Minutes of 28 January 2002
Approved 18 February 2002
ATTENDANCE
Present: Alcock, Antonucci, Brown, Burdi, Dick, Erickson, Faerber, Fisher, Gobetti, Green, Gull, Juster, Karr, Ketefian, Lehman, Lindner, Lubeck, Moore, Moseley, Navvab, Norris, Overmyer, Page, Pedraza, Powell, Raisler, Remick, Riebesell, Rocchini, Uribe, Ward
Alternates:
Absent: Akerlof, Alfred, Andersen, Andrews, Askari, Atreya, Barsky, Bhavnani, Boyd, Brusati, Cho, Clark, Combi, Drach, Elenbogen, Frier, Frost, Gould, Guthrie, Hall, Hills, Jacobsen, Karni, Keller-Cohen, Kim, Koopmann, Korobkin, Lithgow-Bertelloni, Marcelo, Masson, Mateo, McDonagh, Ni, Okada, Peterson, Reisch, Savage, Sears, Taghaboni-Dutta, Thornton, Vicinus, Watkins, Yakel, Yeo
MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED
1. Senate Assembly agenda
2. Draft minutes of the Senate Assembly meeting of 26 November 2001
3. Excerpts from the approved minutes of the Senate Assembly meeting of April 2001
4. Letter from SACUA to interim president White regarding participation of elected faculty governance leaders at meetings of administrative officers
Chair Navvab convened the meeting at 3:15 P.M. The proposed agenda was adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF 26 NOVEMBER 2001
The minutes of 26 November 2001 were approved as submitted.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Navvab invited Assembly members to submit nominations for future speakers for the annual Academic Freedom Lecture.
UPDATES
Chair Navvab reported: The Board of Regents has voted to change the name of the Board in Control of Intercollegiate Athletics to the Advisory Board on Intercollegiate Athletics. The Regents did not follow Senate Assembly ’s request for a delay on the vote despite arguments presented by elected leaders of both faculty and student groups. Vice Chair Gobetti added that after both faculty and students requested a delay on action Regent White expressed her desire for delay. However, he said that the other Regents responded that they would “give this one to Lee”. Gobetti stated that the restructuring puts all power in the hands of the Athletic Director. He noted that only student athletes, not members of the student community at large, would be eligible to serve on the restructured advisory board. He stated that he believed the changes create a board that is inappropriately stacked, and that he was disappointed on behalf of faculty governance. He said that the president set the agenda for the action and that the Regents voted with minimal public discussion or deliberation. Professor Brown asked whether Intercollegiate Athletics issues would now be dropped. Chair Navvab replied no, but that there are many administrative obstacles to action in this time of change.
Chair Navvab pointed out that Senate Assembly’s request for delay on the Life Sciences Institute bylaw was also rejected. He said that the departure of president Bollinger, the announced transition by EVPMA Omenn, and withdrawal of the co-Director has raised additional concerns about governance and decision-making. He added that SACUA has questions about the budget.
SACUA and Senate Assembly have not received correspondence from Human Resources regarding potential changes to prescription drug benefits. Interim Provost Courant has said that he will provide some information today. Both the interim president and the interim provost have reacted positively to a proposal for new policy regarding intellectual property and copyrights as endorsed by Senate Assembly. Some budget decisions are being reconsidered. The Arthur Miller Theater is one case in point.
The Assembly will seek action today on grievance procedures and teaching principles. SACUA and Senate Assembly have not received any communication from the Regents responding to faculty correspondence about the presidential search process. Professor Ketefian asked to whom the faculty should express concerns about the way that faculty input is being handled. Chair Navvab replied that he has communicated concerns to the president, and that hopefully the faculty will hear some response today.
VISIT OF INTERIM PROVOST COURANT
Chair Navvab introduced the interim provost at 3:30 P.M. The interim provost remarked that the role of administration is to facilitate faculty endeavors and to help them take advantage of the rich opportunities of a large university.
VISIT OF INTERIM PRESIDENT WHITE
Chair Navvab next invited remarks from interim president White at 3:37 P.M. The interim president stated that he was pleased and honored to serve the university at this time of transition. He said that he has three priorities. The first, he said, was to demonstrate commitment to priorities set during the Bollinger administration. Life Science Initiative issues are at the hard work phase. He said that the LSI commitments are institutional, not personal. The second priority he stated was to have the university in the best condition for appointment of a new president and then other executive officers. He said that the U-M faces a tight budget with difficult choices, but no crisis. Third, he said, we are not immune from these unsettling times. He said it is a great time for learning and for trying to understand the world better while being mindful of hard tradeoffs between security and academic freedom.
Interim President White reported that he has told SACUA that I would like to accomplish one or two important goals in cooperation with the faculty over the next 6 months. SACUA responded with suggestions of several potential topics. He said that he is examining those ideas and will discuss them at the next SACUA meeting he attends. Chair Navvab asked the interim provost to review the status of prescription drug benefits. Interim Provost Courant replied that a response from vice president Kasdin and himself would be forthcoming soon.
Chair Navvab asked the interim president to comment on the status of the Life Sciences Initiative (LSI) given recent personnel changes. Interim President White responded that it is not surprising that multiple changes follow from a leadership change. But, he said, the University has good methods for managing transitions. He noted that the LSI was by far the largest initiative in the recent history of the university, with a commitment of over $500 million and many faculty and resources. He said that he is discussing start up planning with Jack Dixon, and that White thought they would get a management group in place, and hire a management director to share some of the burden. He added that the LSI was very high in his attention.
Chair Navvab next asked for an update on the Miller Theater. Interim President White said that estimated project costs are about $62 million, but that the Regents have approved only $20 million. He said that $62 million is just too much. He said that he is personally pushing the project hard under his banner of continuity and momentum, and that the project is not being re-planned. He said that he has asked a group of advisors to report back soon so that he can provide an update. Professor Brown asked whether any thought had been given to cooperating with community performing arts groups to develop a common solution. The interim president said yes, that the idea came up at a recent meeting. He said that he would like the U-M to design and build something that will be heavily utilized.
Professor Burdi asked to what extent big initiatives are draining resources from other areas. Interim President White replied that a decision was made to make LSI an institutional priority. But, he said, based on the last three months spent talking with people on campus, he thinks we need to have more winners out of the LSI than we have today. He said that a separatist approach was taken in the design of the LSI. For startup that is fine, but that he senses ambivalence from many quarters. He said that he questions whether we are creating enough people who are going to be beneficiaries. Chair Navvab asked about the next step toward enacting policy revisions embodied in the intellectual property report endorsed by Senate Assembly. Interim president White said that he has accepted the report as written. As it receives its final set of reviews, if there are even minor wording changes, then the administration will come back to the faculty. White declared that faculty governance is a special quality of our institution. He said that the time we take to understand and get the wisdom of the faculty is time well spent.
The interim president left the meeting at 4 P.M.
Professor Riebesell asked the interim provost about the status of a report on the undergraduate experience. The interim provost replied that his office is reviewing the report and will be working on it with the interim president later in the week. He said that he expected to be able to accomplish something significant during the next 6 months. Professor Ketefian pointed out that past actions that disregarded the faculty voice might easily be repeated unless corrective attitudes are applied. She said there is grave concern among the faculty. She said the concern was about process, and that the faculty did not see the urgency forcing the Regents to act. She noted that Bylaw changes were enacted despite opposition from both students and faculty. The interim provost said that he promises that his staff will not do things pre-emptively, and that the things we say ought to be the product of reasoned discourse.
The guest left the meeting at 4:10 P.M.
TEACHING PRINCIPLES DOCUMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 012802-1
Professor Ward moved (multiple seconds):
“The Senate Assembly approves of the Teaching Principles document, and commends it to the Interim Provost for review and comment pending joint endorsement and adoption by the end of the Winter Term 2002.” The Action was approved by unanimous vote.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FACULTY GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE REVISION
Chair Navvab called attention to an unfinished item of business held over from April 2001.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 012802-2
Professor Lindner moved (Gobetti seconded) the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the current faculty grievance procedures were recently adopted, with only minor unit specific changes, by the Schools and Colleges in 1998, and
WHEREAS there is now some practical experience with the grievance procedures, and
WHEREAS there are many strong indications that faculty do not avail themselves of the procedures because of a lack of confidence in 1) the non-determinative nature of the grievance decisions and 2) the lack of objectivity in the designated decision-maker;
THEREFORE be it RESOLVED that:
The Chair of Senate Assembly request the Provost to form a joint faculty and administration committee, comprised of three faculty-appointed and three administration-appointed members, to draft a modification of the grievance procedures to address these apparent shortcomings.
The Action was approved by unanimous vote.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VISIT OF DEAN EARL LEWIS AND MEMBERS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The guests arrived at 4:19 P.M. Chair Navvab pointed out that SACUA and Senate Assembly had corresponded with the Regents about the presidential search process, but had received no response. He said that this is our first opportunity to gain information. Dean Lewis introduced several members of the advisory committee who had accompanied him to the meeting. Dean Lewis said that presidential selection involves a two-part process. The Presidential Selection Committee (PSC) is the Board of Regents, but the Regents are assisted by a search advisory committee consisting of faculty, staff, and student members. He said that the advisory committee plans to send a slate of names to the PSC by late spring or early summer so that the Regents can elect a new president and have the candidate in their role by early fall. Professor Riebesell asked how the membership of the search advisory committee was selected. Dean Lewis replied that it was established by the Board of Regents in consultation with him after he was selected as chair. Professor Burdi commented that it seems like much important work will occur over the summer when important constituencies will be absent from campus. Dean Lewis said that he would share the comment with the Board of Regents.
Professor Ward asked how many names would likely be transmitted to the Regents. Dean Lewis replied that they would likely provide an unranked list of four or five names. He said that the final list or lists would have to be presented to the public. Lewis said that the advisory committee was working with a private consulting firm, A. T. Karney, to develop lists of candidates. He said that the firm was used in the search that named N. Cantor as provost.
The guests left the meeting at 4:45 P.M.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Chair Navvab called attention to distributed item 4. He said that SACUA is pursuing faculty governance issues, especially participation in the Academic Program Group and meetings with Regents. He said that another issue is that the numbers of non tenure track faculty are growing sharply in some units. He said that the appointments are made for budgetary reasons, but it has negative effect on curriculum and continuity. Navvab said that other items on the faculty governance agenda include child care and tuition assistance.
The meeting adjourned at 5:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
John T. Lehman
Senate Secretary
University of Michigan Bylaws of the Board of Regents, Sec. 5.02:
Governing Bodies in Schools and Colleges In each school, college, or degree granting division of the University, including those at the University of Michigan-Dearborn and at the University of Michigan-Flint, the governing faculty shall be in charge of the affairs of the school, college, or division, except as delegated to the executive committee, if any, and except that in the School of Graduate Studies the governing board shall be the executive board, and in the Medical School shall be the executive faculty.