| University
of Houston Faculty
Senate
Last
updated: April 18, 2006 |
President Craig called the March 29 Spring Faculty Assembly and Faculty Senate meeting to order in the Farish Hall Kiva at 12:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: [33]
BUS: R. Keller
CLASS: E.
Brown-Guillory, B. Byrnes, S. Craig, W. Herendeen, N. Houston, G. Jowett, T.
Karner, J. Kotarba,
D. Papell, F. Schiff, G. Trail
EDU: M. Clarke, J. Freiberg, S. McNeil, A. Warner
ENGR: J.
Richardson, R. Willson
HRM: K. Titz
LAW: S.
Huber
LIB: D. Camille, S. Ferimer
NSM: T.
Albright, D. Blecher, P. Copeland, J. Eichberg, A. Ignatiev, G. Johnson, T. Lee,
J. Subhlok, D.
Wells
TECH: K.
Greenwood
GCSW: H.
Karger
MEMBERS ABSENT: [17]
ARCH: D.
Kacmar
BUS:
CLASS: M.
Haun, R. Lence, J. Middents
ENGR: W. Rixey, J. Williams, D.
Zimmerman
LAW: M. Duncan (w/Notice), P. Linzer
LIB:
NSM: D. Graur
OPT: R. Manny (w/Notice), S.
Quintero
PHA: C.
Pedemonte
ON-LEAVE: [2]
CLASS: V.
Brady, D. Mazella
VISITORS:
Jay Gogue (UHS Chancellor and UH President), Donald Foss
(UHS Senior Vice Chancellor and UH Senior Vice President for Academic), John
Rudley (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Administration &
Finance), Dona Hamilton (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Legal
Affairs and General Counsel), Elwyn Lee (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice
President for Student Affairs), Elaine Charlson (UHS Executive Associate Vice
Chancellor for Academic Affairs and UH Executive Associate Vice President for
Academic and Faculty Affairs), Marco Mariotto (Dean of Graduate &
Professional Studies), Ed Hugetz (UHS Assistant Vice Chancellor and UH
Assistant Vice President for Planning & University Outreach), David Bell
(UHS Assistant Vice Chancellor and UH Assistant Vice President for Academic and
Faculty Affairs), Mike Emery (Reporter, UH Today), Rebecca Daoud (Reporter, Daily
Cougar).
REPORT ON FACULTY SENATE ACTIVITIES: Steven Craig
Pres. Craig
said the Senate’s impact could be summarized by a statement made by David
Gergen, Editor-at-large for U.S. News & World Report, during his Rockwell
lecture discussed two models of leadership.
The old model was a King on a big horse, who pointed his sword and said,
“lets go this way.” And everyone
followed. The new model is that everyone
is standing on a field, and someone in the middle says, “gee, we would all be
better off if we took two steps to the left.”
And that person explains why this is a good idea. And pretty soon, as each person convinces the
next, everyone takes two steps left.
Well, I
think that is a good model for the Senate and leadership. We don’t have any power, we can only say what
seems like good ideas, and hope we convince everyone else. And I think its working.
The
University is more focused on research than it ever has been, and I think the
Senate has been helpful at getting there.
The campus is working on a Scholarship Report, which idea originated here. It’s not universally popular. But I believe once it is in place, it will
be.
UH is also
pretty close to adopting a strategic plan, at least in some of its parts. Specifically, we have been talking about that
the faculty is the most important research facility, and I believe people are
starting to accept that. By people, I
mean those that we care about including students, faculty, the administration,
and even the Regents. They are all
starting to understand what it takes to build a real research university. We have a ways to go here. But in the coming year’s very lean budget are
30 new faculty lines, a good start to the multi-year goal of 400 or so that we
need.
One way the
Senate is trying to help is by building a planning effort. My first e-mails to two people from each
standing committee to be on a planning task force was not met enthusiastically,
and we’ll have to send out some more.
But we’ll keep pushing, and I believe the Senate will provide substantial
help in this area.
On a
different tack, the Senate is also helping to be a reservoir of policy advice
for the general running of the university.
We participated in the budget hearings again this year. This is important for opening the
conversation across campus about the role of research, and the role of faculty
at conducting research. One of the
outcomes of this process is that we requested an expenditure report, which
would show expenses over the last 5 years or so by college, by line item in the
way that we think about the University.
As an example, we asked for total expenditures on graduate students,
irrespective of fund source. Since the
University does its accounting by fund, this turns out to have been a rather
novel request. And it turns out that it
is rather difficult. So we didn’t get an
expenditure report by the time the hearings came around. But I’m quite sure there will eventually be
one, and I believe it will be very useful to not only the Senate, but the
central administration, in documenting how UH is trying to achieve its
objectives.
The Senate
has also been an excellent venue for conversation, and exchange of views, on
important topics that affect all parts of UH.
The textbook policy proposal was fully and fairly discussed, and I think
we all at least understand the source of the wide disparity in opinions on the
subject. We have two resolutions on the
agenda today, which may or may not excite as many differences. But both resolutions are an outcome of
faculty concern over the continued health and growth of UH. The Senate has two members on the VP for
Research search committee. We are
participating in emergency management planning.
We have been asked to participate in planning for homecoming as part of
the overall effort to improve conversations between UH and its alumni. I also believe the committees are continuing,
as they have for the last several years, to develop long running conversations
on important policies, including students, the capital campaign, and faculty issues.
One piece
of unfilled business is the Climate Survey we would like to do. We have piles of support, and some
experience, but we need a survey researcher to head the effort and give it the
sheen of academic respectability we all desire.
Finally,
the Senate has continued to be an excellent place for the administration and
faculty to meet and converse on how to achieve our common objectives. I’m looking forward to your questions to
President Gogue and Provost Foss. I’m
pleased that Karl Sparks is going to update us on some of the ways in which he
is trying to make UH a superior place to be employed. And I want to commend you all on your
willingness to work to make UH into the premier University that
Thank you.
PRESENTATION TO THE FACULTY SENATE COMMISSION ON UNIVERSITY
GOVERNANCE: Allen Warner
Sen. Warner
said the Senate wanted to say “thank you” to the members of the Faculty Senate
Commission on University Governance (FS-CoUG).
Last fall they delivered their report.
It was received by the Senate and deferred to the Executive
Committee.
Sen. Warner
noted that the Senate approved a list of criteria checklist for college and
departmental bylaws. The Executive
Committee promised to come up with a check-list. Senators should have a copy of this “Draft:
Criteria Checklist for College and Department Bylaws.” That is a first draft that hopefully will be
fairly simple to use by senators in their college and units. Sen. Warner asked for feedback that he plans
to incorporate to the document and bring it forward for a final action at the
next meeting.
On the
agenda later today is a resolution that has already been adopted by
Undergraduate Council, Graduate and Professional Studies Council, Research
Council and Staff Council to institute a pilot University Coordinating
Commission (UCC), another of the recommendations of the FS-CoUG report. FS-CoUG met for about 17 months, held about
47 meetings and some follow-up meetings are still going on with various
elements within the university. The
Senate wants to thank these folks and give them a small token of appreciation,
a crystal trophy shaped like a book with an etched quill and inscribed with
their name, organization and dates. Four
members were present to receive their award:
Jerome Freiberg (Chair),
PRESENTATION OF THE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE SLATE: Allen Warner
The
The
Grievance Committee is the only committee elected by the faculty on a
university-wide basis. Currently there
are six positions open for election in 2006.
Four carry full three-year terms and one carries a term of two years and
one carries a term of one year. Terms
are decided by the final vote count.
The following
are the candidates for election to the
Sen. Warner
reminded everyone that a nominee must be a “full-time, tenured faculty member
with the rank of associate professor or higher or a senior associate librarian
or higher. Please remember that members
of the administration, including deans or directors, assistant or associate
deans or directors, and department chairs are not eligible to be members of
this committee. Also, nominees must
agree to stand for election. Sen.
Warner opened the floor for nominations.
None were made. It was then moved
and seconded to close nominations. The
motion passed to adopt the slate for election.
Sen. McNeil
said this year’s balloting will be conducted on-line. Instructions will be sent to the faculty via
the Faculty List-serv on Monday, April 3.
Voting will take place between then and Friday, April 14.
UH SYSTEM CHANCELLOR AND UH PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY
KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Jay Gogue
Dr. Gogue said he was
delighted to be here today. Pres. Craig
covered some points and they were almost the exact same points he planned to
make, so he said he may give his conclusion and then go back to the specific
points.
Last fall after
UH had the Faculty Recognition Dinner, which was based on length of service, the
President received seven or eight e-mails that all said the same thing; they
really liked the dinner and everything was nice but the part they liked best
was that there weren’t any speeches.
Dr. Gogue
said he wanted to first of all thank the faculty for their service. On a campus faculty spend incredible amounts
of time to serve on tenure and promotion committees, the Faculty Senate, the
graduate committees, the curriculum committees, and the research committees,
etc. The President said this is the very
hallmark of shared governance within an institution. This campus devotes the
time, the attention, and the professionalism to make that form of input so
valuable. Faculty don’t often get
thanked for the service part of the work that they do. Dr. Gogue said he wanted everyone to know
that it is important and it makes a huge difference in the University. He added that he particularly appreciated
those who take the time to serve on the various committees to guide and direct
and to offer suggestions to the University.
The second
thing he wanted to thank faculty for is the things that they do in their
classroom. The President commented that he
doesn’t know what happens in classrooms on a daily basis, but he does see the
net results. He added that he spends
half of his time in the community, listening to alumni and people in the
community. There is a comment that he
has never heard about UH but has heard at all the other places where he has been. That comment is on the quality of the
graduates that the universities produce. No one says anything bad about the quality of
UH graduates. The President said
obviously he doesn’t know what goes on in the classrooms everyday but it is
apparent that faculty make a huge difference in the lives of those individuals who
eventually become alumni of this institution.
Dr. Gogue
pointed out that Pres. Craig made a comment a few months back that he
particularly remembered. He said most of
the students that UH gets do not come with built-in advantages; most come with
disadvantages. And the preparation that
they get while they are here is really the thing that allows them to go forth
with their lives. The President said he
has never heard an employer who hires UH graduates, he has never heard an
alumni say UH has got to change its curriculum or it has got to change the way it
does things because companies are not getting the kind of people that they need
in their organizations. Dr. Gogue
expressed his strong thanks to those faculty who labor everyday, in classrooms,
labs, or with graduate students to make a difference.
Dr. Gogue
thanked Art Vailas who has served this institution with distinction for about a
decade. During that decade faculty and administrators
have really changed the nature of UH to research. The President said he would give Dr. Vailas,
the ideas that arose from the faculty, and Grover Campbell an awful lot of
credit for raising federal directed dollars in the last few years. They have made a big difference and they will
continue to make a big difference in the research efforts of this institution.
Dr. Gogue
said in his conclusion he was going to thank everyone for allowing him to serve
as President. He appreciates it. It is a fun job and he learns new things
every day. Dr. Gogue said he is awfully proud
of what this faculty does.
The
President said he would now give highlights of his speech, which Pres. Craig
has already covered: (1) Next Monday the
Board of Regents will be on campus and they will address the tuition and fee question. That will be the sole purpose of the
meeting. The budget request that will be
given to them is a 9.9% tuition and fee increase. It is actually about a 6% tuition increase
with an energy charge that brings it up to about 9.7% or 9.9%. It is just under 10%. The part that excites him is the fact that it
does contain 30 new faculty lines. The hope
is for a net 30 new positions. Over time
30 new positions a year will get UH to the number the Senate has discussed.
(2) On
April 17 the legislature goes into special session. The call will be focused on the reduction of
property taxes and to try to address the State Supreme Court ruling on K-12
funding. It is hoped (and rumored) that
tuition revenue bonds will be included.
UH’s first request and the one that was passed by both the House and
Senate on two different occasions deal with the $60 million renovation of the three
older Science buildings on this campus, including the Science Building, which
was built in 1937, and two that were built in the 1960s – the Lamar Fleming
Building and S&RI. These structures
house Biology and Chemistry Laboratories that are in desperate need of repair.
(3) The Comprehensive
Campaign. The President said he was delighted
that Michael Rierson is with UH. Mr.
Rierson has been having a lot of discussion and interaction with the colleges,
going back and looking at the things that they want to request money for and
making sure that the case study is complete. Every day the President is more confident that
UH will achieve its goals in raising private money. He added that he was excited about where the
campaign is and anxious to have the lead gifts that will allow the quiet phase
to begin. It will happen sometime either
this term or near the summer.
(4) Dr.
Foss has had meetings with all the deans, the associate deans, and department
heads to talk a bit about enrollment. If
one asks consultants how to increase enrollment with quality students, they
reply with four principles: (a) There must be multiple entry points into the
educational system. An institution can’t
just have students starting in the middle of August and then start in
January. There have to be multiple entry
points throughout the entire twelve months to accommodate schedules and to grow
quality students. Some institutions use
the May-mester, they use the January session in a different fashion. This is a point to think about how UH could
have multi-entry points? (b) The gaps between disciplines where an institution
doesn’t create new departments but creates new degree offerings by combining
existing programs. (c) The batch
process. Is there a way to find a batch
of students who can be brought together through classes, an entire cadre or
core group, as opposed to the recruitment of one on one? (d) How to retain existing
students? The most important students
are the ones already here. The point is
to keep them in school hopefully until they graduate. Dr. Gogue asked everyone to think about these
principles and make suggestions on how to accomplish them.
(5) At the
May graduation this year there will be two Honorary Doctorates awarded. The names have not yet been released, but Dr.
Gogue said he thought the campus would be very excited about these two
individuals. The names have gone through
the appropriate faculty committees and reviews.
They will be presented at the Board of Regents meeting on Monday. The reason he called this to everyone’s
attention is that there will be a special ceremony. Dr. Gogue mentioned that when he came to UH,
he was asked not to hold the large single graduation, but to go to the various
colleges’ convocations. Unfortunately,
the General Commencement ceremony is the time when honorary degrees have been
historically awarded. .
(6) The
terms of three members of the Board of Regents expired August 20, 2005. UH is still waiting on the replacements who
are appointed by the Governor.
(7) For the first time in University history an
external group has been engaged for the campus master plan. This is not a criticism of the people who
have been involved in campus planning for decades, but it was thought that there
might be some opportunities involved with a comprehensive campaign and the
likelihood of building more facilities on this campus that it would be time
required a fresh look at the campus. One
point that has come out of the campus master planning activity is the view of the
planners that the campus can be far more compact than what it is currently and can
create a far more inviting campus at present.
Their argument is that UH has too much green space and it creates long
vistas with lots of work and maintenance which perhaps a more compact campus
would not.
(8) Since
Hurricane Katrina and Rita there has been a group of about 30 people who are
meeting on a regular basis to try to make sure that by the next hurricane
season UH is better prepared. Also, to
begin to look at other types of catastrophes that could happen to a campus to
be prepared and to give the faculty, staff, and students as much warning and
assurance as possible. Dr. Gogue thanked
the Emergency Preparedness group. He
added a word of caution, saying that no matter what is done, it will not be
perfect, and no matter how much people think about a particular type of
catastrophe, they will not have found everything that could happen. Dr. Gogue said he feels better knowing that
there is a lot of thinking going into this preparedness and a lot of planning.
Sen.
Copeland asked when the honorary doctorates would be awarded during the weekend
of graduation. Dr. Gogue said Thursday,
May 11, around 4:00 p.m.
Dr. Gonzalez
asked if there is a plan to show UH’s movement to Tier 1? Dr. Gogue said that in 2000 UH did receive
research excellence funding, as it did for several years. That was interrupted, then partially
restored, but in the last legislative session UH once again was guaranteed research
excellence funding for two full years.
There is discussion that because of the surplus within the State of
Sen.
Willson asked the President what barriers he saw in working to evolve fields
where there is not a clear discipline already established? Dr. Gogue said from a federal perspective if one
looks at the mission oriented agencies, they will be very excited about the
gaps between disciplines while the traditional research funding agencies, ONR,
NSF, NIH; there is a tendency for them to be less excited. There is a much stronger interest on the
federal side to address very real issues.
In terms of the barriers a faculty member should ask is there really
enough content to constitute a gap between the disciplines for an actual
degree. Does it make sense to have a
degree in this area? Faculty need to deal with these issues For example, there is an interest in a degree
for entertainment management. People may
be interested in being engaged in a particular sector of the economy, but they
may not have the talent to be a performing artist. Still with certain skills they could be
involved with production. He added that
there are some exciting areas within the gaps but the real issue would be, in
the minds of the faculty, is there content enough to constitute a legitimate
baccalaureate degree or masters degree?
Sen.
Ignatiev said that, over the number of years of receiving excellence funding,
he doesn’t see any focused schedule of programs that identify excellence on
campus. He has spoken with at least two
deans on this campus and neither of them has been able to clearly identify
resources for excellence like getting chaired professors or getting new hotshots
in the field, i.e., English, Physics. Dr. Gogue said that when he arrived at UH, he
was told that it was the view of the campus not to use the excellence funds for
positions. The reason was that UH had
the funding, then lost the funding and was suddenly faced with finding other
funding for faculty hired with excellence funds. Dr. Gogue said it was his understanding that
the approach has been to use these funds for facilities and implementation and
service support as opposed to taking the money and developing completely new
areas of expertise. The only thing that
the legislature will look at relative to that money is where the research
dollars go because that is the model that they use for the allocation. It is a money driven model. If UH brought in more competitive dollars, if
it brought in more federal dollars or industry dollars, then UH is doing great
with the money.
Sen.
Johnson asked if a position is authorized through the department and the
department wants to get someone that it considers good, will the department be
promised funds before the search is started, including start-up funding? Dr. Foss said positions have to be negotiated
on an individual basis. He added that
the way UH does start up has to be reviewed.
Also, there should be some monies in the budget because not all the
positions will be filled. Sen. Johnson
asked if a position is authorized to a certain department, will that department
know the amount of money available to support a candidate or will it not find
out until the candidate appears on campus?
Dr. Foss said he knows department by department and even subunit by subunit
historically what it costs to start faculty members up. As hiring goes forward the administration
will block out with the VP for Research what it expect the needs to be and then
work with the dean and department chair accordingly to have some rational
process. There will always be some
people who say no; this person is so special that they need more than what is
planned; and these cases have to be negotiated.
Dr. Foss said he is not sure whether the current negotiation process is the
one that works the best. One knows that recruiting
people in chemistry is going to be very expensive for start up vis-à-vis a hire
in creative writing.
Sen. Johnson
said suppose a department has found two or three candidates it thought were
very good and makes an offer to them, then discovers there were no funds or a
very small amount to support either one of the candidates and perhaps it loses
both. He added that it would have been
better to know what the funding was before they searched. Dr. Foss agreed.
Sen.
Herendeen said one more area of related discussion which involves both
enrollment and research excellence is the matter of graduate student support. The problem is growing worse in a number of
departments where there hasn’t been any increase in graduate student support
and the departments aren’t able to attract the best students or retain the best
students because they aren’t competitive.
Sen. Herendeen wondered if excellence funds and other resources could be
identified to increase graduate student support. Is there any plan to increase this support? Dr. Foss said people cost money; good people
cost more money on the average. One of
the things that he would like to do is to look across the disciplines and see
what comparable places are paying people at the faculty level and at the
graduate student level. He has had a
chance to do that at the faculty level here, but not at the graduate student
level. When he does he will probably
find out that there are shortfalls in some areas, maybe in many areas on this
campus. At that point which will
probably be in the next budget cycle UH has to ask itself whether it wants more
faculty, higher paid faculty, more graduate students, higher paid graduate
students, more staff, or higher paid staff.
There is a three by two matrix of the kinds of decisions that will have
to be made with respect to human investments and the problem is that UH can’t
work on all six of the cells the way at any given moment. Dr. Foss said at that point he will have to
have the conversation with the deans and the chairs about how to deploy resources
in the next cycle. He continued, saying
that he had said last week and today both the President and Dr. Craig alluded
to the fact that in the budget to be proposed to the Board of Regents that
there are new faculty lines. That was a
conscious decision that stayed in through the whole process and as he has said
in other venues caused the administration to not be able to do as many things
in other parts of the budget that they would have like to have done. Dr. Mariotto said many of the decisions on
graduate support are departmentally driven.
The issue requires careful consideration of the proper mix of students. Dr. Gogue cautioned that one cannot look at
what advertised rates are in terms of graduate student support and make any
comparison of what that department actually pays. He added that it is a valid point and UH does
need to look at graduate student support to be competitive for the best
graduate students. Also, to have them graduate
in a timely fashion and do the work that is expected, then salary is important.
Sen. Papell
asked, assuming these thirty new lines go through, is there going to be a
mechanism in place where the departments can make the case to get one? Dr. Foss said that has already happened. Dr. Foss said as the budget request was built
this year, all the deans were ask what their needs and their priorities were
with respect to all the categories of funding.
The requests came to something like $20 million. Approximately $9 million for new faculty university-wide
was requested plus $9 million in other university initiatives. The requests came with justification from the
deans about why these were important.
REPORT FROM AND DISCUSSION WITH THE UH SYSTEM SENIOR VICE
CHANCELLOR AND
Dr. Foss
reported on: (1) The budget process went very well in terms of the
process. Of course it would be nice if there
were more money but he is happy about the outcome. The Provost was unhappy that the University
to give back between $8-$9 million. He
said the idea of batch recruitment needs to be applied to UH’s current students,
who need to be recruited on a continuing basis to stay here. UH has to do a lot to help its students from keep
from stopping out in their education because the odds are they won’t return and
finish their degrees. There are some
proposals about changing the drop policy.
Dr. Foss said he was looking forward to participating in that process. He added that allowing students lots of free
drops does them a tremendous disservice in long term because it tempts them to
not stay on track for their degree. It
also allows them to go over the cap and they are soon paying huge sums of money
if they go 30 semester credit hours above their degree plan. In the end it is going to cost them and UH, both
in their pocketbook and graduation rate.
(2) He appreciated having the opportunity to visit with the FS-CoUG
folks and to understand a lot more about the faculty governance issue on this
campus. In their report they focused a
lot on the local level which is completely appropriate. It is one of the reasons why the Provost wants
to bring the chairs together as well as the deans at least once a semester
because in terms of faculty governance it keeps things run smoothly. The number one place where things happen is the
department. (3) Looking at the requests
to hire new faculty who have tenure, the Provost said it should be UH’s
practice to look at elements of teaching ability in the proposals. UH should get teaching evaluations. Also for full professor appointments with
tenure, it should try to get information about graduate mentoring, the number
of Ph.D.s and Masters students that this person has mentored. After all that is one of the main criteria
for promotion and tenure on this campus.
UH should make sure that the people it hires from the outside meet the
same standards as UH faculty meet. By
next year the Provost will make it a required part of any binder or proposal
that comes to him for an outside hire with tenure that there be evidence of teaching
and mentoring.
Sen.
Copeland agreed, saying that it makes good sense but what if a department
wanted to hire for a senior position someone who had spent their career not in
academia but in industry. Dr. Foss said one
has to look at where people are coming from but there should be some evidence
of their communication skills.
Sen.
Copeland said that does not sound quite like what the Provost just said. Dr. Foss said the whole case is about hiring
someone from another institution. Sen.
Copeland said right, but UH has associate professors who are working hard to be
promoted, so when someone from industry who has never taught and never mentored
graduate students are hired as a full professor with tenure that seems
troublesome to faculty who are trying to make it the hard way. Pres. Craig added that doesn’t mean UH
shouldn’t hire someone from industry.
Sen. Copeland said he was just trying to understand what Dr. Foss is
saying. Pres. Craig said he answered. Dr. Foss said he thought he answered, too.
Pres. Craig
asked the Provost to talk about salary plans in the new budget proposal. Dr. Foss said in the budget there is what he
would call the student version which asks to keep the tuition increase below
10%. The truth is that is the version
that Board of Regents will likely adopt.
UT-Austin has a proposal which is for something like 9.6% or 9.7% total
increase. This is tuition and fees. It includes the energy fees as does UH’s
recommendation of a 9.9% increase. In
order to make that number and in order to cover the other financial challenges
like the utility increase, which is estimated by Dr. Rudley and his staff at
approximately $6 million, and the shortfall from decreases in enrollment, required
a $8-$9 million cut on the campus. The
initiatives in the plan include: (a) The student fee increases to support
people working for the
Sen.
Blecher asked what might happen with new lines; is there any kind of guarantee
that they won’t be taken away? Dr. Foss
said he hereby guaranteed it; a department should never hire someone because it
has a line and is afraid of losing it.
Sen.
Willson said he had the impression that the dean is the person who had to
guarantee the faculty line. Dr. Foss
said he will just declare a policy of the institution, adding that it might not
be able to be cashed it next year as things could go badly budget-wise, to say
to a unit if UH has provided it with a faculty line with X dollars in it, it is
the unit’s. To tell that unit that it
didn’t fill the line so the administration is taking it back in the long run
means that people will settle. In his
judgment and, he thinks the deans would agree, this only makes sense. To go forward and to inspire people to settle
for less than the top quality is just stupid.
Sen. Jowett
asked whether or not there is a policy on this campus for assistance from the
Provost Office to help with minority hiring. Dr. Foss said he is meeting with some folks
this very afternoon to discuss the topic and he will be happy to come back and
report about it.
REPORT FROM AND DISCUSSION WITH THE UH SYSTEM ASSISTANT VICE
CHANCELLOR AND UH ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES: Karl Sparks
Mr. Sparks
said one of the things put in place this year was a series of financial
planning presentations. HR asked the ORP
veterans to come in and, without commercial, talk about some topics that are of
interest to UH faculty and staff in terms of not just retirement but financial
planning. There have been two or three seminars
and those dates on HR’s Website. Mr.
Sparks encouraged everyone to take a look at these offerings. One of the things that always comes up is UH’s
benefits package and what is happening with it.
That is one of the things that HR has been working on diligently over
the past year or so and continues to work on it. The Faculty Senate HR Advisory Committee has
been very helpful in terms of bringing view points and issues to discuss.
There is
also a System-wide Fringe Benefits Committee which gets together twice a year
to talk about what needs to be done with the benefits package.
First of
all, regarding the normal benefits, medical care, and that kind of thing, Mr.
Sparks re-emphasized that UH and UHS are locked into the State package of
benefits. UH and the System elected some
years ago to do that. Unless the
legislation changes, UH is not able to get out of that. The good part of it is that in the past two
or three years the coverage has not changed.
They seem like they have changed but they actually haven’t. They have stayed the same. The prices have gone up and what individuals
contribute has gone up, that is the bad news.
The good news is it hasn’t gone up as much as the national average which
is about 14% last year. It hasn’t gone
up as much as UT’s plan. UT went up 9.4%
and their HMO BlueCross plan went up over 14%.
Texas A&M was over 9% and UH’s was just over 8%. The year before that it was just over 5% and
both of the other systems experienced upward of 11%. So it is good news; bad news. Mr. Sparks said he doesn’t know what is going
on right now in terms of negotiations. He
typically finds that out about a month before the open enrollment in July and
August.
One of the
things that HR has been talking about and proposed in its budget this year was
an Employee Assistance Program. Again
the faculty advisory committee was very adamant about taking a look at that and
doing something with it. In actual
practice about 20% of the usage of an Employees Assistance Program is for
emotional well being; 20% is for relations issues; 15% are for legal matters;
10% is child care and elderly care; 9% is work and management questions; 7% are
financial matters and 4% are addiction and recovery. The EAP is not unlimited counseling,
unlimited financial advice, or unlimited legal advice, but a kind of quick fix
maybe three meetings with referral if more time or help are needed. There may be discounts if individuals
continue, for example, in a legal situation an attorney might look at a four
page document like a simple will so if a person uses that attorney he/she would
get a 25% discount. Some services are
offered 24 hours/7 days per week through a center where people can get a live
answer to their call or face-to-face sessions.
Counseling would be available in primarily three areas: financial,
emotional well being and legal.
Hopefully, this program will stay in their budget and, if so, it would
begin September.
The faculty
committee and HR are also looking into optional benefits to augment the current
program. HR has looked at vision programs,
critical illness programs and whole life insurance. For example, there have questions about when an
employee retires, the person has no life insurance left and HR is trying to
find some vehicles to cover that need.
Also Medigap plans like AFLACK. Mr.
Sparks said they had worked very hard and had hoped to let people choose before
the semester was over. That is not going
to happen. It just takes longer for
these things to mature. Right now HR is
looking at doing it in the fall for implementation in January.
Sen.
Ignatiev said HR has been working on or has generated a new staff performance
appraisal plan which faculty will have to interact with to some degree. The part of the plan that he is interest in involves
some discussion about bonuses for personnel.
Could that be extended to faculty also?
Mr. Sparks said HR is just trying to go to a merit system first of
all. It may not be very good for people
in the public sector to call something a bonus.
Right now HR is trying to get the staff to a point for merit review.
Sen. Huber
said he wanted to comment about group insurance and decision UH made. UH has something in the order of 10,000
employees. That is a tiny group. UH is in an urban area which would mean higher
cost. If UH had gone out on its own, a
couple of serious cases can kill a health plan.
The choice was enormous cost for a small group or to be in a group with the
whole state where the cost is to lose control.
There is no doubt about it. UH doesn’t
have control, but the alternative of going on its own is madness. The name of the game in insurance is large
numbers. UH made the right decision.
Mr. Sparks
said Texas A&M has started looking at alternative programs.
Sen. Karger
said regarding medigap or gap insurance is that plan going to be implemented in
the fall and what the cost will be? Mr.
Sparks said he has looked at the cost but it is a part of a set of things that
are being reviewed for the fall. Sen.
Karger asked will it be inclusive; how inclusive will it be? Mr. Sparks said the University is looking at AFLACK
Sen. Wells
said he has a research grant, his own lab and his own staff people, but if he
finds somebody who is very good and wants to do something for that person to
keep the individual at UH, his business administrator tells him that is staff
and therefore he can’t give the person a raise because he can only give the
standard incremental raise to these people.
Is that really true? Does that
make any sense? This involves money that
he raises himself, Are any exceptions allowed?
Mr. Sparks said they are considered legally as employees of the
university. UH pays them and pays the
taxes that go with them. Mr.
Sen.
Copeland said he had experienced this same thing and what it seems to come down
to is that the desire to treat people equally ends up by treating the good
people like the bad people.
Pres. Craig
asked what is the chance of staff getting on the merit pay system? Mr. Sparks said they will be.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The February 15, 2006 minutes were approved
RESOLUTION ON UNIVERSITY COORDINATING COMMISSION:
Pres. Craig
said the UCC resolution has gone through a lot of iterations and it is not
exactly what was in the FS-CoUG report.
There have been a lot of conversations with the University Councils and
the Executive Committee recommends the following as a one year pilot:
A Proposal to Create a University Coordinating Commission
and the administration in the
development of policies and procedures.
The result of the UCC will be to:
The UCC will operate not to create policy, but rather to
facilitate discussion among existing groups regarding policy during its
formative stages.
Among its objectives
are to:
The membership of the UCC will consist of 10 members;
including the Faculty Senate President, President-elect, and the Chair from the
Committee on Committees, the Chair from the Research Council, the Graduate and
Professional Studies Council, and the Undergraduate
Council; the President of
the Staff Council, one member selected by the Provost from Academic Affairs, one
Dean selected by the Deans’
Council, and the President of the Student
Government Association.
The central role of the UCC is to “confirm” that a proposed
policy or procedure has been considered by all of the relevant governance
bodies,
and that any dissenting opinions of the governance bodies have been
shared.
The University of Houston administration shall insure that
the governance groups’ activities be ‘confirmed’ through the UCC prior to the
University making a final procedural or policy decision.
The UCC will develop procedures to best exercise its duties as described herein.
Senate staff.
of
the fall semester. The UCC may choose to
release the report to the larger campus community.
Sen.
Freiberg said, as it is going to be critical in the pilot, he would encourage
that resources be provided because the surest way to short circuit something is
not to provide the resources to get organizationally set-up. He also encouraged the UCC to tap into the
members of the FS-CoUG in terms of some of the issues that are being raised
because these people have expertise, they spent a lot of their free time
looking in to these kinds of issues and it would be very helpful to the success
of the UCC to be able to do that.
Sen. McNeil
said she seconded the idea of resources.
A staff member is going to be critical to the success of this pilot. The
tracking of policies really needs to be done and the Senate staff can’t be
expected to do that.
Pres. Craig
said he has already told the Faculty Senate staff that their priority is: #1 –
Faculty Senate, #2 – Faculty Senate, #3 – Faculty Senate and for any questions
see number one.
Sen. Keller
said the UCC has got to confirm whatever happens happened. This could be a potential road block veto to
a policy that the administration is trying to reform. Pres. Craig said the UCC is not supposed to
be a veto; if the administration wants to do a policy that hasn’t been seen by
the faculty governance groups they won’t be certified or confirmed. Sen. Keller said that is the opinion, the UCC
won’t know whether it has been seen or not.
Sen. Keller said it is this group that has to vote on this. Pres. Craig said the group does not vote on a
document policy; the group votes on whether the policy has been seen and
everyone has had their say. Sen. Keller
said so if they don’t confirm a policy, what does that mean? Pres. Craig said the group confirms that
everyone saw it and it means that the administration is acting on policies that
faculty didn’t have a chance to give input.
Sen. Keller said this might hurt the relationship with the
administration because it is saying they have to go through this. He added that he thought it would be better to
develop a spirit of cooperation. Sen.
Keller said he didn’t see how the UCC conforms with the entire university,
state law, or whatever if faculty on a committee have a right to confirm things.
Sen. Warner
said this whole effort came up really out of some discussion with Dr.
Gogue. His comment was that there were
many things that land on his desk for him to sign and he doesn’t know who has
seen them and who hasn’t. Some things
comes out of one part of the university, goes straight up and ends up on Dr.
Gogue’s desk and it is enacted, then everybody else says wait a minute, where
did that come from, they didn’t know that was out and it affects them. Many things affect faculty. For example, he just found out that there is
some question about moving the control of the Cullen Performance Hall. That is holding up some use that he had made
of the Cullen Performance Hall as part of his work for the past five or ten
years. Now he hast to figure out who
controls the Hall and how the decisions were made but he didn’t think faculty
had any input into the change. It is
that kind of thing, communicating with one another and so when a proposal
arrives for a decision, Dr. Gogue or whoever has to act knows that the bodies
that should have had a chance to interact with it had that chance and may have
chosen to interact with it or not.
Sen. Keller
said if it is desirable, then a committee isn’t needed with a staff member,
etc. to do that.
Sen.
Greenwood said the last sentence in the policy states “It will be extended only
with the explicit assent of the participating governance bodies” but shouldn’t
there be more evaluation than that in a pilot project? Pres. Craig asked if she was saying that the
evaluation process should be more explicit.
Sen. Greenwood said there should be more criteria used that saying it
would be extended only with explicit assent of the participating bodies. Pres. Craig said it is more than that; if a
lot of the bodies drop out and the Senate thinks it is useful it will try to
stay in and see what happens.
The
proposal passed by majority vote (25 For; 1 Against; 1 Abstention).
RESOLUTION ON VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH:
Sen.
Ignatiev said the following resolution comes from the Faculty Senators in NSM
and ENGR and several others:
RESOLUTION ON THE VICE
PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH
(Unanimously approved by the Faculty Senate Executive
Committee on March 27, 2006)
Whereas, The University of Houston has made great strides in research and scholarly activity;
Whereas, The University of Houston has committed itself as
an institution to enhance and advance research and scholarly activity
across
the entire university, which objective the Faculty Senate actively supports;
Whereas, The size and quality of faculty are the most
important research facility, and this facility is supported through all of the
financial resources of the University;
Whereas, The University of Houston is searching for a new Vice President for Research; and
Whereas, The VP for Research should be instrumental in
providing resources to attract the highest quality faculty across all
components of the university, and should be instrumental in facilitating and
enhancing the research output of existing faculty.
Be it resolved, That the Faculty Senate recommends that the
highest attention be given by the University Administration to the
appointment
of a vice president for research of a recognized, credible, and productive
research scholar who can continue to
advance the University through research
excellence across the entire campus;
Resolved, That the Faculty Senate strongly recommends that
the Office of the Vice President for Research be given significantly
increased
resources out of the appropriate university funds including at least four
million dollars of HEAF and fifty percent (50%)
of University Excellence funds
for FY07, to allow for the advancement of the institution in research and
scholarly activity. The funds
available
must be sufficient to provide start-up lab funds, cost share funds, summer
salary support, supplemental travel and research
design funds, [computational
funds] and any other needed inducements for new faculty, and to stimulate and
assist the efforts of
existing faculty; and
Resolved, That the Faculty Senate strongly urges the
President to continue to integrate the activities of all of the vice presidents
as
they pertain to the enhancement and advancement of research and scholarly
endeavors across the campus.
Sen.
Ignatiev said the concern is that UH is working toward and is in the process of
becoming a Tier 1 institution and for that the resources are needed for the VP
for Research to give support in research and scholarly activities on campus; this
is not limited to ENGR and NSM, but is totally inclusive of the whole campus;
for paying the faculty, for supporting graduate students and this is an intent
to enhance the resources in the Research office so that UH can further grow its research and
scholarly activities.
Pres. Craig
said the last part of it encourages the VPs to work together.
Sen.
Kotarba said he was allowed in on the major deliberation and the result of all
of that was to his satisfaction that this is a very inclusive idea. It is for support across the university and
that is very explicit in the proposal. While
it voices support for externally funded research, it also supports other kinds
of research and scholarship. Sen.
Kotarba then moved the Senate accept the resolution.
Sen. Schiff
said that under the second resolved he noticed that there is no specification
of computational funds as part of the research grant. Sen. Kotarba said he would accept adding “computational
funds” as a friendly amendment. Sen.
Ignatiev said he would support that, too.
The
proposal as amended was passed by unanimous vote.
BUDGET AND FACILITIES COMMITTEE, CHAIR – Karl Titz
The Budget
and Facilities Committee met on February 22. In attendance were: Peter
Copeland,
Sens.
Kadipasaoglu and Kacmar presented preliminary analysis of salary data provided
by the Office of Institutional Research.
Sen. Lee observed inaccuracies in
the data base provided by Institutional Research. Discussion ensued and it was
determined Sen. Lee would provide salary data from the Dean of Natural Science
and Mathematics office to Dr. Barlow for comparison.
The other
topic of discussion was the recently concluded Budget Hearings. Based on
the Faculty Senate’s representation at these hearings, the Sub-Committee sent a
letter to Dr. Foss dated March 8. The letter follows:
Donald J. Foss
Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, UH System
Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost, UH
214 Ezekiel W. Cullen Bldg
Dear Dr. Foss:
This memo is the response of the members of the Budget and
Facilities Committee who attended the college budget hearings. We
certainly appreciate the opportunity to learn more about the colleges across
campus, the complexities, and the challenges faced in managing a large research
university. Your commitment and the commitment from your staff, to moving
the
There were several common threads running through our
observations. We submit them for your consideration.
1. It would
seem that submitting measures of success to coincide with funding requests
might be helpful at establishing the feedback loop
between centrally provided
inputs and University output.
2. Along the
same lines, it would be helpful to see how previous funding requests were met,
and to be able to assess their relative success.
3. We have
already discussed that an expenditure report for recent fiscal years would be
helpful.
The BFC meeting scheduled for March 22, 2006 was cancelled. The next BFC meeting is scheduled for April 26, 2006 CNH S250 Board Room at 12:00 p.m. noon.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES, CHAIR – Allen Warner
The
Committee on Committees has been preparing the slate for the upcoming Grievance
Committee election. The candidates will
be: James Benbrook, NSM; Maria Gonzalez,
CLASS; Nancy Graves, HRM; Ernst Leiss, NSM; Howard Karger, GCSW; Michael Parks,
BUS; Susan Robbins, GCSW; Ira Shepard, LAW; and Jerry Waite, TECH. There are four 3-year terms, one 2-year term
and one 1-year term available.
EDUCATIONAL POLICIES AND STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, CHAIR –
Dan Wells
EPSAC met
once since the previous Faculty Senate meeting.
In attendance were Dan Wells, Thomas Albright, Dan Graur,
The initial
agenda of topics for the year include:
1. Examining the organizational structure and
coordination of undergraduate related activities.
2. Evaluation of interest and feasibility of
developing a Center for Teaching Excellence.
3. Continuing to develop a close working
relationship with the Undergraduate Council.
4. Continuing interactions with the Student
Government Association to discuss issues of mutual concern.
5. Help to develop an assessment tool for revised teaching
evaluation forms.
6. Continue to assist in the development of a
workable textbook policy.
7. Continue to coordinate efforts with the
Enrollment Management Taskforce on a number of issues including:
At this month’s meeting the Committee met with Agnes DeFranco, Interim Assistant Vice President for Undergraduate Studies to discuss A) organizational structure and coordination of undergraduate related activities; B) a proposal to modify the existing drop policy; and C) the development of undergraduate graduation contracts. The Committee continues to work on these issues. No action items are currently ready for the full Senate.
FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, CHAIR – David Papell
The Faculty
Affairs Committee met with Sara McNeil. Co-chair of the University Commission
on Women to discuss revision of the Interim Policy for the Extension of
Probationary Period for Emergency Purposes. The Committee plans to
continue the discussion at the next meeting.
SCHOLARSHIP AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE, CHAIR – Suzanne Ferimer
The Scholarship
and Community Committee met with Michael Rierson, Vice Chancellor/Vice
President for University Advancement, on March 10. It was a very informative meeting for all attending. The SCC members present made a proposal to
Mr. Rierson that University Advancement create and present a workshop on
successful development and fund raising practices for faculty members.
A future
meeting is being planned with the SCC and Steve Hall, President and CEO of the
New Business: None.
The meeting adjourned at 1:55 p.m.
| Questions about this
page should be directed to FSenate@uh.edu (713) 743-9181 University of Houston Office of the Faculty Senate 351 Cullen Performance Hall Houston, TX 77204-2005 UH Faculty Senate Home Page Mapping purposes: Houston, TX 77004 UH Home Pag |