February 22, 2022

Call to Order, Roll Call (Sign In) FS President announced link to sign-in. Started at 3:30 PM. Began recording at 3:30 PM 

Guest Speaker – New Ombudsperson (Jim Mann): Reaud Building Office 114 – best to contact by phone  

Data that could be kept by the Ombuds Office will be non-identifiable info – number of people using the office – general classification of issues in a categorization – doing this to help recurring issues to be addressed.  

Call to make an appointment – this is the best way to maintain anonymity. Specific office hours have not been set. 

Matt Hoch - Will data be collected by academic unit – either by Department or College? Believes especially on the account of handbook violations that knowing College will be important. Jim Mann – no, it will be kept very broad and general for anonymization. 

CH Lin – Can faculty/chair discussions and disagreements be dealt with by the Ombuds?  Can the Ombuds act as a mediator? – Jim Mann: yes, but both parties have to agree with it 

G Harden – What if we just need a hug? Are you there for that Jim? Jim Mann: yes, can come by to vent. 

K Weeks – Faculty member and Dean both agree to mediation – is the result binding? Jim Mann – that decision is made in mediation (e.g., both parties agree to documentation or that other individuals need to see this etc.)  

1. Jeffryes – Dean and faculty don’t have an equitable level of power – how is an equitable resolution? 
2. Mann – Ombuds acts as a mediator to attempt to find an informal resolution between parties before a formal route is necessary.

McCollough – What if a higher power simply says no? Jim Mann – then there may need to be a more formal meeting.  

Jim Mann – Will have m&ms in my office. 

President Taylor’s Minute:  

Not present  

Approval of Minutes – November 2021  

Motion Vivek and Stephan Malick – second; passed  

Faculty Senate Committee Chair Reports    

Academic Issues Committee – Melissa Riley   

• Did not meet in Dec. 2021 or January 2022 – Meeting Feb. 16 via Teams 

Faculty Issues Committee – Sujing Wang  

• Met in December but not in January  

• Working on faculty grievance policy and received second Provost feedback  
• Working on grievance policy MAPP also to add to faculty handbook 

Budget and Compensation Committee – Garrick Harden   

• Met with Jeremy Alltop and B. Nichols – 2003-2009 admin has agreed to make equity raises in that cohort – in discussions with how that will occur  

• J. Slaydon: 105 faculty possible – potentially $200,000 to supplement this equity change 

Events – Ashwini Kucknoor – stepping out of FS due to conflict of time    

• Needs new chair 

Research and Creative Activity – John Gossage   

• Did not meet in Dec. 2021 or January 2022 – Meeting Feb. 16 via Teams 
• People have not heard about their faculty leaves – J. Fowler to check on that 

Faculty Evaluation – Millicent Musyoka (new Chair) 

• F2.08 Chair addition to that discussion 
• Campus Climate survey will go to that group  
• April timeline for Campus Climate survey 

Student Success – Pat Heintzelman on FMLA so Yasuko Sato recommended to take over as interim Chair  

• J. Fowler will reach out to Y. Sato to discuss 

Faculty Handbook – Matt Hoch   

• Did not meet in Dec. 2021 or January 2022 – Meeting Feb. 16 via Teams 

Faculty Senate President’s Report    

• J. Fowler – Asked Matt Hoch to look at iPeds data on workload. 
• J. Slaydon – J. Alltop mentioned we only have 1.9 admins per faculty member  
• K. Weeks – on TSU – they are the only one who publishes their data online – plotted 2014-2019 (1.52:1) 
• J. Slaydon – wants admin to be evaluated every 2 to 4 years instead of every 3 to 6 years – will make a motion on it at a later date  

• M. Hoch – all faculty senators need to be quite aware of what’s going on right now – there is a recommended date for when this should happen and there are aspects that should be done and aren’t – Senators were not added to Dean review and by the time they were, there was no input on the questions/surveys – there was no methodology for the survey  
• M. Hoch – Admin Review Committee had issues, especially regarding surveys – has also happened for actual evaluation survey – went to clutter – only have a couple of days to complete and may not know the existence of the survey – no announcements have come out to remind faculty – many faculty may not get to participate; on this committee, the makeup is not even across disciplines – admin appointment is supposed to bring balance (2 English faculty), no STEM in COAS 
• M. Hoch – Jim Slaydon when did you step down – March 2019 – only one faculty member who has been a faculty member the entire time the Dean has been present – the others are admins or ex-admins 
• J. Slaydon – wanted a question about class size in the survey – Poonam Kumar wouldn’t allow it.  
• J. Fowler – we could remove word “recommended” to make the timeline more concrete  

• J. Fowler – has created an updated list of needed positions for elections – officer elections are also coming up – JP Nelson will you do the nominating committee lead? Yes. 
• J. Fowler – Reached out to get a list of unresolved grievances from admin – B. Nichols and D. Brown asked which grievances the senate is referencing. 
• K. Weeks – Doesn’t the admin know who filed a grievances? Why should we have to report it? 
• J. Slaydon – Is the Provost application only internal or external also? We need to find out. J. Fowler will ask. 

Old Business      

• FDLs? K. Weeks – A. Dockens heard that a list had been sent to J. Fowler, but she has received any correspondence and will clarify with B. Nichols. 

New Business    

• K. Weeks – about course sizes – I motion we send a resolution as such to President Taylor:  

• “In keeping with shared academic governance, each department's faculty should decide the most appropriate class sizes, in their annual department meetings with the faculty as a group and the chair (faculty handbook page 103, section 44.3). The chair then administers these decisions. This is true regardless of delivery mode. More specifically, we ask that distance education or other administrative units not interfere with these academic related decisions, which includes overriding departments, colleges and chairs set class limits on courses.”  
• J. Slaydon – This is an issue because Chairs are finagling for money and pay issues. 
• G. Harden – Wants to mention in support of this – AP and Distance Education were separated out because of FERPA violation but now that they are being treated as one class – teaching two separate sections with huge numbers but only counted as one class in a faculty member’s teaching load. 
• K. Weeks – Courses are separate in so many places except when it comes to faculty compensation  (syllabi, banner, etc.). 
• T. McCoy – It is a bookkeeping thing with AP/DE for revenue sharing purposes; in reality it is only one section. 

• A. Dockens – Should it be recognized as one class for student number caps? J. Slaydon – yes 
• V. Natarajan – Shouldn’t we consider workload as instructional load, not course load? 
• J. Slaydon – Historically classes with enrollment of over 100 could be counted as more than one credit by a Dean, but most Deans are doing so 
• CH Lin – in COAS – one AP section, one DE section but then merged in 2019, now considered one, effectively doubling the courseload: BUDGET committee take up this issue with President, Provost, and Poonam. 
• K. Weeks – Motion listed above - seconded by J. Slaydon 

• J. Fowler – Cannot be voted on until next week; do we need an ad hoc committee with Office of Academic Affairs? 
• K. Weeks – Should officers be allowed to be sending administrators information that was sent to us? 
• J. Fowler – Consulting with the administration is literally the definition of shared governance. 
• J. Gossage – I feel like it speeds things up and could assist in resolving issues. 
• T. McCoy – We are an independent body; maybe we shouldn't’t have the admin receiving all information. 

• J. Fowler – This level of information sharing can be clarified in our bylaws. 
• J. Gossage – Do you want senate to be closed? 
• K. Weeks – No but information should not be share until after issues are brought to the senate floor. 
• K. Weeks – I motion that we update the bylaws to say no faculty member (in future/upcoming elections) may be a senator if they have more than a 25% administrative release and/or any supervisory duties over other faculty. Seconded by J. Slaydon but thinks much discussion is needed before moving forward with this issue. 
• K. Weeks – issues with Ombudsperson – old grievance policy only had faculty who heard it but then wanted to add admin because they didn’t like the outcome – TSUS says President has to hear and appoint a hearing officer – why is the Provost receiving these? Multiple other institutions report to President 

• K. Weeks - Be it resolved that, in keeping with standard procedures of many other universities, the LU faculty senate asks President Taylor to:  

• Change reporting structure of the Ombuds position from the Provost to Faculty Senate. However, after reporting to the senate the Ombuds may possibly make reports/recommendations directly to the LU President, under advice and consent of the senate.  
• Agree to changes necessary to allow the Faculty Senate body to select the Ombuds candidate, although it will consult the Provost. The LU President will choose to accept the senate's recommendation or not.  
• Acknowledge the faculty senate sets forth the criteria for the Ombudsperson, which includes recommended qualifications, release time and payment stipends.  
• In keeping with items a-c above, we, the senate further request: President Taylor agree to consistently use the Ombudsperson as his/her designated "hearing officer" that TSU policy details until such time as the LU faculty handbook can be updated accordingly.  

NOTE: I do not have the final adjournment info since I was excused at closed session – A. Dockens (Secretary) 

Adjourn at 5:20 PM 

Motion to adjourn by J. Gossage, seconded by J. Slaydon – passed - ended at 5:20 pm