Minutes of 19 April 1999
Circulated 26 April 1999
Approved 4 October 1999
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
SENATE ASSEMBLY MEETING
MINUTES OF 26 APRIL 1999
ATTENDANCE
Present: L Bernal, M Bonner, D Brophy, A Burdi, V Castle, R Christiansen, T Croxton, W Ensminger,S Erickson, M Foss, R Gull, J Hart, D Karr, L Kleinsmith, S Kossoudji, M Lomax, C Loveland-Cherry,G MacAlpine, R Mann, N Marshall, J Merchant, S Nolen-Hoeksema, J Raisler, R Robertson, R Sharf, J Scheiman, M Schneider, J Shotwell, K Taylor, F Whitehouse Jr., G Winger, E Wingrove, C Yocum,J Zorn
Alternates: None
Absent: V Anderson, R Bartlett, B Bleske, J Boyd, D Burns, L Colletti, K Cooney, D Deskins, R Dunkle, M Feldman, I Francis, K Freese, H Harrington, K Jamerson, A Jensen, S Julius, P Kabamba, B Karnopp, J Lawson, D Lee, B MacAdam, M Maehr, A Malkawi, D Malamud, Y L Murphy, L Nagel, M Navvab, J Rahme, P Rogers, V Rosenberg, M Rosenthal, J Rush, D Schteingart, A Sedman, M Shapiro, M Sharp, M Sheil, S Teasley, J Turcotte, P Ward, S Wright,
Chair Ensminger convened the meeting at 3:20 PM.
MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED
1. Senate Assembly Agenda for 19 April 1999
2. Senate Assembly Skeletal Agenda
2. Draft Senate Assembly Minutes for 15 February 1999
3. Draft Senate Assembly Minutes for 15 March 1999
4. Draft report from Tenure Committee, dated 7 April 1999
5. Collected correspondence between SACUA and VP Krislov regarding Academic Property Rights
6. The University of Michigan Intellectual Property Policy, dated 19 April 1996
7. Faculty Governance Update, dated April 1999
8. Committee Volunteer and Nomination Form 1999
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Ensminger announced:
1. Nominations are being sought for service on Senate Assembly committees.
2. The new Grievance Policy Model has been adopted by 14 units. The provost has reported to SACUA that approval by schools of Music, Information, and Business is expected during the month of May.
3. Members of the Senate Assembly are invited to submit agenda items and topics for discussion during 1999/2000 to the SACUA office.
REPORT FROM THE TENURE COMMITTEE
Chair Ensminger introduced Professor Charles Garvin, chair of the Tenure Committee, at 3:25 P.M. Professor Garvin called attention to distributed item 4. He explained that the Tenure Committee was seeking feedback and comments from Senate Assembly at this time in anticipation of preparing a final draft report which would be brought to Senate Assembly for action early in the Fall Term. He said that the present draft had already benefited from comments received from the Academic Affairs Advisory Committee and from the Office of the Provost. Professor Garvin pointed out that there is substantial variance among
units in the practices employed for tenure review, and that both the deans and the provost expressed amazement at the disparities. He said that the Tenure Committee report emphasized the importance of feedback to the faculty member, a practice that is not universal across units. Professor Kleinsmith added that the committee had uncovered enormous variability in practices even within units. Professor Garvin said that the Tenure Committee hoped that its recommendations concerning basic fair practice and feedback to faculty could be codified in the Standard Practice Guide. He explained further that the Tenure Committee was not trying to standardize everything, and that it had not, in fact, examined procedures at departmental levels.
Associate Provost P. Raymond said that enforcing Standard Practice Guide rules concerning promotions and tenure would become the responsibility of the provost.
A member of the Assembly suggested that the competency of reviewers merited further consideration particularly in evaluation of interdisciplinary work. Professor Garvin requested that specific
recommendations be transmitted to the SACUA office or the Tenure Committee directly so that the committee could consider them in its future revision of the draft report. Professor Garvin concluded his
remarks at 3:55 P.M.
VISIT BY VICE PRESIDENT M. KRISLOV AND M. PARNES
Chair Ensminger introduced the guests at 3:55 P.M. Vice President Krislov explained that M. Parnes administers the U-M intellectual property policy and that Krislov advises him. VP Krislov said that the distributed documents (item 5) summarize the policy well. He said that U-M policy assumes that all faculty intellectual property rights belong to the Board of Regents, but that the policy aims to share revenue. He said that the U-M administration does not see the intellectual property policy as a contract. He said the Regents govern the faculty and administration and they can do anything they choose.
A member of the Assembly asked if the Regents were likely to re-open the question of definition of intellectual property rights. Parnes said no, as far as he was aware. Professor Zorn asked about the status of lecture notes. Parnes replied that there is currently a Media Rights working group examining the matter, but that generally lecture notes have not been considered under the intellectual property policy. Vice
President Krislov added that lecture notes have been treated as traditional faculty property.
Professor Kleinsmith asked about the percentage distribution of revenues between administration and faculty inventors. Parnes replied that the policy of specific proportions of financial distribution was outside of the regental bylaws. Kleinsmith asked if faculty could rely on the advertised policy of distribution. Parnes replied that the administration has always attempted to keep it in place. Kleinsmith asked whether the distribution might be changed retroactively. Parnes replied that he could not provide 100% assurance one way or the other.
A member of the Assembly asked whether the university was increasingly taking equity in companies started from faculty inventions. Parnes replied that the administration has accelerated that option in the last
two years. He said that around the country universities are increasingly taking equity in companies.
Chair Ensminger thanked the guests for their comments at 4:10 P.M.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
FAREWELL REMARKS BY CHAIR ENSMINGER
Chair Ensminger made the following remarks.
This has been a productive year. Your Model Grievance document has been approved for implementation in 14 units; the 3 remaining schools plan approval by the end of May. An Ombuds program should be in place by this fall as another mechanism to assist faculty when serious disputes arise. The Faculty Handbook is in printed form and on the Web to educate faculty about University policies and resources available to them. Engagement continues with the Provost on the changing nature of the Professoriate; information will be provided on an annual basis about numbers of each type of untenured and tenured faculty in the various schools and colleges. These data will be distributed to you shortly. Support for the Academic Freedom lectures has been secured from the University. M-Care steerage is either dead or in deep hibernation. And recently a significant step toward Tobacco Divestment has been taken by
formation of a Presidential committee to make a recommendation on the matter.
Based upon recent events, it is possible to foresee several items for the next year’s agenda. The Tenure Committee’s report represents one significant area of engagement with the Administration. Development of an improved and more open approach to faculty compensation, as described by the Committee on the Economic Status of the Faculty in their report to the Regents, is a second important goal. SACUA anticipates that a joint faculty-administration group will be created to develop a policy document by following the precedent established with the Model Grievance Document. Third, SACUA will re-examine faculty involvement in the Board in Control of Intercollegiate Athletics.
Constant effort and attention is essential to make agreements and mechanisms work and to refine processes that will allow faculty to function effectively and to flourish. Success demands goal setting and
persistence over the long haul. All accomplishments in Central Faculty Governance represent the dedicated efforts of many people, including those serving on the Senate Assembly, its many advisory committees, and
on SACUA. We are fortunate to have an Administration with a president, provost, and other executive officers who are willing to work on areas of importance to faculty. I have enjoyed being a part of this vital
effort. My deepest appreciation goes to the staff of the Senate Assembly/SACUA office, Tom Schneider, Mary Mandeville, and Tawna Dabney, whose efforts are truly outstanding. I would also like to thank our
superb Senate Assembly and SACUA secretary, Professor John Lehman, for his institutional dedication, efficiency, and for his personal counsel.
Thank you and best wishes for the upcoming year.
The members of the Senate Assembly expressed appreciation to Chair Ensminger in the form of applause.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
John T. Lehman
Senate Secretary