Ex officio members present. Margaret Payne for President Carol Cartwright; Provost Myron Henry; Margaret Garmon for Vice President Mark Lindemood, Cornell Morton for Vice President Nancy Scott; Vice Provosts M. Thomas Jones, Gordon Keller, Terry Kuhn; Deans Larry Andrews, A. Raj Chowdhury, Joseph Danks, Marlene Dorsey, Davina Gosnell, George Stevens, Nancy Mitchell for Scott Sullivan, Joanne Whitmore; Parliamentarian Bessie House; Observers Harold Williams, Professors Emeriti, Julie Metham (UGSS).

Guests present. Associate Dean Judy Hirschman, Scott Layman (Technology), Sherona Garrett (GSS),
Justin Boyd (Record-Courier), Greg Anderson (Provost's Office), Associate Provost Lois Muir, Melissa Goodrich (Daily Kent Stater), Associate Provost James Louis, Assistant Dean Darrell Turnidge.

Senators absent. Carole Barbato (excused), Roger Craik, Edna Erez, Kazadi Mukuna, Linda Walker (excused).

Ex officio members absent. Vice Presidents Charles Greene, ILee Rhimes.

The meeting was convened at 3:25 pm.

MINUTES. The minutes of the meeting of October 13, 1997 were approved (Harold Johnson, Dymon). With regard to the minutes of the July 21, 1997 meeting, the secretary reported that he had listened again to the audio tape and that the second sentence from the end of the paragraph on "New Business" should read, "Senator Frank Smith moved, seconded by Senator Feezel, to refer the Lee motion to the Executive Committee; motion carried."

CHAIR'S REMARKS. "This month we have a brief agenda. The only action item is a motion from EPC relating to the Catalog in Force. In addition, we will have a progress report updating us on the Faculty Professional Development Center. The latter item is for information and discussion.

"In the meantime, other Senate work is proceeding apace. In response to a motion at the October Senate meeting, the Executive Committee is in the process of making minor editorial revisions to the Promotion Policy, bringing it into conformity with the language in the recently adopted Tenure document . We hope to present those revisions to the full Senate at the December meeting. In addition, the Executive Committee has met with Vice President Lindemood and agreed in principle to improve communication between Faculty Senate and the KSU Foundation. While details are to be worked out over the next several months, we have a commitment on both sides to create a constructive working relationship.

"The Executive Committee has been reviewing the list of University Priorities that the President's Office disseminated in October, and we have been conducting additional information to determine which issues should be of special ongoing concern to Senate. The Senate Budget Committee is now up and running, and meetings of the Professional Standards Committee and Committee on Administrative Officers will be held within the next few weeks to begin deliberations for the current academic year. Lastly, the first Senate Coffee Hour was held on Monday, November 3rd, to discuss a variety of pressing issues.

"About a dozen elected Senators attended the first Coffee Hour, and those in attendance agreed that it was a useful session. The frank and animated discussion focused upon issues relating to academic quality. Points of special concern included Library Holdings, Grading Policy, and Retention.

"Questions surrounding the library involve university priorities, the limited budget available for library acquisitions, and the importance of maintaining up-to-date learning and information technologies. All agreed that a well-stocked, state-of-the-art library is an essential ingredient in academic quality. It impinges directly on the quality of service that we can provide our students, and, in that respect, it is also connected to problems of student retention. In addition out status as a respected research university depends in large measure on the quantity and quality of our library holdings . At the same time, we recognize that our resources are limited, and we must make choices based on carefully considered goals and priorities. As a result of last week's deliberations, the Executive Committee was asked to have an appropriately constituted committee or commission study the question of library resources, how the library relates to other aspects of our academic mission, to identify problems, and to make realistic recommendations for addressing them.

"The second set of issues relates to the ongoing conversation about grading policy. Grades should be an accurate indication of students' levels of accomplishment. They must reflect rigor on the part of instructors and yet be based on reasonable standards of evaluation. A grading policy that is too lax may compromise the university's academic reputation, while one that students perceive as rigid and unfair may discourage able candidates from completing their degree at KSU. Grading policies should reflect academic level and degree of specialization, and grades should be amenable to accurate interpretation by potential employers as well as other educational institutions.

"Because of the complexity and importance of grading policy both for retention and as an indicator of academic quality, Senators felt that there should be a committee or commission to examine the issue in a careful, fair, and even-handed manner. The Executive Committee will consider ways in which this might be accomplished and recommend to Senate an appropriate body to conduct the necessary investigation."

PRESENTATION AND QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION WITH PRESIDENT AND/OR PROVOST. President Cartwright was traveling out of the country. Provost Henry spoke briefly on the recent action of the Trustees to approve the new Tenure Policy. He thanked all the many people who had worked on this policy and especially Professor Robert Stadulis, who had been chair of Professional Standards during the generation of the policy. Then Senator Robert Johnson asked the Provost when we might expect the administrative approval of changes in departmental handbooks to reflect the new policies on promotion and tenure. Provost Henry pointed out that these approvals came at the level of the college deans; and Dean Danks commented that in his college the review of departmental handbooks is progressing well, and that official approvals will come as soon as possible.

PROGRESS REPORT ON FACULTY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER. Senator Holly presented this report. She first described the relationship of the original Planning Committee, which had submitted its report to President Cartwright in the spring of 1996, to what she called an Implementation Committee that is currently working to complete plans for the Center. The Planning Committee had consisted of herself, Professors Wootten and Amitay, Vice Provost Jones, and Dean Whitmore. She said that Provost Henry, then, had asked these individuals to continue work as the Implementation group and that he had added to the group Deans Andrews and Tolliver and Rosemary Du Mont, who will have administrative duties at Moulton Hall where the Center will be located. Next Professor Holly described the allocated budget of approximately $150,000, the plans for space in Moulton Hall, and the plans for an internal search for the Director to take place this coming spring so that the Center may be fully operational by this coming fall. She also mentioned that the Implementation Committee is still uncertain about details of the search and about the nature of the Advisory Council for the Center. Following Senator Holly's presentation, there were a number of questions and comments. Senator Lee asked if the Implementation group were not, in fact, a negotiating group since so many key questions seem yet to be resolved. Senator Robert Johnson commented that, in his recollection, the report of the Planning Committee had been submitted to President Cartwright with the approval of Faculty Senate in January of 1996 and that the President had accepted the report with only two reservations: a question about the size of the planned budget and a question about the reporting responsibility of the Director. He assumed, then, that once it was agreed what the budget should be and that the Director should report to the Provost's office then there should be no need for further negotiations or discussions between those implementing the plans for the Center and the administration. Senator Casper asked if the composition and duties of the Advisory Council were still under consideration by the Implementation group. She recalled that there had been an effective Faculty Advisory Committee associated with the former Office of Faculty Development two decades ago. A further point of discussion had to do with the majority of administrators recently appointed to the Implementation group for the Center, which Provost Henry explained was due to the particular expertise of the new appointees. But Senator Frank Smith thought it is "inappropriate" that these appointments should result in an Implementation/Planning group with a clear minority of faculty, and he asked whose responsibility it was that these appointments should have been made. Provost Henry said that he takes full responsibility for these appointments. Senator Booth asked what proportion of the budget will be used for developmental projects and what proportion for the running of the Center, and Provost Henry answered that about a third of the budget will be used for salaries and operational expenses. Finally, Senator Robert Johnson returned to his original point and said that he felt the President should report back to Senate on exactly which points in the original Planning report were not acceptable and are still under discussion. Provost Henry said the he would be glad to summarize these differences, and Senator Holly said that the issues are so important to the faculty that a further report ought to placed on the Senate agenda for December. Chair Feinberg agreed that this should be done and thanked the Provost for his willingness to report back to us after talking with President Cartwright over the discrepancies and points of continuing discussion.

New Business. Chair Feinberg introduced this portion of the agenda by reminding Senate that the Executive Committee had approved revisions of the Rhetoric and Composition major in the English Ph.D. degree program since the major outline of this new degree had already been approved by the full Senate and by the Trustees.

UNDERGRADUATE CATALOG-IN-FORCE POLICY. Vice Provost Kuhn and Dean Judy Hirschman, from A & A Deans presented this revision in the undergraduate catalog-in-force policy, which would create three key changes in how the catalog is interpreted as a contract with the student. It would define the catalog as a university-wide contract or commitment between the University and the student rather than between a degree-granting program and the student so that a student could change majors and change colleges without changing catalogs. It would set a limit of ten years, and require satisfactory progress, during which a student may remain in one catalog. It would define more clearly "rights and exclusions" in the catalog relationship of the University and the student. Hirschman described how these changes had passed through A & A Deans after Kuhn had initiated the changes at first for exploratory majors. Senator Lee asked about options that the student has for "appeals" and exceptions; when Kuhn referred to appeals through the Deans's offices, Dean Danks explained that such appeals are handled when a student applies for graduation and that in his college a vote of the faculty is taken on each exception. Senator Feezel expressed some concern over the length of the ten year duration that a catalog may be used since knowledge changes so rapidly, and Kuhn explained that our ten-year period was selected to coincide with the accreditation time frame. He also pointed that sections #5 and #6 in the proposed policy allow considerable flexibility in order to keep a student abreast of changes in knowledge. Dean Whitmore added that in her college the use of such measures for upgrading requirements is clearly used to protect the student in a competitive world where one must not learn outdated material. A motion to approve the new policy was made by Senator Sosnowski, seconded by Senator Frank Smith, and the motion carried.

POLICY CHANGES IN RESEARCH AND GRADUATE STUDIES.. Senator Lee introduced three questions that he hoped could be answered by Vice Provost Jones, each having to do with Research Council monies and with regulations governing grant applications and awards. To his query about the transfer of monies from Research Council for the use in the hiring of research faculty as "startup" funds, Jones responded that no such transfers have taken place. His assertion about a time limit having been set for the expenditure of incentive monies associated with successful grants and returned to faculty was, also, denied by Jones; he is considering such time limits but no incentive monies have been taken back yet. His query about changes in the overhead rate charged for grants was answered by Jones with an explanation that such rates are set by the Federal Government and that we at Kent did have to go through the complex process of instituting new rates after July of this year; this process involved consultation with the Research Council. At this point, Senator Robert Johnson commented that he is on Research Council currently and that, further, the Council is a council of Faculty Senate; hence all questions such as the above can be easily answered by asking our faculty representatives. He confirmed Vice Provost Jones' responses to Lee's questions, although the pending changes about time limits on incentive funds has yet to be discussed in Council. Senator Frank Smith asked Jones for more details on this latter issue and was assured that faculty could "save" monies for future use if the cause were justified, but that his office is trying to encourage faculty to use incentive monies for research purposes. Finally, Chair Feinberg said that the Executive Committee will look at these issues to see if any further discussion needs to be put on the agenda. Vice Provost Jones said that he would appreciate time to prepare responses if items are to be put on the agenda.

STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD/ ANNOUNCEMENTS. There were a considerable number of these offered and so they are arranged below in an ascending order of complexity.

1. Vice Provost Kuhn reminded Senate of the standing committee of EPC devoted to library matters so that when the Executive Committee pursues its interest in such matters, as outlined in the Chair's remarks above, it must avoid duplication of efforts; and Chair Feinberg agreed.

2. Senator Feezel described again what an excellent Teaching Conference had taken place early in October, which had also been mentioned in the President's remarks at the October meeting.

3. Dean Chowdhury announced that a successful eight-campus multi-media conference had just been concluded (November 7) at the Tuscarawas Campus under the leadership of his School.

4. Senator Lee read a commendatory statement about the Director of Academic Computing, Dewitt Latimer, who is leaving the University. At the end of this statement, Senator Frank Smith commented that this office ought to report to the Provost rather than to the Vice President for Business; Provost Henry responded briefly that his office is, in fact, in the reporting loop.

5. Senator Lee read a concerned statement about expenditures approved recently by the Board of Trustees.

6. Senator Frank Smith read the following statement about the Vice President for Enrollment management and Student Services: "I have heard that there is a plan to move the office of this vice president from the Student Services Center to the center of the campus. I well remember that a perfectly viable University School was closed so that there would be a building available to consolidate student services. I do not believe that moving the Vice President for Enrollment Management and Student Services from the Student Service Center would be in the best interest of the students. I do not like condemning an action I am not sure will happen, but I do believe the President will hear about this and respond at the next meeting."

With regard to the last statement for the record, Chair Feinberg expressed some recognition of the rationale for the relocation of this office in the Student Center. He also reminded the Senate that Statements for the Record ought to be in written form and items of new business should go through the Executive Committee before coming to the Senate floor so that all parties involved might be prepared for discussion.

The meeting adjourned at 4:53 pm.

Respectfully submitted,
D. M. Hassler, Secretary
Faculty Senate