FACULTY SENATE MINUTES NO

No report.

VI. SECRETARY�S REPORT:

No report.

VII. TREASURER�S REPORT:�

D. Berger, Treasurer, was unable to attend but Chairman King announced that the amount in the Senate account remained unchanged. He also reported that Dr. Berger would be putting out a call for the ten dollar Senate dues later on this month.

VIII. PRESIDENT�S REPORT:

President Bitterbaum reported that at 3:00 that day the grand opening of the Library Commons would be taking place with Senator Seward in attendance. He reminded the Senate that Seward was able to earmark $100,000 to help transform the library. He encouraged everyone to attend.

The next item of business regarded the Dartfish technology, allowing for the composition of images, which is Bitterbaum expressed is very useful in teaching and athletics.� Dartfish executives will be here and colleagues Dan DePerno and Jeffrey Bauer and others will be conducting workshops utilizing the creative ways the technology can be used.

The local Downtown Business Association is going to be recognized on Thursday from 4-6 and President Bitterbaum encouraged everyone to come down to Main Street Cortland to see the venture which will give the campus increased space. He reported that an individual has given us a 3 year grant in order to better revitalize the downtown area. President Bitterbaum asked the campus community to please lend their support Thursday to join in the celebration with the Mayor and business programs downtown.

President Bitterbaum indicated that the early signs from the Admissions Office are very positive.

He reported that last year there were 1,075 freshmen with over 10,000 applications having been reviewed. The President indicated, �We are going very strong at this point.��

Bitterbaum next mentioned the Spellman Commission report which came out recently. He indicated that it concerns major issues which such as affordability and access. He said that if you look at the costs for coming to SUNY for one year, $4,350 he considers it a really extraordinary gift that the State of New York gives to its young people.� Bitterbaum stated that in regards to access our community colleges are criticized wrongly. He said that people should look at New� York State and consider some of the positive things we are doing such as Financial Aid, to make it more accessible for families. The Secretary of Education spoke yesterday with toned down rhetoric which pleased the President. Bitterbaum mentioned the economic advances that are taking place like helping the local community and volunteerism, both in businesses and the community.

Another item of business and probably the most controversial, President Bitterbaum indicated, is tracking students through their college career. He said colleges are opposed to it but the ASCU, which we are member of, is in favor. It involves the fact that many students don�t get credit for work they started out somewhere else. The community colleges are very interested in this since they are often not recognized for the good work they do.

President Bitterbaum announced that Middle states has begun and �we are working fast and furious.� Ed Caffarella, who is in his fourth year as Dean of Education, has asked to return to the faculty and his request will be honored. The President thanked Ed for his wonderful work and there was a hearty round of applause.� He stated that the Senate will be involved in the national search to replace the Dean of Education.�

The President also reported that the Provost and Rod Shu, a faculty member, will be going to China, next week to ASCU with 100 individuals going, 300 presidents and 30 or 40 Provosts. Bitterbaum also stated that we were visited by Capital Norman University last year and four of their deans came here as well. He mentioned the nice things we are doing with ASCU and the higher education officials. He reported on a visiting scholar from Capital Normal and that we have several programs going on and in an effort to give us an opportunity to internationalize our curriculum. He expressed his hopes that it will be successful. �

Dr. Bitterbaum explained that there has been a little confusion about DSI as far as salary. It was negotiated by UUP last year for faculty to get 3%. He announced that his office is adding 1%. The new faculty are not eligible for 3% but our new faculty are eligible for 1%, in addition, adjuncts the base salary which was 24 to 25, at the time because money was tight, the officers of UUP asked if we could do something for continuing adjuncts. He said we made a decision as a cabinet to find the dollars that was needed. Bitterbaum announced that those faculty who are adjuncts who are here last year will be able to see the 1% as well, which he was very pleased to be able to do.

K. Alwes asked, �The English faculty are confused as to how last year�s 1% considered performance based pay for DSI?

E. Bitterbaum replied, �That�s something completely different. I think that�s part of the confusion. It was a negotiated 3%, everybody�s going to get 1%.� It came from the state based on our monies that we get. Another 1% was put aside for DSI and so in theory someone could get 3%, 1%, and if they got the full DSI, which is 50% inequity and 50% which is merit, they could get 5 so it varies.�

K. Alwes asked, �But then this year you said only one year for DSI, so what happened to 03-04, 04-05?�

E. Bitterbaum responded, �Well my first year here there was no DSI.��

K. Alwes asked, �What happened in �04-�05?�

E. Bitterbaum replied, �It went to everybody.� It was across the board.�

K. Alwes responded, �Okay, that was across the board again. So is that�s considered performance based?�

E. Bitterbaum said, �No everybody got that. I guess that�s what they�re confused about. This year 1% is inequity and performance.�

K. Alwes asked, �So last year performance really didn�t have anything to do with it?�

E. Bitterbaum responded, �Everybody got it.�

K. Alwes asked, �So nobody gets any performance based from last year?�

E. Bitterbaum replied, �No they do.� It�s for a few years ago.�

K. Alwes said, �But, across the board?� Because many of my faculty have things from last year that they wanted to put in for this year and they couldn�t because they could only use for one year, because it wasn�t really performance based because it was across the board.�

E. President replied, �It was across the board.�

K. Alwes said, �All right.�

E. Bitterbaum stated, �Part of this is the way the contract was constructed with UUP and system, also going through a process, as you recall, a lot of faculty were very unhappy� because of the way DSI was done but in the end they thought the old way was better than the new way.�

K. Alwes asked, �Which is what we are doing right now?�

E. Bitterbaum said, �We are going to keep it this way greatest majority of faculty pleased with it although they were displeased with it at one time. I mean, we worked very hard. So does everybody understand what we are talking about? So there is 3%, 1% and another 1% DSI, which is 50% inequity, and 50% merit, and for professionals there�s another system that we use.�

K. Alwes said, �Thank you.�

IX.� SPECIAL REPORT:�

Ed Caffarella, Dean of Education, gave a special report and update on the Op Ed piece which was written in response to the article from Arthur Levine, Educating our Teachers.�� He distributed copies of the editorial that ran in the Syracuse and Cortland papers as well as the Dragon Chronicle. He indicated he just wanted to make sure everyone was aware of it.� Caffarella indicated it was picked up by the national press and most of the city papers. He also indicated that he has not received any comments back consisting of negative feedback from Levine�s article, although he said he had received some positive comments.� He told the Senate he wanted everyone to be aware of it in case questions arose from parents at Open House next week, social gatherings or from current students. He ended by saying, �Our students are very strong and stand up well against national averages.�

X. VICE PRESIDENT�S REPORT:

Provost Davis-Russell reported that she just received the results of the student opinion survey. The survey was administered last spring to a randomly selected population of our students. The Provost reported the preliminary review of the results she found dissatisfactory. Davis-Russell indicated that she would like to have as many discussions and forums as possible to look at the results. She said, �I am particularly disturbed by how students are receiving and perceiving their educational experiences, their coursework, their instructors, etc. At some point I�d like us to engage in some discussion.�

M. King asked if the results had been made public yet?

The Provost indicated that she had received a copy from Shawn Vane ten which will be disseminated.� She said that the section that she looked at is one that compares us to the 27 state ops and then to the 12 comprehensive institutions. She said they are self reports by students that rely on their reporting of their experiences in the classroom, residence halls on the campuses and the like.

M. King asked the secretary to make a note so that it could be brought up at the Steering Committee next week.

K. Alwes said, �I want to thank Dean Caffarella for writing this, number one, and secondly, did Arthur Levine research and write this completely solo, was this part of a task force?�

E. Caffarella responded, �He�s the lead personnel on the team, team. He surveyed, did a survey of faculty students alumni and school principals, and it seems to me the number was 1,800 or so in each of those groups and then did in depth interviews at 28 institutions. The surveys look as though they are pretty much random in population, the faculty, students and alumni were all matched against institutions, the alumni, faculty and students were at the same institutions. The principals were the same across county. He doesn�t describe how he picked the 28 institutions but they visited, did in depth interviews on each one. He�s got 3 studies that he�s doing out of his data, one on educational leaders, which came out in �85, this one on educating teachers and then he�s got one on educational research that�s probably another year and a half out, all the data was collected in 2001. It�s not just, he�s got himself and other staff members working on it.�

E. Bitterbaum: I thought there would be public outcry and interest in it, maybe because it�s come against Spellman institution report, I have seen nothing. I was on the line with the other presidents yesterday, it�s almost like nobody even cares, which is even sadder.

E. Caffarella: We may have dodged a bullet and�

X. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS:

Long Range Planning Committee � D. Ritchie reported that the LRPC will be holding its first meeting of the year this week and will be electing a chair and doing the outstanding work for this coming year. Ritchie indicated his committee is still in need of faculty members from the Arts and Sciences, as well as one additional student member.

Educational Policy Committee � J. Cottone reported that he EPC met that morning and �the curriculum change proposal for the curriculum change guide was unanimously moved. It will be going out for its final review to chairs, deans and the following committees: the Curriculum Review Committee, the Graduate Faculty Executive Committee, TEC, The Writing Committee and the GE Committee, for a two week period of review for its final revision and then will be submitted to the Faculty Senate. Cottone pointed out that many may have seen these documents before because of submission policies. He said the EPC encourages feedback and revisions will be done in the next couple of weeks� and then forwarded to the Steering Committee for final action by the Faculty Senate by Thanksgiving.

J. Governali asked a question regarding distribution to committees, if part of it would be distributed to faculty members.?

J. Cottone responded, �Based on policy it will go out to all department chairs, deans and the above committees.�

J. Governali asked, �We can distribute it to our committee members electronically?�

J. Cottone said, �Yes. There is a 10/20 deadline and all comments will come back to me to take it back to EPC to share with the Steering Committee.�

Student Affairs Committee � No report.

Faculty Affairs Committee � No report.

College Research Committee � No report.

General Education Committee � M. McGuire gave a status report from her committee regarding their recent charge. She reported that the committee has met three times involving the responses to the GEAR Committee. The subcommittee has met twice, McGuire indicated, and they have survey which going out to faculty on Wednesday on the question of requiring faculty to give credit for GE assessment activities. She said that they are asking faculty to return it no later than Monday morning. They will have the results compiled Monday afternoon and then will be meeting 8:00 AM on Tuesday morning to start formulating their recommendations.

J. Cottone asked, �Last spring the Educational Policy Committee submitted their recommendations regarding implementation of the Gen Ed program once it was passed. I was just wondering what status is and where right now?��

M. McGuire said, �It is on our agenda for next Tuesday.�

J. Cottone said, �Thanks.�

J. Governali asked a question of J. Cottone, �Is your question about GE, in terms, so that�s become the responsibility of the GE Committee? I am not sure the answer you gave Mary in terms of implementing it.�

M. McGuire responded, �My answer was that it is on our agenda for Tuesday.�

Provost Davis-Russell said, �I think somewhere there�s been confusion of roles. The Faculty Senate passes a policy, the President approves it, it then should become the responsibility of administrating units to plan the administration of that. So, I don�t understand why it has been returned to the GE Committee. Perhaps I am missing something and I�d like to be educated.�

M. King indicated he was unable to remember and asked if the Senate passed it last year. Someone from the floor affirmed that it had gone out to the faculty for a vote. �

Provost Davis-Russell said there was a referendum which passed.

M. King said to the Provost, �Which passed therefore it should go directly to you.�

Provost Davis-Russell said, �Yes, so I don�t understand why it�s back in the committee�

E. Bitterbaum said, �No it�s not. I think there is some confusion to John�s question and Mary�s response, we are now implementing it.�

Provost Davis-Russell said, �No we�re not.� That�s why I am asking. Because if it�s on the committee�s agenda it should not be on the committee�s agenda.�

M. Prus said, �My understanding is that the recommendation went to the Faculty Senate last spring and initiated the referendum that came jointly from GE and EPC and called for, if the referendum was successful, the establishment of an implementation committee. I use the passive voice there because it did not charge the GE committee with serving as that implementation committee. It didn�t charge GE with the authority, I believe, as vested in the proposal, but I could be mistaken.�

E. Bitterbaum said, �I remember signing something�it is incumbent on us to move forward.�

Provost Davis-Russell said, �I guess we are trying to define who the �us� is.�

J. Cottone said, �The question was posed that the recommendation that EPC developed was completely separate of the referendum, it was actually done intentionally, its own recommendation, because there was more than one that was sent to GE and it was also sent to the Provost.� So my question is, where is the implementation status right now? Because l know there�s a lot of work and deadlines to meet. What is the status?�

M. King said, �Well if the President has signed it��

E. Bitterbaum� responded, �I was under impression as with a mighty sword, with the pen, as I read the declaration, the way I interpreted it maybe I was wrong it was really now in aegis of Provost maybe I am incorrect.�

Provost Davis-Russell said, ��That�s the Provost�s understanding, but understanding why it is now in the GE Committee is what confuses me.�

K. Alwes asked, �Is it the same thing Elizabeth and John are talking about, the same thing?�

M. King said, �Can we have two chairs of the committees, the President and Provost, have a little parlay after the meeting to settle the matter.�

Provost Davis-Russell said, �I am asking for clarification, generally. My understanding is that the Faculty Senate adopts a policy or at least makes a recommendation to the President. If the President accepts that, and it pertains to academic issues, it then becomes the responsibility of the Provost to implement those am I correct?�

M. King said, �Yes.�

M. McGuire said, �My understanding that the goal is the courses have to be put in��

M. King responded, �The courses in the categories, but we are talking about the merged programs. Correct.� If the four of you could just meet for 3 minutes just to clear it up.�

Someone from the floor asked who the four individuals were that King referred to?

M. King responded, �The President, Provost and two Chairs of the committees.�

E. Bitterbaum said, �I don�t think there was much confusion but we will be happy to.�

M. King said they just needed to talk for a few seconds.� The chair ended by reminding everyone that the Senate will be conducting a review of governance and if anyone is interested in volunteering he will be working to form a committee.

XI. SUNY SENATOR�S REPORT:�

No report (absent fall semester due to class conflict).

XII. COMMITTEE REPORTS:

Committee on Committees � There was a vote to approve the nomination of John Sternfeld to the Facilities and Masterplan Oversight Committee.

XIII. OLD BUSINESS:

There was no new business.

XIV. NEW BUSINESS:

There was no new business.

XV. AREA SENATOR�S REPORTS:

There were no Area Senator reports.

XVI. STUDENT SENATOR�S REPORTS:

M. Scala reported on the grand opening of the library commons. He also indicated SGA is working with John Suarez on voter registration of students on campus and attempting to get the word out to the students and let them know it�s important that they vote and express their opinions. Scala also announced that �Take Back the Night would be held that night starting at 8:00 meet on the steps of Corey Union in support of the awareness of rape and sexual assault on campus, the community and the nation. He also reported that SGA is experiencing NYPIRG issues right now and currently working to get back to speed because NYPIRG failed to give SGA a rep. He said, �It�s important that they elect a rep so we can get up and running again doing its job.� Scala also indicated student government has been working on getting committees filled including the recent recruitment of three new senators. He asked those who need reps on their committees that he would be in contact with them. ��

Scala reported that SGA just did a big Crop Walk and organized a river cleanup on Saturday and he said, �We wanted to get the word out to try and get more faculty and staff involved, maybe with community, service work, committees.� He indicated� SGA is currently setting up another project and he is in the process of putting together a proposal.

C. Schacht said, ��The SGA President, Katie Boyes, could not be here today but she asked me to give you a message. She wanted me to mention to everyone if you are a chair of a committee and you have a student position� be sure to contact the students so you can get going and also we have started to work on the committee process. If you haven�t received a student yet contact Katie or mike and we�ll get you one as soon as possible.�

The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 PM.

Respectively Submitted,

Barbara Kissel

Staff Assistant/

Recording Secretary

http://www.cortland.edu/senate/minutes/0607min3