Perhaps an informational item from the administration at the end of the meeting.

a. State IFO Academic Affairs Committee

Senate elected Alex Yard to represent WSU-FA on the statewide IFO Academic Affairs committee. Immediate issues before the group will be (a) technical college courses and the MN Transfer Curriculum and (b) the BOT's (mis)use of standardized tests to measure the readiness of student teachers to work in the classroom. Alex has also been elected on the statewide committee to work with BOT on test issues.

b. WINGS Task Force

Senate approved Comm. on Comm.'s recommendation that Dennis Pack, Gail Grimm, and Jim Reineke be the faculty reps on the WINGS Task Force.

These appointments were acknowledged by the administration.

a. E-Learning Center proposal to FA-Tech Committee.

b. Increased membership on IACU, Residential College Steering, and Service Day committees to Committee on Committees.

c. Report on Ed Department assignments for supervisors of student teachers (Fall 01) to PP&G committee.

The administration acknowledged these referrals.

Administration Comments:

1. WSU should put the E-Learning Center proposal on the fast track.

2. What is the IFO's input on the E-Learning Steering Committee composition?

D. Bratt informed the administration that the PP&G chair will be requesting at the next Senate meeting a meeting between PP&G committee and Dean Carol Anderson on the matter of Student Teacher Supervisor Loads.

D. Bratt was instructed by FA Senate to investigate whether Tim Dost's 3-credit adjunct appointment places him in the IFO. He has determined that a person with a teaching assignment above 3-credits or one course per year would be considered a member of the IFO unit. Since Tim Dost is only teaching 3-credits this semester, he is not a member of the IFO unit. Therefore it is OK for the administration to appoint him on the IACU committee.

FA Senate agreed to the proposal to establish a Service Day committee, with membership to include 5 faculty members, with the understanding that the service day would not result in the loss of an instruction day. (The loss of a Faculty Development Day was preferred.) Some senators also hoped that the day would not be early in the Fall semester, when first-year students need to be developing the habit of attending classes.

Administration Comments:

1. The Adm. is waiting for a report from the committee. Might be difficult to satisfy Senate wishes.

2. Looking for a date when leaves fly! (Are we raking leaves!)

FA Senate agreed to the proposal to ask the Commencement Committee to make recommendations regarding the Convocation opening ceremony, with the understanding that Senate wishes to review and respond to those recommendations before they are adopted.

The administration acknowledged the referral.

a. Adjunct appointments, 00-01

b. Complete 00-01 fixed-term appointments

c. Special Ed Dept assignments for supervisors of student teachers (Fall 01)

d. Revised Additional Duties of Administrators report

e. AA/HR assessment final report

D. Bratt requested the administration for the above.

Administration Responses:

1. (Complete) Adjunct and Fixed-term appointments (00-01) will be forthcoming.

2. The administration distributed a revised report on the "Revised Additional Duties of Administrators Report."

3. AA/HR final report could be mid- to late-fall.

D. Bratt asked members of the administration to attend a Senate meeting to discuss the related topics of enrollments and budget. He also mentioned two corollaries for them to consider: 'how do we serve student needs when their numbers are increasing more quickly than the faculty's?' and 'what do we quit doing (or do less of) in this sort of environment?'

Administration Responses/Comments:

1. Administration is looking forward to this discussion with Senate.

2. Once the new Science Building is built, WSU might have even more budget problems dealing with such issues as additional maintenance, debt service, etc.

3. Not sure if there is a satisfactory solution at this point.

4. 1^st draft report on Retention (on enhanced retention rate) might imply we don't have to increase number of incoming students.

5. Might need more than one meeting, might also need to send this issue to Long Range Planning Committee.

6. Depends on MnSCU Allocation Model, might look for a solution within the new allocation model.

7. A new Science Building doesn't necessary mean WSU gets more from MnSCU, depends on other needs from other campuses; i.e. if Moorhead also gets a new building, then we have to share any new monies within the system.

8. President Krueger would like to limit our enrollment but is feeling pressure because of the current allocation model structure to increase numbers.

9. The MnSCU Allocation Model is too complicated to make any simplified/reasonable estimates due to many different variables! Mathematicians are trying, but quite often encounter model instabilities when they run simulations on parameter variations.

10. This fall has not been any easy fall, affected not only WSU, but also the community (i.e. noise level and drinking patterns in the neighborhood have risen this fall).

11. Still rather miss our target on the high side.

12. In order to get more prepared, the Administration proposed the Oct. 29 Senate meeting for this discussion. We will be discussing further on this issue at the next M & C.

Regarding the Dean of Education's memo regarding student teacher supervisors' loads (dated 5/2/01); D. Bratt sought clarification from the administration regarding the chronology of the process described. President Bratt also expressed Senate's concern regarding the process by which this proposed solution was created (i.e., committee members had believed that the department, not the dean, would come up with the process).

Administration Comments:

1. Administration understands the process starts with departments. Director of Field Experience and the Dean will then meet to discuss individual supervisor loads.

D. Bratt asked the administration about the draft's scope and organization, to explain:

a. NTT and fixed-term faculty are not mentioned. An oversight? or will an additional regulation be written to cover these faculty?

b. Point 3 seems to combine the tenure process/decision and the promotion process/decision

c. Point 8 addresses only those faculty who report on an annual basis.

Administration Responses:

1. Form is not available specifically for NTT and fixed-term faculty. VPAA will be discussing with PP&G.

2. Administration will be sending responses on the above and the VPAA will be meeting with PP&G on this matter.

 

D. Bratt requested the clarification regarding:

a. Regulation 3-15 (a.k.a. 3-26?)

b. Senate endorsed PP&G's recommendation that VP Richardson be invited to meet with the committee in order to expedite consideration of this draft.

Administration Response:

1. VPAA will be meeting with PP&G.

 

The administration agreed (tentative on room availability) to begin at 3:45 p.m.

Senate discussed what works and what doesn't, led by Kerry Fine. Besides some concerns, a lot of good comments regarding WSU service units were mentioned.

Administration Comment:

1. The administration will be asking five Orientation Leaders to a journal (for a month or more) detailing their interactions and experiences with various WSU organizations. These data will be collected and analyzed and then provided to the President.

The administration requested for a Statistician to be added to the committee. This came from the committee. Members on the committee that a Stats person is needed for evaluating/assessing IRB protocols.

Need faculty to get involved in discussion of Residence halls. Of the $135M MnSCU bonding, $44M is needed alone for WSU's maintenance of Residence halls (deferred maintenance). But should WSU go into debt again since we just finished paying off all our debts on buildings such as Lourdes Hall? WSU needs to plan more carefully on using bonding debt vs. room/board/housing fees.

WSU Foundation is building a $13M res. hall off campus to help alleviate over-crowded dorms. When the new dorm opens, having more bonding debt would not give WSU flexibility. Should we get rid of deferred maintenance debts in Res. halls in ten years using housing fee increases? Perhaps WSU shouldn't borrow using bonding money (and incur interest). This seems to be a question of going with the rest of the system on bonding debts or going it alone. If we go with the rest of the system, we wind up paying down debt for years (essentially paying interest). If we go it alone, it looks like we can be in the same place in essentially the same time period, but wind up with no interest payments - all the money coming in then can be allocated elsewhere at WSU. Potential savings can perhaps be in the $5M/yr area. The question is whether the system can be convinced to let us do it ourselves.

Cal Winbush is doing the Analysis of Debt Service. The administration might need some support from IFO to deflect some of the pressures from students who are lobbying for maintenance bonding debt service in Res. halls.

Having enough Residence halls help with retention rate.

This will be discussed with the administration during the Oct. 29 Senate meeting.

Adjourned 5:15 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Bill Ng.