The second Regular Meeting of the Faculty Senate for the academic year 2000-2001 was held in room 4.03.08, John Peace Library Building, on November 14, 2000 at 3:30 p.m. with Dr. Patricia Harris, Chair, presiding, Dr. Raul Aranovich, Secretary.
Present: Sos Agaian, Raul Aranovich, Deborah Armstrong, Ron Ayers, Guy Bailey, Mark Blizard, John Bretting, Russell Briner, Ruben Cordova, Mansour El-Kikhia, Keith Fairchild, Patricia Harris, Wanda Hedrick, Robert Hiromoto, Kellye Jones, Michael Kelly, James McDonald, Louis Mendoza, Sandy Norman, Walter Richardson, Jr., A. C. Rogers, Kent Ruth, Deborah Schwartz-Kates, Raydel Tullous, Anthony Van Reusen, Arturo Vega, Diane Walz
Absent: George Negrete, Jeanne Reesman, Thomas Ricento (excused), C. S. Shih, R.K. Smith (excused)
Total members present: 27
Total members absent: 5
Dr. Keith Fairchild stated that he would support increasing the membership to seven so that all colleges would be represented.
Receiving no objections, Dr. Bailey stated that he would request elections in the appropriate colleges and would notify the Senate of the committee membership when it was finalized.
Dr. Raul Aranovich asked if the member appointed by the Provost had to be faculty.
Dr. Bailey responded that his appointee was chosen from a list of all full professors.
Dr. Aranovich asked if there were problems regarding the TOEFL scores of the international students who were admitted and whether those students were required to take the English courses offered by the Division of Bicultural-Bilingual Studies.
Dr. Bailey replied that everything was going well with the Division's handling of the American Language Institute, but he would check with the Division Director to see if there were any problems related to the TOEFL scores.
Dr. Bailey reported that another issue in the Office of International Programs was that student fee funds had been used inappropriately for faculty travel abroad. To correct this, discretionary money had been provided to Dr. James Almazan's office to fund travel abroad and faculty should apply to that office. It is anticipated that these funds would be allocated directly to the colleges in the future.
Dr. Bailey reported that the UT Health Science Center has previously handled visas for new faculty at UTSA. That process has never worked satisfactorily and the Office of the Provost plans to hire a half-time staff person to handle faculty visas in the future.
Dr. Walter Richardson asked if faculty should apply to their divisions for foreign travel funding.
Dr. Bailey replied that procedures would be appropriate if the division had funds but faculty could also apply to International Programs.
Dr. Deborah Schwartz-Kates expressed concern that the removal of the Office of International Programs would present a compromise for divisions or units that are negotiating contracts and establishing relationships with foreign universities.
Dr. Bailey responded that Dr. Almazan's office would be responsible for agreements with foreign universities. The Office of Multicultural Programs would be responsible for student exchange programs.
Dr. Aranovich asked who would be designated as the official at UTSA to sign forms for international students or for faculty who apply for green cards. He also asked if green cards would be processed in house in the future.
Dr. Bailey said that he would notify the Senate when the official was identified. The goal is to have someone trained to process green cards by Spring 2001 when faculty start to be hired.
Dr. Mansour El-Kikhia asked why deans were not more involved in the budgetary process. Dr. Bailey replied that the deans are very involved in the process. Each dean is provided with data on all money that is allocated to the colleges. The process by which the funds are allocated is also provided in a very clear manner. Each of the deans has a college-by-college comparison that lays out all of the discretionary money. Certain things, like summer school profits, generally are not known until late in the process. Dr. El-Kikhia suggested that the budget process should include a committee from the Faculty Senate. Dr. Bailey said that there would be a Senate Committee to work with the Office of the Provost during the Spring 2001 semester when the budget is received from the legislature and funds are allocated.
Dr. Anthony Van Reusen said that faculty had asked him where they could obtain the full text of the accreditation report from the Southern Association of College and Schools. Dr. Bailey replied that he would bring copies of the report to the next Senate meeting.
Dr. Richardson asked if UTSA was in compliance with the Fair Employment Practices Training requirement. Dr. Bailey responded that most faculty had attended and the university is currently in good shape.
Dr. Bailey distributed a report titled, "Actual Annual Performance Measures."
The Curriculum Committee is charged with examining issues related to the duplication of course offerings across disciplines, and curriculum-related problems arising from the dissolution of multi-discipline divisions into single discipline academic units. The Committee should address at least the following questions:
The Curriculum Committee should examine these issues and deliver a report of its recommendations to the Senate at its next officially scheduled meeting in February.
The Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee is charged with examining the following questions related to the problem of serious intra-disciplinary conflict.
The Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee should examine these questions and deliver a report of its progress to the Senate at its next officially scheduled meeting in February.
Dr. Art Vega asked what policy the University was currently operating under.
Dr. Harris replied that the policy as contained in the Handbook of Operating Procedures was the operating policy. Since there appear to be misperceptions among faculty relating to the policy, Dr. Harris plans to distribute copies of the Grievance Policy, along with a cover memorandum highlighting its salient features.
The Faculty Senate wishes to express its heartfelt appreciation for the good work of the staff at the University of Texas at San Antonio. Furthermore, the Faculty Senate wishes to express its support for making educational opportunities at UTSA more accessible to the staff. Thus, we ask the Administration to consider the establishment of a Staff Scholarship Fund, which would be directed to defraying the cost of tuition for those staff who enroll in a course of study at UTSA.
Dr. Bailey said that a source of funds would need to be identified. Everybody believed that the idea is good, but the resources to implement it have not been available.
Dr. Wanda Hedrick suggested that faculty might want to contribute to the scholarship fund as a means of giving to the University community if they were given an opportunity.
Dr. El-Kikhia made a motion to approve the resolution. Motion passed. The resolution will be forwarded to the President and to the Provost.
Dr. Harris asked about the timeline for the continued work of the committee.
Dr. Alexander replied that the Committee planned to present recommendations on how to proceed relative to new instruments and consequent faculty development efforts to the Faculty Senate by the end of the Spring 2001 semester.
Dr. Aranovich pointed out that during the current restructuring process, many colleges were reexamining the faculty evaluation process in general.
Dr. Mark Blizard of the School of Architecture noted that the current instrument was not relative to the studio model of teaching used in his discipline.
Dr. Alexander agreed that these issues need to be considered. The Committee will review several existing instruments to determine if they can be custom fit to different teaching formats and objectives.
Dr. Robert Hiromoto said that he felt the problem was that the instruments were evaluated without context to what the instructor actually does. Typically in the past, some directors have done a good job of evaluating their faculty because they have understood the program of the unit. Other directors have based their evaluations strictly on the instruments of the student evaluation. He said that the move to department chairs from division directors would, possibly, remedy the situation since chairs would more likely be individuals who are part of the programs, who would understand what courses were being taught, who will interact with the faculty and who would know what the faculty contributes, inside and outside of the classroom.
Dr. Harris noted that all these concerns were mirrored in the SACS report on Faculty Performance, Incentives and Rewards and the Academic Policy and Requirements Committee has been charged with determining how to implement the recommendations of that report.
Recommend approval of the addition to the Graduate
Catalog of two concentrations to the Master of Arts degree
in Education: 1) Instructional Technology; 2) Kinesiology
and Health Promotion.
Dr. Richardson suggested that the Faculty Senate Bylaws should be changed to allow a division director to serve as a Senator. He also noted that it appears that the Senate's Executive Committee had been making an increasing number of decisions for the Senate. He stated that the Senate should be a deliberative body and, while the Executive Committee could decide some issues, there were many things that should be decided by the entire Faculty Senate. Dr. Harris responded to the concern about having a division director serve in the Faculty Senate by providing the history of the University Assembly Bylaws change prohibiting division directors to serve. She reported that Dr. Sam Kirkpatrick had introduced the change to the bylaws during an Assembly meeting without providing the appropriate notice or vote. Therefore, the change is not being treated as a valid change to the University Assembly Bylaws. Dr. Harris stated that she feels that nothing she does as a department chair contradicts her service to the Faculty Senate and vice versa.
Comments or questions to email@example.com