ARIZONA FACULTIES COUNCIL
Arizona Faculties Council Meeting Minutes
Date: Thursday, August 23, 2007
Place: Ventana Room, UA Student Union
Time: 12:00 p.m.
Present:
George Watson, Arizona Faculties’ Council President (2007-2008) and President,
Governance Council ASU Downtown Phoenix
William (Bill) Verdini, President, ASU Academic Senate, Tempe
Linda Vaughan, President, Academic Senate, ASU Polytechnic
Richard Gitelson, President, Academic Senate, ASU West
Richard Lei, NAU Vice President, Faculty Senate
Marsha Yowell, NAU Past President, Faculty Senate
Wanda H. Howell, UA Chair of the Faculty
Robert Mitchell, UA Vice-Chair of the Faculty and Presiding Officer of the
Senate
Barbara Citera, UA South Faculty Forum President
J.C. Mutchler, UA South Faculty Forum Past President
Call to Order:
AFC Chair Watson called the meeting to order at 12:08 p.m. Members
introduced themselves.
Topic: What’s Happening:
AFC President Watson opened the conversation by describing a simple, online
faculty survey that faculty leaders conducted at the Downtown Phoenix Campus
last spring. The survey asked four simple questions about how satisfied faculty
are with their work, what they like and/or don’t like, and suggestions or
recommendations for improvements. This informal survey garnered a 50% response
rate and showed that the top two concerns of faculty responding are: 1) Faculty
governance; and 2) Faculty do not feel valued. AFC President Watson will forward
a copy of the survey and the results to AFC members.
AFC members discussed whether similar surveys should be conducted at the sister
institutions, initially as a benchmark and then repeated every three years.
Perhaps some sort of index measures such as “quality of academic/campus life”
could be developed, particularly since quality of life for the state and
communities has been identified as a focus area for the Regents’ strategic plan.
UA Chair of the Faculty Howell cautioned that faculty who take the time to
answer a survey often expect something to come about because of the concerns
raised. Faculty can become frustrated when nothing happens. Some AFC members
feel that it is the job of the survey designer to phrase questions in a positive
way, to give a voice to faculty frustration with an opportunity to provide
suggestions or to simply ask what is expected as an outcome. In this way,
faculty leaders gain knowledge about what their constituents want and could
result in positive changes.
ASU Tempe Academic Senate President W. Verdini reported that they have queried a
Senate panel plus a random panel of general faculty monthly. AFC members turned
to the issue of transparency in upper administration’s decision-making. Some
administrations employ a style of casual conversation that may allude to a new
way of conducting affairs of a campus. When a change is announced and faculty
leaders are caught off-guard, this administration truly believes it was
transparent because this topic “was discussed.” At other times, an
administration will consult with people who can be counted on to agree and then
announce a “consensus” decision. At UA, the Shared Governance Agreement
specifies who the administration must consult. At all campuses the Senate
presidents regularly meet with their university President and often sit on a
“university council” or cabinet; only UA has representation on a decision-making
finance committee; however this committee does not have decision-making power
over the entire budget.
ASU West Academic Senate President R. Gitelson reports that his campus has
undergone dramatic changes in the past year, from an accredited institution with
a full-time Provost to a part-time administrator, and involving losses of
faculty personnel, replacement deans and demoted directors. West campus parking
has become particularly contentious, especially since a committee with no
faculty representation has more than tripled the cost of parking permits from a
few years ago. The $480 price tag for a parking permit represents 1/6th
of an adjunct faculty member’s salary. The rapid changes stem from the
decision-making authority now delegated to the Tempe administration and the
intent to make all ASU campuses uniform, bringing them under a single
Academic Affairs Policies and Procedures Manual (ACD) and to create a single
ASU Academic Senate. The changes have left many ASU faculty feeling powerless.
ASU Polytechnic Academic Assembly and Senate President L. Vaughan described
faculty recognition and rewards coupled with increasing demands for scholarship
and research as the primary faculty concerns at this time.
NAU Senate Past President M. Yowell described a survey that was conducted of
just the Senate members during a time of great unrest, and while the faculty
felt it was important to identify areas of satisfaction as well as areas of
concern, the Provost at the time received the information defensively. More
recently, the NAU Faculty Senate has conducted breakout groups by college, which
discuss issues and report back to the full Senate. Patterns are emerging from
this exercise showing that some colleges just don’t participate, and this
appears to be a leadership-driven decision.
UA Chair of the Faculty Howell shared that last January, the Faculty Senate
generated a “critical issues” exercise in which members identified ten critical
issues facing the UA. Senators then began discussing these issues in depth on
the floor of the Senate, which the University President and Provost regularly
attend. The issues are faculty-driven and the open discussion in the Senate
makes them visible to the President and Provost. Chair Howell will forward the
list of critical issues and the white paper to AFC members.
The first issue the Senate chose to begin working on is that of student preparedness and admissions/undergraduate and general education. The issues are complex for faculty members as they attempt to teach to the extremes of student preparedness levels, and are further compounded by the UA’s dual missions as a land grant institution and as a research institution aspiring to be in the top ten of public Research I universities. The UA’s Committee of Eleven has written a white paper on “Reconfiguring Undergraduate Education at the University of Arizona” which the Senate will discuss at its first meeting this fall. Other critical issues included resources allocation, outreach to the state versus the research mission, and faculty roles including faculty workload, performance reviews and rewards. Another concern at the UA has been the continuous budget cuts for the past fourteen years. UA’s new president appears to be a fiscally responsible leader who intends to never cut budgets again. To help accomplish this effort, Chair Howell and the Chair of the UA’s Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee will co-author with the Provost a call for faculty teaching load accountability. The research mission allows for a wide range of teaching workloads and these are tied to budget cuts.
At UA-South,
B. Citera reports that the Faculty Forum is not actually a Faculty Senate, but
rather is a meeting of the entire UAS faculty. UAS members can run for and serve
on the UA Faculty Senate. UA South also has an observer seat. While parking is
not an issue at UASouth locations, the aging fleet of cars and time spent on the
road is a concern of UASouth faculty. Promotion and tenure was discussed. (Note:
The University of Arizona South Promotion and Tenure Handbook of August 2004 was
reviewed and approved by the Vice Provost, Office of Academic Affairs, August
30, 2006.) A concern of UAsouth faculty is the fear that they may be held to
UAMain’s standards of scholarship, while the teaching and service loads are
considerably higher. B. Citera relates that UASouth faculty is stable under the
leadership of the new Dean.
AFC’s Report to ABOR
AFC President Watson turned to the AFC’s report to the Regents for today’s
meeting. Members agreed he should highlight the AFC’s successes of last year and
mention the following:
1) AFC will host the upcoming “Climate Change and Higher Education in Arizona”
conference at ASU on November 26;
2) AFC was instrumental in finalizing the Textbook Task Force’s report and looks
forward to serving on other such committees;
3) AFC looks forward to providing continued oversight of Learner-centered
education (see paragraph below);
4) AFC is also interested in the focus area of Quality of Life and would be
willing to help with questions about quality of life on the campuses.
Members discussed that the future of LCE and its budget are in question and
should be clarified with ABOR staff Stephanie Jacobsen before speaking about it.
Members also discussed whether the AFC should make a presentation to ABOR on an
issue of importance to faculty (shared governance). If so, the issue should be
given a positive spin. Members also discussed the need for another AFC/ABOR
breakfast or lunch to give additional face time between the AFC and Board
members. A specific conversation topic for the meal, such as “the rigors of the
tenure process and post-tenure review” that the AFC addressed with ABOR two
years ago, could be helpful in educating Board members about what faculty do.
This meeting concluded at 1:30 p.m.
Recorded by Pam Bridgmon
Program Coordinator – UA Faculty Center
AFC/2007-08/afc minutes 8-23-07