Minutes of 20 April 1998
Circulated 21 April 1998
Approved 18 May 1998

ATTENDANCE
Present: Baker, Bernal, Bleske, Cooney, Croxton, Curley, DeCamp, Ensminger, M. Feldman, Freese, Hultquist, Karnopp, Kibbie, Kleinsmith, Kossoudji, Lawson, Lomax, Loveland-Cherry, MacAdam, MacAlpine, Perakis, Raisler, Rosenberg, Schteingart, Shapiro, Sharf, Shotwell, Seibers, Steneck, Teasley, Turcotte, Wagaw, Yeo
Alternates: M. Rosenthal (for M. Schneider)
Absent: Assanis, Bartlett, Browder, Bryant, Burdi, Burnham, Burnstein, Castle, Christiansen, Colletti, Deskins, DeWoskin, E. Feldman, Flynn, Francis, Freedman, Gull, Jamerson, Jensen, Julius, Kabamba, Keyserling, Lafortune, D. Lee, V. Lee, Malamud, Maloy, Mann, Marshall, Martin, Nagel, Navvab, Nolen-Hoeksema, Pastalan, Pintrich, Rahme, Rogers, Rush, Schneider, R. Sharp, W. Sharp, Ward, Wasserman, Yeung, Zorn

Chair D'Alecy convened the meeting at 3:24 P.M.

MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED
1. Agenda for 20 April 1998
2. Draft minutes of 16 February 1998
3. Draft Minutes of 16 March 1998
4. Report from the Committee for a Multicultural University, dated 20 April 1998 5. Report of the Study Group on the Changing Nature of the Professoriate, dated 10 April 1998
6. Proposed modifications to the January 26th minutes of the Senate Assembly by Jose Marie Griffiths
7. Suggested motion for Senate Assembly regarding quorum requirement
8. Suggested motion for Senate Assembly regarding a General Counsel Advisory Committee
9. Report of CESF to the Senate Assembly, dated 20 April 1998

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair D'Alecy reported that selection of chairs for Senate Assembly committees was in progress and that 7 of 13 positions have already been filled.

REPORT FROM STUDY GROUP ON THE CHANGING NATURE OF THE PROFESSORIATE
Chair D'Alecy called on Professor Curley at 3:25 P.M. to present the report from the committee he chairs. Professor Curley reviewed the report (distributed item 5). He noted that use of non tenure track faculty in higher education is increasing nationwide, and that the University of Michigan is participating in the trend. He cited figures in item 5 which demonstrated that whereas the number of tenured and tenure track faculty at the University of Michigan changed from 2679 in 1987 to 2678 in 1996, the non tenure track ranks have increased from 22% of total numbers to 33% of the total faculty. He suggested that the data showed erosion of the tenure system by attrition. He added that it is hard to tell if the trend is beneficial to the university as a whole because administrators and faculty have conflicting interests in the outcome of that judgment. He said that his committee recommended that the faculty should monitor the practices and trends closely, and that SACUA should assign such a monitoring role to one of the Senate Assembly committees. Professor Curley concluded his remarks at 3:34 P.M., and invited questions from the members of the Assembly.

Professor Kleinsmith remarked that the committee report appeared to lack data for research track appointments. Professor Curley replied that his committee was unable to obtain the necessary data. He stated that the committee experienced difficulty acquiring information from the units. He explained that his committee circulated a questionnaire to the heads of university units but did not receive anything close to a full response. He added that the committee was disappointed that the Provost had declined its request that she lend support to their effort at information gathering. Provost Cantor replied that the monitoring task could perhaps be assigned to the AAAC, and she said that she would speak to that committee about the prospect. She added that her office is considering a retreat involving deans and members of elected faculty leadership to discuss related topics.

Professor Rosenberg commented that one additional aspect of the modern trend to use of non tenure track faculty is the fact that the positions had often been part-time and temporary appointments in the past, but now they were evolving into full time appointments with full rights and privileges, other than tenure. He said the trend was toward an erosion of tenure with severe impacts on young scholars. Professor Steneck remarked that it appeared to him that most of the growth of non tenure track faculty had been in clinical areas. He said it was too simplistic to say that the tenure track is under assault. He said that we need to determine what type of professoriate is needed to run a modern university.

The report was concluded at 3:50 P.M.

REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEE FOR A MULTICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
Chair D'Alecy introduced Professor C. B. Smith at 3:50 P.M. Professor Smith referred to the report and recommendations from the committee he chairs (distributed item 4). He expressed thanks to Associate Provost Monts and members of his staff for their participation in committee meetings, and he thanked members of SACUA, including SACUA liaison Professor Kleinsmith for help developing the text of their report. Professor Smith reviewed the recommendations printed in the report, and then invited questions from the audience.

Professor Freese said that she was particularly concerned about more subtle forms of discrimination which were not addressed in the committee report. Professor Perakis remarked that former President Duderstadt had once suggested raiding other universities in order to bring faculty from underrepresented minorities to the University of Michigan. He said that he wished the university would engage in such raids to bring Nobel Laureates, as well.

Professor Ensminger suggested that interested members of the Senate Assembly consider attending meeting of the Committee for a Multicultural University to discuss issues in greater depth. Professor Steneck stated that if the report comes back to the Senate Assembly he would like it to include substantiating data for the statements and recommendations. Professor Smith remarked that no study to date had considered the role of alternative recruitment and retention practices. He noted that turnover of African American faculty at the university had been 50% since 1990. Professor MacAdam said that there are great variations among units that may have an impact on results. She said that the "one size fits all" strategy is unlikely to work. The report and discussion were concluded at 4:12 P.M.

REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEE ON THE ECONOMIC STATUS OF THE FACULTY
Chair D'Alecy called on Professor Dunn to present the second part of a report from CESF (item 9). Professor Dunn pointed out that Part 2 concerned benefit policy. He reviewed the written recommendations in the report and then invited comments from the floor. Chair D'Alecy asked what will happen next with the reports. Professor Dunn replied that he would present them the following day to the Regents, as part of the obligatory annual report from CESF. He said that additional comments from the faculty should be sent to SACUA and to CESF. He said that it is now up to the Senate Assembly to take action on the policy recommendations contained in the report, and if assent is given, to send them to the Provost for negotiation and implementation. He said that it would be acceptable if action did not occur until the Fall Term because deliberation was more important than speed. Professor Dunn completed his remarks at 4:27 P.M.

OLD BUSINESS
All additional business was postponed owing to absence of a quorum.

REMARKS BY THE RETIRING FACULTY CHAIR
Professor D'Alecy made the following remarks at the conclusion of his term as Faculty Chair:

"One of the problems with computers is that they coldly restate one's past writings having never felt the strain and effort of intervening activities. I went back to my February '95 prepared statement as a candidate for election to SACUA to see if perhaps I had made any progress toward my academic ideal. Indulge me while I read that one page statement.

I believe the faculty, individually and collectively, bears moral, ethical, and professional responsibility for the University's operation including executive decisions that impact on the student's experience and the faculty's' professional life. We have largely abdicated this responsibility and our neglect has eroded academic climate and allowed entrenchment of those with an economic agenda. The "corporate model" is destroying our University and short-changing our students and society. It is time for faculty of like mind to join together, stand up for what we believe in, and pull back the reins on those who espouse and support top down management. The University, through its faculty, must confront and combat nationwide trends of anti-intellectualism by adhering to the highest of academic and ethical standards, not industrial or corporate standards.

This is a university first, and we should only utilize corporate strategies to the extent that they serve the academic mission. Not every unit or activity of the University must be a "money maker" but every unit should contribute to the academic mission of the University. It is time to consider recruiting chairs of departments who have as elements of their agenda the advancement of scholarship, the enhancement of educational programs and the equitable support and development of their faculty rather than being focused on the expansion of yet another lucrative research fiefdom. The University needs strong deans, but deans that serve the students and faculty. Such a dean would coordinate the strengths of their department heads for the good of the unit or school rather than dissipating resources on yet another burdensome physical structure that demands further bureaucracy and copious extramural support. I believe the faculty would welcome the opportunity to give their substantive counsel prior to changes in policy at both the collegiate and central administrative levels. Let us return to excellence through collegiality, and leadership -- both intellectual and administrative -- by example. Let us be recognized for the lessons we teach, and the students we train, in addition to the research dollars we attract.

My message to you today is the same. Central administrative personnel have changed markedly but the pressures on them are the same. Faculty must remain vigilant and fight for full participation in the governance process. We must get past the point of hearing that "It is legal" and fight for what is right. We must get past the point of "It is necessary" and fight for what is good. The one thing I have re-learned during my tenure as Chair is that our academic freedom is more at risk today than ever before. Faculty must unite and participate in the defense of academic freedom and excellence. Do it. Thank you. "

At the conclusion of his remarks, Senate Assembly members applauded Chair D'Alecy. The Chair expressed his thanks to vice-chair Loveland-Cherry, members of SACUA, Professors Dunn and Lehman, and members of the Senate Assembly staff. He presented the Senate gavel to Chair elect Ensminger at 4:33 P.M.

The meeting adjourned at 4:33 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

John T. Lehman
Senate Secretary