Faculty Senate
March 21, 2003

MEMBERS PRESENT: P. Anderson, G. Avent, P. Bagley, R. Barton, R. Byram, J. Emerson, P. Fisher, S. Garcia, G. Goicoechea, E. Henderson, B. Hofland, P. Josey, R. Kampf, N. Kelly, B. Kern, J. King, J. Larson, J. Licht, K. Martin, C. McMullen, B. Murphy, E. Nickel, C. Pyatt, J. Rice, B. Robertson, S. Rombough, J. Rosenthal, R. Schaffner, J. Shaw, J. Shrock, R. Siler, D. Smith, Ja. Smith, Ju. Smith, P. Smith, S. Sweetwater, S. Thomson, L. Uhlenkott, P. Warren, J. Williams

OTHERS PRESENT: Vice President for Administrative Services Carl Diekhans; Student Government Association President Steven Houk

  1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS: Chair Pete Bagley welcomed everyone to Senate.
  2. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 1:19 p.m. A quorum was reached at 1:46 p.m. with four proxy votes noted. VP Carl Diekhans presented the Professional Administrative Faculty Evaluation Process while quorum was being reached.
  3. VICE PRESIDENT CARL DIEKHANS: The Professional Administrative Faculty evaluation process was presented to Senate. The responsibility of the procedure was removed from the Senate. However, the procedure adopted is comparable to the procedure under consideration for teaching faculty with perhaps the exception to the aspect of collegiality. VP Diekhans reiterated that this is not a final procedure by any means, but will be considered a work in progress.
    1. The model is based on that of Mount Hood and is similar to that of the Community College Management Performance Appraisal process used by the UCCSN that was formulated from the 1990 Hay Group Study. It is a combination of a peer and upward evaluation procedure.
    2. The Management Performance Appraisal Form consists of four parts: self-evaluation, peer evaluation, upward evaluation, and supervisory evaluation. The mechanism is based on a point system; 5-Outstanding, 4-Above Standard, 3-Satisfactory, 2-Needs Improvement, 1-Not Satisfactory. There is a "Not Applicable" rating for instances where the individual has no familiarity with a line item.
    3. It is designed so that the employee determines their goals and self-evaluates those goals in conjunction with their supervisor. The goals that are set require a signature so that the employee and supervisor acknowledge the goals. Four to seven major responsibilities are listed and each is then rated at the time of evaluation. Three to five annual goals or objectives are listed and then each is rated at the time of the evaluation. Both employee and supervisor individually rate these responsibilities and goals with commentary to follow.
    4. The process requires an evaluation committee who evaluates the employee on personal competencies. The committee consists of one teaching faculty member, one classified member, and direct-report personnel. The content of the committee is strongly encouraged but not mandatory. This procedure may prove cumbersome and, therefore, modified. Participation in a committee is voluntary and each person is to be asked to participate prior to the initiation of the procedure. On average, an employee will be asked to take part in six evaluations; however, test groups have indicated that the forms only require approximately 15 minutes to complete. The supervisor can assist in making certain the responsibility is kept on a rotating basis. The comments are anonymous and are returned directly to Human Resources.
    5. Dates for completion are not conducive to this year's process because of the late development and institution. Arrangements for placing the forms on the web are being completed.
  4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the February 14, 2003, Faculty Senate meeting were unanimously approved with the following adjustment:
    1. Section X.A.2 states that it was the recommendation of the Bylaws Committee to combine the Personnel Committee and the General Education Committee. It was the Faculty and Administrative Evaluations Committee and the General Education Committee that had been suggested for combination.
    1. Board of Regents -
      1. Tenure was granted for Librarian Karen Dannehl, Prof. Jan Kempster, Dr. Leonardo Sanchez-Saenz and Dr. Joel Shrock. There was once again an attempt by Regent Howard to derail tenure for an UNLV faculty member although the faculty member succeeded in receiving tenure. The increased number of Regents does not seem to have had impact on decreasing personal assaults by its members.
      2. Honorary Bachelor of Arts degrees were accepted for Kevin Butler and former GBC Regent Dorothy Gallagher.
      3. The Regents Scholar Award went to Michelle Urain.
      4. Dr. Eric Henderson was awarded the Regent's Advisory Award.
      5. State Senator Raggio attended the BoR, however, very little information was exchanged. There was disturbing news from the BoR that the Governor may be asking for the return of funds. Delay in implementation of key tax initiatives leaves the state at approximately $90 million short. Information will be circulated to departments as soon as developments are received. VP Elliott assures faculty that they will have a voice in methods taken to offset the deficit. There is a possibility of personnel cuts to compensate. Chair Bagley insists that any cuts be fair and across the board. Stated sentiments give faculty a more protected position in the college structure.
      6. Code Revisions -- The push for this comes from UNR and UNLV in order to reiterate the importance of tenure procedures by institutional presidents. Chancellor Nichols has been receptive to the procedure submitted by the Council of Chairs. The proposal will go before General Council. The proposal has gone before other senates for endorsement and Chair Bagley calls for similar endorsement from the faculty of GBC. A motion was made and unanimously approved to endorse the revisions to the Regent's Code. Similar endorsement from UNLV is pending.
    2. President Killpatrick has been approached with regards to the Academic Master Calendar. Expect progress within the following week.
    3. Faculty Workload - It doesn't appear that one formula will fit every situation. A meeting with President Killpatrick, VP Diekhans, VP Elliott, Senate Chair Bagley, Senate Vice Chair Shrock and Chair of Department Chairs Rice is forthcoming to attempt to look at strategies and possible formula generation. The proposal will be brought back to Senate for approval.
    4. Efficiencies - It appears that the numerous efficiencies with regards to the working of the college pertain specifically to faculty. It is suggested that Senate provide a means of communicating areas wherein administrative efficiencies could be increased to the benefit of the institution. Comments and suggestions should be forwarded to Chair Bagley.
    1. Academic Standards - Written report submitted; approved.
      1. The committee recommended a policy pertaining specifically to challenge examinations. The policy does not change current procedure; but allows a letter grade so that a student may have sufficient entrance requirements into the bachelor degree programs. Community Colleges in the system do not have a policy that allows a letter grade for a challenge exam; however, they do not typically offer four-year programs. Therefore, the committee reviewed similar policies of UNR and UNLV with the UNLV model seeming most appropriate for the use of GBC. Individual departments have the final say in dispensation of challenge requests. The proposal should be amended to show 'P' instead of a 'S' to be in compliance with current GBC policy. The motion passed with two opposed.
      2. The committee also heard arguments for accepting credits from non-accredited institutions. The code does not give any indication that system institutions may accept non-accredited credits and therefore has not been a practice. The committee agrees with this policy.
      3. The committee will revisit the AP Test policy because it conflicts with the institutional CLEP policy.
    2. Bylaws - The committee asks that the Senate accept the revised language of "Article II. Authority and Functions of the Senate." The proposal was distributed a week prior to Senate as required. A motion was made to accept the amendment and was unanimously passed.
    3. Curriculum and Articulation - Written reports submitted; unanimously approved. Two sets of committee meeting minutes were presented.
      1. The February 25, 2003, meeting shows submission of the Agriculture degree; program content with course maps were heard by the committee and accepted. The meeting also indicates the removal of the fine arts elective within the nursing program to reinstate NUTR 223. Art instructor Sarah Sweetwater does not feel that this removal is to the benefit of the students and her comments are so noted.
      2. The March 10, 2003, notes common course numbering changes specifically targeting the education courses. The committee accepted the crosslisting of English 329 and Anthropology 329. The committee also heard at this time the acceptance of English 100 as a trial study for the Fall 2003 semester (the course was brought before Senate at the February 14 meeting). The listing of FIS 100 for the Introduction to Film is to meet the common course numbering matrix as well as to eliminate competition with general education humanities requirements. GEOL 341 was accepted.
    4. Distance Education - Oral report; information only. The committee will meet with the incoming IAV Coordinator to address the concerns indicated on the questionnaire previously circulated to faculty who utilize interactive video delivery. Concerns include classroom set up, classroom furniture, payment for use of equipment by outside agencies, the facilitator's role in instruction delivery, facilitator training, use of faxes vs. use of email, GBC's reliance on IAV compared to that of other system institutions, and enrollment caps at distant sites.
    5. Facilities - Written report submitted; approved. The committee reviewed the requests for the occupation of McMullen Hall pending relocation of UNR and AHEC to Griswold Hall. The committee emphasized keeping departments together. The committee recommends the housing of the Education Department and the English Department in addition to Lynne Owens and support staff. This leaves two offices vacant that have occupation conditional upon hire.
    6. Faculty and Administrative Evaluations - Written report submitted; approved. The committee submitted the revised process for the Academic Employee Assessment.
      1. The committee advises Senate that there are edit changes expected to tighten up the language. In particular, the process will be referred to as the Academic Employee Evaluation Procedure. The term 'assessment' is being overly used and the committee does not wish to confuse one process with another.
      2. The system moved away from using collegiality as a method of evaluating performance and moves the evaluation back into the hands of teaching faculty to ensure evaluation of instruction-specific areas of performance.
      3. The annual evaluation form will be an online form. This will be kept on file along with detailing information. Only the form itself goes to the VPAA each year for four years. In the fifth year a comprehensive evaluation is held with the faculty member and his/her evaluation team. A remediation process is incorporated into the tenure-track proposal.
      4. The committee will manage the system which may initially prove cumbersome, but will streamline itself once it is a standardized practice. The VPAA and the President has approved the procedure for use. Adjustments may be necessary once implemented.
      5. A motion was made to accept the Academic Employee Evaluation Procedure and was passed with one opposed and one abstention. Opposition was noted as to the amount of connection in the process to the Office of the VPAA (i.e., four years the process only involves the faculty member and the VPAA). The committee was commended on providing a procedure which is clear, well-defined and usable.
    7. General Education - Oral report submitted; information only.
      1. The committee is working on restructuring the previously termed "General Education Grid" which appears in the general course catalog and the roster. The grid will be re-titled "Degree Requirement Comparison Chart." The Bachelor programs will be separated into individual columns. The grid does include the AGS degree.
      2. The committee will continue to review English 102 syllabi and progress on the sampling requirements.
    8. Personnel - Oral report submitted; information only. There are currently three committees working towards hire: the Ely Developmental English position, the IAV Coordinator position and the Interim Curriculum Development/Instructional Technology position. All committees have completed their interviews with outcomes forwarded to President Killpatrick. Positions should be announced by the end of Spring Break.
    9. Scholarships and Awards - Written report submitted; information only. The committee has determined scholarships for the next academic year. The committee questions the awarding authority on scholarships established through non-state funds (i.e., vending sales, etc.). The committee welcomes new scholarships and students; however, the establishment of the scholarships is non-traditional. The committee is planning for the Scholarship Afternoon Tea that will be held April 11 and the President's Awards Ceremony to be held May 1.
    10. Student Relations - Oral report submitted; information only.
      1. The committee is discussing the recommendation by the Bylaws Committee to combine the Student Relations Committee with Scholarships and Awards Committee. The committee will make a recommendation to Senate early next year.
      2. The committee recognized SGA President Steven Houk.
        1. A calendar of upcoming student events was distributed.
        2. The faculty is thanked for the assistance with campus student organizations and clubs. The faculty's involvement has resulted in an approximate 50% increase in student clubs. Having faculty as club advisors is key to their success. The Social Work Club is among five new clubs added this year.
        3. The BoR approved the new constitution of the Student Government Association.
        4. The SGA has formed a Programming Board to assist in channeling student involvement with campus projects and activities.
        5. Formation of a student literary magazine is a long awaited dream for both students and select faculty. The magazine will be coordinated through the English and Art departments and will give students the opportunity to display their work.
        6. The Quiet Room will be restructured into a Student/Club room. The room's use as a study facility is not conducive to the habits of the student body as most students utilize the High Tech Center for their study needs.
        7. The SGA is seeking a location for a Student Union Building or area. The student body has outgrown the College Community Center which houses offices, the bookstore and cafeteria leaving only a small area available for student recreational use.
    1. Bachelor of Arts in Elementary Education - The committee received 31 applications for admission and has interviewed 28 individuals. Susan Lawrence has signed a 300-hour internship contract to complete development of the Special Education endorsement.
    2. Bachelor of Applied Science - A written report was acknowledged but not presented due to miscommunication. The report was information only and will be forwarded to faculty via email. The report consisted of minutes from the March 12, 2003, BAS Faculty Committee Meeting.
  8. OLD BUSINESS: No old business was brought forward.
    1. Two-year Program Reports - Members of the Senate ask the Executive Committee to discuss the possibility of incorporating two-year program reports as part of the Senate agenda. Senate Chair Bagley will take this recommendation to Executive Committee for discussion.
    2. Resolution A - A Sense of the Senate resolution was brought forward which reiterated a previous unanimous Senate vote that President's Council include a faculty representative. The request was subsequently vetoed by President Killpatrick. However with the recent developments in reference to college efficiencies that directly targeted faculty, it is clear that more extensive and open communication with the faculty concerning issues that affect the college must be initiated. The suggestion is not meant as antagonistic but as an improvement in the lines of communication. It was reiterated that Senate is an open forum; any person may attend the meetings. There are, however, limitations on voting representation. President's Council is a closed forum, membership at the discretion of the President, with minutes of the meetings being circulated, on average, fourteen days after the discussions take place. These are discussions which prove to directly affect faculty. A motion was made to accept the resolution by Eric Henderson and seconded by John Rice. The resolution passed 26 in favor with 1 opposed and 1 abstention. The Secretary of the Senate will forward the resolution as indicated.
    3. Resolution B - A Sense of the Senate resolution was brought forward which requires a pro-active policy action on the part of Administration to stay the effects of possible budget shortfalls by encouraging the President, Vice Presidents and the Executive Dean for Extended Studies and Special Programs to teach at least one course per academic year in his or her area of expertise. The language of the resolution directly refers to establishing efficiencies for the operation of the college. The courses do not need to be core curriculum classes which will enable the administrators to instruct a course in areas of personal interest thus producing positive outcomes for the students. A motion to accept the resolution was made by Eric Henderson and seconded by Richard Kampf. A roll call vote was called. The resolution passed with 13 in favor, 11 opposed and 2 abstentions. The Secretary of the Senate will forward the resolution as indicated.
    1. The Great Basin Festival and The Basque Festival - In light of a recent decision of President's Council to seek the marriage of The Great Basin Festival with the Annual Basque Festival, it was requested that Professor Sarah Sweetwater's objection, which was circulated via e-mail, be read into the record. The objection follows. The festival is scheduled for September 18-20 this year and all faculty are encouraged to participate.

      " In response to the President's Council meeting regarding the possibility of "tagging" the Great Basin Festival on to the Basque Festival there are important reasons why this idea need not be pursued:

      1. The event was established primarily to bring people on the campus to celebrate the multicultural diversity of the region.
      2. The event is planned for the fall when there are fewer activities to bring people of the region to the Elko community. The fall is also a beautiful time to introduce travelers to our beautiful area. We schedule it a few weeks into the semester so that our students can be involved in the planning and presentation of the event.
      3. One of our goals is to create an event on campus during the school year so that the various schools can bring their students by bus to the campus to participate in the activities. We have had several school groups from our community and two van loads from Ely in the two years we have presented this event.
      4. The Basque event in July showcases the Basque and adding other events to the fringes would dilute their presentation. It would not make sense to "tag" it on to the Cinco de Mayo for the same reason. Each of these events put "heads in beds" during separate times of the year.
      5. The involvement of the faculty and staff and students is heart-centered on the campus for the event and a summer event would not have this potential.
      6. Marketing the Great Basin Festival with its multiple components such as the performances of the various ethnic groups in our amphitheatre is a way of bringing people to our campus with innovative learning central to the experience. Marketing the event on the campus during the school year is as important as marketing a trail ride off the campus, at least.
      7. Will the regional people who will come to the Basque Festival want to stay three more days to attend another festival? Would the Hispanics, Native Americans, East Indian, Irish, etc. feel as special as a "tag" on to the Basque event, as they feel when they are honored in their own multicultural event?"
    2. Course Time Layout Schedule - A revised course time schedule was distributed for information only. Department Chairs has formed an ad hoc committee to review the schedule. This is a work in progress and a final recommendation will come back to senate for vote.
  11. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 3:46 p.m. The next Senate meeting is scheduled for April 18, 2003, at 1:15 p.m.