point of the page. 

 

Agenda Item IV: President of the Faculty Report: William Schneider

 

Porter: We will now move forward with the President of the Faculty Report.

 

Schneider: I will try to brief also.  One item that I would like to report on is that the Executive Committee of the Faculty Council has adopted the interim procedures for Faculty Boards of Review that were recommended by the committee chaired by Carl Rothe and discussed at the last Faculty Council meeting.  In fact, Chancellor Bepko and I have scheduled the first orientation for the members of Faculty Boards of Review for February 24.  The Executive Committee will follow the other interim procedures recommended in assigning cases to the new boards.  I would like to thank the members of the committee as well as Faculty Council for their thoughtful suggestions and we look forward to the final recommendations of that committee.

 

I would also like to point out that you should have received the ballots for elections to the University Faculty Council from this campus.  They are due in the Council Office no later than February 14. 

 

The Trustees have met since our last meeting.  As you may have noticed, one of the items that was decided on was the Teaching Excellence Recognition Award.  Another item affecting us was the decision on the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday which will we be considering later.  If you wonder how those things happen at the Trustees’ meeting, The next one will be on Friday, February 28.  The Business meeting of the Trustees is always conducted in the afternoon around 4 p.m. or so in the Conference Center and it is open to the public.

 

Also, meeting in Indianapolis this month is the University Faculty Council.  That will be on February 11 at 1:30 in the Conference Center.  Items to be considered include: further discussion of the tenure/ineligible faculty issue.  It is most important in identifying the issues that we want to concentrate on.  There will also be a report of the initial collection of data from the various campuses.  I understand that just yesterday we received the reports from all the campuses.

 

There are some other things going on at the University Faculty Council that you probably should be aware of.  They will eventually come this way.  One is a revision of the Intellectual Property policy which was passed last year.  Some of the Trustees had questions about it, and it has gone back to subcommittee for further work.  That will probably be coming within a month or so.

 

Another item that the University Faculty Council is beginning to consider is the question of Post-Tenure Review. On this campus we are far ahead of others and will  proceed, keeping in mind that the discussion is also beginning at the University Faculty Council about it.

 

Warfel: Can you share with us what the Trustees’ concerns were for the Intellectual Property policy?

 


Schneider: Primarily it had to do with ownership and whether or not there was sufficient  concern of ownership by the university as opposed to the individual faculty member.  They felt the balance needed to be addressed further in favor of the university.

 

(Unknown Speaker:) Could you repeat the dates of the University Faculty Council meeting?

 

Schneider: The University Faculty Council meeting is next Tuesday, February 11 at 1:30 in Room 132 of the Conference Center.  The Trustees’ meeting is on Friday, February 28.

 

Agenda Item V: Election of Faculty Boards of Review

 

Porter: We will proceed with the election of the Faculty Boards of Review.  Karen West, the chair of the Nominating Committee is here to conduct this election.

 

West: Are there any questions about the revisions that were sent out?   Because of some appointments it changed the mix of the Faculty Boards of Review so we had to rearrange our initial nominations.  The same people were nominated but they were rearranged to different boards of review.

 

Mannheimer: Are there several procedures or one procedure regarding the election of the University Faculty Council?

Chumley: The procedure is that each unit can nominate up to two persons whose name is turned into the Council Office.  Those names are then placed on the UFC ballot to be elected by the faculty at large.

 

Mannheimer: There are no at large nominations?

 

Chumley: The members are elected by the faculty at large. There are no unit representatives on the University Faculty Council.

 

Mannheimer: Thank you.

 

[The results of the election of Faculty Boards of Review were]

 

Faculty Board of Review #1: Paul Galanti

Faculty Board of Review #2: Carl Andres, Dana McDonald

Faculty Board of Review #3: Zacharie Brahmi, Dixie Ray

 

West: I would like permission to destroy the ballots.  The tally sheet will  be retained in the Council Office.

 

Porter: All of those in favor of destroying the ballots, say “Aye.”  Opposed? [none] Thank you, Karen.  Also, express our appreciation to the committee members.  Congratulations to our newly-elected members of our Boards of Review.


Schneider: If any of those newly-elected persons are here today, please mark February 24 on the calendar for orientation.

 

Agenda Item VI: Constitution and Bylaws Amendment

 

Porter: We are going to proceed to the next item on the agenda which is an amendment to the Constitution.  It is included in your packet with today’s agenda as IUPUI Circular 96-37.

 

Wilkins: On the second page of your packet is the proposed amendment.  If you recall, last spring about this time we brought to you a proposed amendment to the Constitution which redefined the description of units that we had in the Constitution.  At that time a question was raised about whether the language applied appropriately to librarians.  We asked that that be deferred so we could get the substantative part of what we were doing last year through the process.  When you do an amendment to the Constitution it is a fairly complicated procedure.  Action has to be taken here then notification goes to the faculty and then the faculty has to vote on an amendment to the Constitution.  What we are asking you to do is to add the language about librarians so that it is very clear that librarians are eligible to be members of the Council.  Therefore, we are asking you to add the words “and librarians dedicated to performance, professional development, and service” to the section that describes who can be a member of this Council.

 

Porter:   This stands as a motion coming from the committee.

 

Spechler: Harriet, does this change our de facto practice?

 

Wilkins: No.  As I understand it, in the librarians documentation of the last few years they have come to use this language in describing their work and, therefore, have had that reflected in their constitution.

 

Porter: Is there any other discussion?  Hearing no other discussion, all of those in favor of the amendment, please say “Aye.”  Opposed? [none] Are there any abstentions? [none] The motion stands adopted.

 

Agenda Item VII: Trustees’ action of Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday

 

Porter: Our next item is in relationship to the Trustees’ action on the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday.  Jeff Watt from the Academic Affairs Committee is here to present a resolution for your consideration.

 

Watt:   There was a handout distributed regarding this issue.  I will give you a couple of minutes to read it.   [IUPUI Circular 97-01]

 

Peterson: Bill might know the answer to this.  There was an E-mail message that came through from John Walda this morning with a kind of apology related to this issue, but there was no indication in that E-mail message that there was any ______ on their part.  Is that correct?

 


Schneider: Yes.

 

Porter: We will let Jeff make some introductory remarks. 

 

Watt: I will tell you what the discussion was in the Academic Affairs committee.  It came to us between meetings so we did all of the discussion via E-mail and had a vote via E-mail.  The resolution passed 7-1.  There were about four major comments which I will go through.

 

The Academic Affairs Committee strongly believes the following:

 

1)           Students learn more about Martin Luther King’s life and contributions by attending class to observe this holiday rather than observing it by staying at home.

2)           It is the faculties long standing tradition and authority to determine the academic calendar.

3)           Adding a one-day holiday to the academic calendar (which will be a scheduling nightmare).

4)           No other individual’s holiday is in the calendar (Washington’s birthday or Lincoln’s birthday, etc.)

 

Having said that, I am not real familiar with the historical perspective of how Martin Luther King’s holiday was celebrated or what other resolutions have been done in the past or how this got to us via Bloomington.  I think Bill Schneider probably knows more than anyone.

 

Schneider: Although I am a historian by training, I only go back as far as  two days. [laughter]  You know that this came from the Trustees.  What happened two days ago is that the Bloomington Faculty Council passed a resolution which is fairly similar to this which means that it will go to the University Faculty Council for transmission to the Trustees.  In case you are wondering what might happen with our resolution, I would expect that we would send it to the University Faculty Council as well, and use that also as a vehicle for going to the Trustees.

 

Porter: We have the delightful occurrence today of having more people here than we have a couple of times in the past which means that we are having difficulty seeing name cards to record them in the minutes, so we are going to ask that you please identify yourselves when you speak so that we can give you ownership to your comments.

 

Spechler: The background of this is that students have been demanding  on the Bloomington campus for quite a few years that this day, and some other days, be recognized and classes be canceled.  It has also been demanded for Labor Day and for the day or two or three for Thanksgiving, etc.  This year there was a large demonstration on the Bloomington campus demanding this and a number of other things.  There was no idea that there be immediate action, but Vice President Gros Louis  met with the students and said that he personally would be in favor of this as well as some other demands that are Bloomington specific.  The implication was that he would bring it to the Bloomington Faculty Council as we thought he ought to do since the calendar is a matter of the faculty.  Very shortly thereafter, the Trustees brought this up and passed it.  Mr. Walda, the chairman of the Board of Trustees, said that notwithstanding the three-day lapse, that they need do this under pressure.  But, it hadn’t been on the agenda before and no one knew that they were going to consider this at the Board of Trustees.  That is some of the background.

 


My comment is this.  In general, the President of this University knows that this matter, and several other matters, are complicated for  the faculty.  In the past, when ad hoc resolutions have been brought by whatever or another Trustee, which has happened more often recently than in the past, the President has seen fit to say, “Yes, let’s take this to the faculty because they are involved and they have the authority, etc.”  In this case, apparently the President did not see fit to bring this to the faculty as he, I think, could have.  I find it somewhat troubling that he knew, or ought to have known, that it was our legal authority and that it is very complicated, especially for the sciences, and that there was no rush for this.  The protest was over.  So, he could have done that.  I found that troubling because it seems to me, if I may be quite frank and open, that this is a pattern of action in which a number of measures involving the faculty have been taken either by the Trustees or by the President or both without consultation with the faculty.  I would Give a number of instances from the more recent pass, but the most recent example was this teaching recognition thing where the President, instead of putting it in the hands of the faculty, gave it to a committee of his own  which came up with a resolution.  Luckily for us, Kathy Warfel and others intervened and we got a good resolution.  But, we were put very much on the defensive by the Trustees.  It seems to me, if I may speak quite openly and frankly, the President has got to speak up for the faculty and at least give the faculty a chance to respond as to what the consequences are of these actions.  He apparently did not do so in this case which I must say I find some disappointing. 

 

I think this resolution, Jeff, is an excellent resolution and we ought to send a couple of our articulate faculty leaders to explain to the Trustees the depth of difficulty that this puts us in.  Not only that, the embarrassment.  However much we honor the memory of Dr. King, and I am sure we all do, we surely don’t honor the memory of George Washington or Abraham Lincoln any less.  I don’t think the people of Indiana are going to understand this point, particularly with the timing of this resolution taken obviously under duress and under influence of a student demonstration.  It just doesn’t seem right to me.

 

Mannheimer: One point of clarification.  I actually had the opportunity to ask President Brand about this stating that I thought we had the legal authority to do this.  His reply was, “The Trustees have the legal authority to do anything they want and they delegate perhaps part of that to us, but they have the final say.”  I am not a lawyer.  I don’t know, but  that was what I was told. 

 

The second thing that he did say, and rather than misquote him, let me offer this only as a vague paraphrase, that he felt himself at the time that this came up to be in the presence of a quickly accelerated freight train on the part of the Board of Trustees.  I don’t want to infer too much, but it was a vague sense that he was caught a little unaware by the intensity of their feeling on the subject.

 

Porter: We have had a couple of background statements. We also have Mark Grove who is the Registrar who can provide a couple of comments  as he is looking at the academic calendar.  Perhaps that would be helpful.


Grove: I am happy to speak to ways to address this, although it strikes me that the Council’s resolution is probably independent of how we create a workable calendar.  I am happy to speak to this, if you would like.

 

Porter: Just a couple of comments about what the impact of the holiday would be.

 

Grove: One note I should pass along is that President Brand back in October asked the Calendar Committee to look at the question of Martin Luther Martin Luther King Day.  He gives a charge each year and this year’s issue was that the campus calendar committees, through the University Calendar Committee, were asked to review the possibility of whether or not Martin Luther King Day could be accommodated.  The committees reviewed that going into this cycle only the Northwest campus has had Martin Luther King Day off.  We did a survey and about half of  the Big Ten is off on Martin Luther King Day.  This is just as a piece of background information for you.

 

The individual calendar committees reviewed this.  I consulted with our Calendar Committee here, and the sense was that it will be very difficult to accommodate for the reasons already mentioned, especially in the sciences.  Having said that and looking at this from a Registrar’s perspective as something I muist find a way to accommodate, we believe we have come up with a model that will allow us to do this and still finish final examinations no later than we do now, but still provide the full 15 weeks of instruction.  Obviously, Monday night classes, the one day a week which is primarily Monday evening, are the most difficult.  That is an entire week of instruction.   We essentially have to capture five lost exam periods.  My assumption was, in putting this together, I had several options.  One, to lose the Monday of instruction which no one would want, because faculty have spoken strongly on that in the past.  Second, was to teach the Monday of Spring Break.  And, third would be to add a Monday to the end of the semester and extend exams into the next Monday. But, five years out of ten, that would be the day after commencement.  So, I didn’t see much choice there.  The only other viable option was to look to see if we could squeeze a day out of final exams.  At the same time, coincidently, we have been approached at our office about trying to find more time for common examinations such as are provided now through math, chemistry, and economics.  So, we have been kicking this around for other reasons.

 

The solution we have identified essentially is to accommodate those five slots by moving to those which are less used now by looking at the actual number of bodies that need to be in chairs during final exam week.  To do that, we looked at the current spring enrollments and tried to find a way to make sure there were enough rooms and enough chairs.  To minimize the difficulty of students being placed in situations where they had two exams at the same time or them having three exams in a single day.  The model we came up with essentially is moving an exam to a Tuesday morning exam slot and moving the rest of Monday to the following successive Friday.  We think we can do this without major impact on spring final exams.  It will be much more difficult in the fall because we have more sections placing students in the jeopardy of having to make decisions or to work with you.  I am trying to find alternate times because they have two exams at the same time.  For example, a student taking a Monday and a Friday night class only -- we would have those meeting at the same time.  We think the number of students affected, it will not be insignificant, but we think we have minimized it by the model we have developed as well as accommodating time to take care of more multisections ________.  It does mean for multisections exams all day Saturday and going to Sunday afternoon.  It is not easy.  It will pose some difficulties for students with some time conflicts, but we think we have a model that will work.

 

Koleski: I would like to say a few things in relation to the importance of making Martin Luther King Day  an Indiana University official holiday.  First, we at IUPUI say that we can’t afford to make the arrangements and take the time to close the University in honor of Dr. King.  That is strange because Purdue has already done that.  It honors Dr. King with a holiday of remembrance and celebration.  My wife teachers in the Purdue Computer Technology Program on the IU Kokomo campus.  Indiana University can’t find a way to close and celebrate the King Holiday.  Purdue on the IU Komomo campus and in West Lafayette does just that.  It closes.  I am sure that there are many other universities in the United States that do close in honor or Dr. King.  And yet, we say that we can’t find a way to make Martin Luther King Day a holiday on our campus?


Second, I understand that the percentage of African American students on the Bloomington campus has been declining steadily.  We say that we are concerned about African American student enrollment.  Perhaps if those students or prospective students saw us give honor to Dr. King, they might begin to believe that we are serious about wanting them on our campuses.  I suspect that African American students feel alienated from many institutions in American society because they feel that we don’t make those institutions friendly in reality and appearance to them.  Our vote in favor of a Martin Luther King Holiday would be one way of saying, “We want to share respect of Dr. King with you.”

 

Third, I have been thinking about what Dr. King means, not only to the African American community, but to all of us.  Dr. King is a Nobel Peace Prize winner.  As such, he belongs to all of the world.  One could say that he is the major American spokesperson of modern times in reminding us of how important the values of equality, fairness, justice, and opportunity are to all of us.  As I think about my own name and life and as I look around the room at all of you with your different backgrounds, I am sure that you and I know that the overwhelming majority of persons in this room had grandparents, parents, or you yourselves who came to the United States because they or you were seeking those values that King espoused for African Americans and for all people.

 

I would hope that we can find a way to make Martin Luther King Day one of our holidays.

 

Bepko: I would like to make two quick points.  One is I think that Myles Brand was confronted with a board that wanted to do this very much.  I don’t think he had much ability to steer them in any different direction.  I think Steve’s comment on this is exactly  right.

 

The other point is that if, in this resolution, it is the desire to reflect all of the effort that has been made to celebrate Martin Luther King’s birthday, both this year and other years, you might want to include more than just the dinner speaker this year who was quite distinguished and worth mentioning, but each year we have a breakfast and then a dinner and each year for many years we have had outstanding people around the country, many of whom were close friends of Dr. Martin Luther King.  You might want to add those to your resolution or perhaps you could put it in a footnote, if you were interested.  We could supply the names of the speakers who have been here. 

 

Spechler:   Certainly we do welcome those convocations and speakers, but realistically if we don’t have classes, how many students will be on campus to benefit from those activities?

 

Bepko: I wasn’t offering this as a reason for not adopting the resolution.  I was offering it as a way of making the resolution better.

 

Rothe: Is it necessary to consider a holiday (as worded in the resolution by the Trustees) as canceling classes at the Indianapolis campus?  Is that the only way to recognize a holiday?

 

Schneider: I had a conversation earlier today with President Brand and asked him that specific question.  His answer was that, according to the Trustees, “No.”  But, canceling classes is in the resolution of the Trustees.

 

Rothe: Is that what the resolution says?

 


Schneider: Yes.

 

Rothe: It doesn’t read that way.

 

Schneider: That is what it was supposed to say.  More important, that is how it has been interpreted by the Trustees and the President.

 

Bepko:  All eight campuses and it is a holiday for all employees as well except emergency employees.

 

Warfel: I was going to ask if we know how our student body feels about this?

 

Porter: I think the answer to that is that we have not heard from the student body on this issue.  Are there any other comments?

 

Koleski:   Just one comment. Sometimes the things that we do are important both substantively and symbolically.  It seems to me that by making Martin Luther King Day an official University holiday is of that nature.  It says to African Americans and to all of us that we do care about the values of equality, fairness, justice, and opportunity for everyone.  To say that students appear in our classes on that date and get information about King in our classrooms is probably overstating, to put it euphemistically, what really happens in those classes.  Furthermore, that idea misses the point.  To make Martin Luther King Day an official holiday is to recognize the importance of the values that he espoused for all persons both substantively and symbolically.

 

If students don’t show up for some of the celibratory events on Martin Luther King Day would be no different than if some of them didn’t show up for such events on President’s Day or Thanksgiving or any other official University holiday.  Such days are still holidays because they have both substantive and symbolic meaning to Americans.

 

Baldwin: I agree with this.  I find it strange that we don’t celebrate all federal holidays.  The federal holidays, taken together, describe the national culture and values and to celebrate some of them in one way and some of them in another way is a way of saying that they are not the same.  I remember at the University of Texas we used to celebrate Texas Independence Day. [laughter]   We celebrated it by not having classes or by shooting cannon.  It was part of the culture.  We have breakfasts and dinners in memory of Martin Luther King, but if you have a class during that period, you have to attend class or suffer the consequences.

 


Ross: Just to go back a little historically, when this started this was supposed to be a day that was celebrating Martin Luther King.  Even if classes were held, classes were to speak to the importance of the day  and many of the classes will plan their activities for the day to allow some participation in the program.  There were programs held at the Union Building where students actually presented.  There were meetings that were held where African/Americans discussed issues and concerns, and there was community outreach.  It was a day that involved celebration of the things that Martin Luther King believed in.  I think a lot of those things have been lost.  I am not sure how much of that ever happened in Bloomington, but at one point on this campus it was important.  It wasn’t just breakfast in the morning and dinner.  I think if we perhaps had an opportunity to speak to some of that concern -- why we did this -- it probably would have made more sense to the Board of Trustees.  I think perhaps they are reacting to some type of symbolism.  I think that it is important, and in some ways it has been lost.  I don’t know how many majority students come to the breakfast or to the dinner.  I think some do.  I think people would come to the dinners whether there were classes or not.  I have been a regular at the dinners and they are pretty well attended.  So, I think there is a problem that exists in the way the day has been dedicated in recent years.  It is not  clearly dedicated to the vision of Martin Luther King.  The idea was Martin Luther King supported education, and would have preferred education to continue.  He would not  want us at home or going to the movies. 

 

Watt: There was a person on the Academic Affairs Committee who said they felt that if we took the day off, participation in these activities would drop.

 

Reed: I just wanted to comment on all of the holidays.  It could be an absolute disaster if someone has a Monday class because they place all of those holidays on Monday.

 

Porter: Are we ready for a vote?  The motion, as I understand it coming from Academic Affairs Committee, is to adopt this resolution.  All of those in favor of adopting the resolution, say “Aye.”  Opposed? [a few]  Are there any abstentions to record? [one]   The motion is carried and the resolution is adopted.

 

Agenda Item VIII: Committee Reports

 

Porter: An item that will start appearing regularly on the agenda is an item that we will be listed as ‘Committee Reports.’  There will be times when we can anticipate ahead of time which committees will be reporting. This may be an opportunity for you to have some variety added into the agenda.

We have three committees that would like to report today.  We are going to start with the Student Affairs Committee which is chaired by Subir Chakrabarti.

 

Chakrabarti: I hope you have the copy of the proposed.  The following amendments have been proposed as exceptions for IUPUI.  My understanding is that this document has already been adopted by the University Faculty Council, but the IUPUI Student Affairs Committee felt very strongly that there were certain gaps in the document as well as certain things that were overlooked by the University Faculty Council.  I spoke to Bill Schneider on this and he said that we could, in fact, bring certain amendments to the IUPUI Faculty Council. The amendments are listed.

 

Spechler: In your judgment, are any of these substantive changes of what we have passed before?  Does this raise any controversy or are these technical?

 

Chakrabarti: Some of them are less important than others.  I would like to point out a couple that are really of some significance.  We don’t have a Dean of Student Affairs at IUPUI.  So, any student complaint that goes beyond the school level, doesn’t have an administrative officer.

 

Plater: That is not exactly true.  The Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate Education has assumed the responsibilities of the Dean of Student Affairs.  The language that is proposed here would still work since the functions and responsibilities of the Dean of Student Affairs are being assumed by the Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate Education.

 

Chakrabarti: So, we propose that we add the phrase ‘or another appropriate person’ to the document.


The other thing that I think is of significance is the following: The change from calendar days to working days.  This was very strongly felt by committee members because as the document currently stands the number of calendar days was felt to be too short a time because the weekend would interfere with the number of days.  So, we want to amend it and substitute ‘working days’ rather than ‘calendar days.’ 

The last thing that the committee felt had to be followed very carefully has to do with the student witness.  If she or she brought a counsel to the meeting, that would have to paid out of his or her own pocket.  Do we want this kind of phrase provided it is at the student’s expense? 

 

Warfel: Who do you plan on paying this?

 

Chakrabarti: I don’t know.  I think we felt that it should be left to the student.  It depends on if the witness is speaking for the University, then  the university should foot the bill rather than the student.

 

Spechler: Subir, how many working days in a week?  The Biblical six; the American five.  How many working days?

 

Chakrabarti: My understanding is that it is five.

 

Grove: Part of the concern I have with the lack of definition is that, for example, the academic support offices for beginning students right now are open Saturday mornings.  The students may interpret that as the university being open one more day.  It may not be an issue, but it is the same general area that reports to the faculty and students.

 

Peterson: Does this address such days as the Martin Luther King holiday?

 

Chakrabarti: If, Martin Luther King is a holiday, it will be counted as a calendar day.

 

Baldwin: What about Presidents’ Day?

 

Warfel: I don’t know if you were expecting action on these, but if you were, I would like to suggest that we defer it until the next meeting.  Unlike Martin, I have not seen this before.

 

Porter: Our intent was to use this as an opportunity to introduce them to allow people to ask some background questions.  It would come forward as an action item at the next Council meeting.

 

Chakrabarti: Is the Code of Student Ethics available to everyone?  Have you seen the document?  If not, we could circulate it.  If you look at the report, it points to precise lines in the document.

 

Porter: Thank you very much.  The next committee that will report is the Handbook Committee.  The chair of the Handbook Committee is Norman Hudson and he was not able to be here.  I am a member of the committee so I am going to read his report.


The committee members are Edmund Byrne, Mary Carpenter, Karen Cobb, Dolores Hoyt, Norman Hudson, Carol Nathan, Shirley Nusbaum, Antillo Orazi, Rebecca Porter, Rick Ralston, and Charles Yokomoto.

The Committee continuously reviews the contents of the current Academic Handbook and the IUPUI Supplement.  Several items have been incorporated into the current 1995-1997 edition which reflect either action: taken by the IUPUI Faculty Council, new or changed administrative policy, or new information which is of general interest to the academic community.  A list of these items and their current status have been given to the Executive Committee.

 

The Committee’s work is not finished.  The time line for publishing and distribution of the next edition of the IUPUI Supplement to the Academic Handbook is set.  Important dates for the  Committee are:

 

June 4, 1997      Proofing of the penultimate draft

July 2                   Proofing of the printer’s version

August 15              Handbooks will be available for distribution

 

The Committee has been working with Kim Manlove in the Dean of the Faculties Office to provide an on-line version of the Handbook.  This project is currently in the early stage of the bidding process.

 

Are there any questions you would like to ask about the handbook? 

The third committee report was to be a report from the Metropolitan Affairs Committee; however I do not see the chair in the room.  Is any other committee prepared to report at this time? [none]

 

Agenda Item IX: IUPUI Campus Campaign

 

Porter: We have an announcement concerning the IUPUI Campus Campaign.  The faculty co-chair of the Steering Committee is Kathy Warfel.

 

Warfel: We wanted to have something said about the IUPUI Campus Campaign here at the Faculty Council meeting.  It is my honor to serve as the faculty co-chair for the Campaign this year.  As I hope you have seen all around the campus, the slogan or motto that has been adopted for the Campaign is “I believe in IUPUI.”  Most organizations have a campaign in which the employees have an opportunity to financially give back to the institution.  That, of course, is what our campaign is about as well.  If you have not already received in the mail or heard directly from one of the volunteer workers in the campaign, when you see your campaign packet, it will look like this [showing sample].  Among the materials inside there will be a pledge card which is simplified considerably from prior campaigns.  The Steering Committee has identified three priorities for this year’s campaign.  These were chosen because they are campus wide and they reflected perceived current needs.  The three campus wide priorities designated are: The Child Care Center, the Scholarship Funds for Minority Students and for Staff, and finally the University Library Acquisition Fund.  On this form there is a space for “Other.”  The Steering Committee hopes that people will give something back to IUPUI.  We don’t care what you give it to, but give it to something.  You may choose to give to something that is very close to your academic area or to one of these other things that has been suggested.  The Campaign is running this month.  We hope to bring it to a successful conclusion in a timely way.  Our goal is one quarter of $1 million.

 


We hope that all of the faculty employees will be able to look into the institution and find something that is worth giving to.  We feel that, in fact, if there is nothing here at IUPUI that you feel is worth giving to, that may mean we have a problem. [laughter] That is the Campus Campaign report and I hope we get good participation this year.

 

Porter: We will be delighted to come back and announce when we have exceeded our target.

 

Agenda Item X: Question and Answer Period

 

Porter: We have an opportunity for questions and answers.  Are there any questions?

 

Baldwin: I have a comment and a question.  I noticed that construction is under way at the Old Library which, after three years, is really nice to see and students have remarked on this.  In fact, the first two town meetings for the University College were held directly under the construction and the banging of hammers kept interpreting -- which is symbolic, I guess.

 

Is the second floor connection between the old library and the Education/Social Work Building going to be covered as part of the construction project?

 

Plater:   The answer is not certain.  In the first effort to get construction bids, we identified the connector as a separate biddable item.  The bid that came in was for a simple enclosure that was not very attractive but would have simply gone from the old library to the Business/SPEA Building.  There was some thought that perhaps it could be enclosed so that more space could be used during a longer period of time.  That issue is being considered.

 

Baldwin: You have probably answered the second part of my question which was, I was wondering, if any consideration was given to linking Cavanaugh and the Lecture Hall to the remodeled library?  Symbolically, but also for the disabled students who have difficulty getting around in bad weather.  They could at least get to Cavanaugh which is the major classroom building without running through the ice and snow.  Has any consideration been given to that?

 

Plater: Certainly consideration has been given, but it was not considered a part of this project.  That is a project for a future time.  Regarding the points that you have raised, there is a study as to how best to accomplish the objective.  In part, because the “front door” for the UEC (or University College) will be on that level, there is an expectation that there will eventually be a fairly steady flow of traffic from the second floor downstairs and out the doors toward Cavanaugh or the Lecture Hall.   That traffic would make a connector far more appropriate or necessary than it has been in the past when those doors have not been opened.  People are considering how that might be accomplished, but it will not be a part of the current renovation of the old library.

 

R. Kirk: I read in the Indianapolis Star yesterday that IUPUI was one among other organizations that supports the construction of a new arena for the Pacers.  When I think of IUPUI, think of a collection of faculty, staff, alums, and students.  What does that  endorsement mean?  Would you clarify that statement made in the paper?

 


Bepko: I would wonder if it is fair to believe everything you read in the newspaper except for Steve Mannheimer’s column. [laughter]   You will find that there is a lot of slippage.  There was no position that was taken by IUPUI.  That was some loose reporting.  I was there and spoke on behalf of IUPUI.  As a matter of fact, I think that if the community is going to react in any way to opinions that are voiced by people at IUPUI, they are much more likely to be influenced by and to react to a book that has been written by one of our colleagues, Mark Rosentraub, entitled “Major League of Losers: the Real Cost of Sports and Who’s Playing For It”  which is a very compelling work on why state and local government should not give any money toward the construction of sports facilities for professional teams.

 

It was reviewed in the Indianapolis Business Journal by Neal Pierce of the Washington Post.  It was also reviewed by Bill Benner on the Sports Page yesterday.  I think it is going to get a lot of attention, far more than my personal endorsement of this project.  The reporter that was there was identifying where people came from and concluding that my remarks represented an institutional endorsement and that was not what was said.

 

Gable: The upcoming issue of The Chronicle identifies some approximately 100 institutions across the nation that are signing up for Internet II.  IU Bloomington is identified as one of those institutions.  Does that mean that IUPUI will be linked into Internet II or does that mean that the sign up is strictly campus specific?

 

Bepko: I think that means more than just IU Bloomington. 

 

Plater: IUPUI was intended to be included as a part of Internet II.

 

Gable: Excellent.  Thank you.

 

Bepko: Speaking of slippages in reporting, often times the response to some kind of information that is given on an issue of that type will identify Indiana university and the world will think Bloomington, but it really means more.  It is like the reporting of research awards.  Indiana University is listed.  Most of what is listed is on the Indianapolis campus, but there are people reading that who might think “Bloomington.”

Plater: There is another development related to this.  It is called the Very Broad Network System (VBNS) which is even higher speed.  A proposal was recently submitted for entry into that as one of the early universities and that too includes Bloomington and Indianapolis. 

 

Schneider: Finally, one of the people who will be addressing the University Faculty Council on Tuesday is the new Vice President for Information Technology -- Michael McRobbie -- who started in January.

 

Porter:   I know a question that you all have on your minds is when is the next opportunity to learn more about University College since we will be discussing that in March.  As a reminder, on Monday, February 10, at 3 p.m. in the University Library auditorium University College Curriculum will be discussed.  The revised proposal will be discussed Wednesday, February 26 at noon in the University Library auditorium.  There is a second draft of the proposal that is going to be placed on the Web.  It should be there by Tuesday so that you might want to look at the new version to see the areas that are being revised.  Are there any other questions? [none]

 

Agenda Item XI: Unfinished Business

 

Porter: Does anyone have any Unfinished Business to bring before the Council? [none]

 


Agenda Item XII: New Business

 

Porter: Does anyone have any New Business? [none]

 

Agenda Item XIII: Adjournment

 

Porter: Having no business to consider, we stand adjourned.