MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Acker, Barbara Borst, Jim Buckley, Mike Gizzi, Phil Kavanagh, Doug O'Roark, Eric Schruers, Gayla Jo Slauson, John Sluder, Cindy Thomas, Brian Udermann, Russ Walker, Carrie McVean Waring, Mary Zimmerer

GUESTS: Jim Brock, Sam Gingerich, Valerie Horton, Bryan Howard, Cindy Lueb

The meeting was convened at 3:30 pm by Senate President Doug O'Roark.

A motion was made to approve the draft minutes of the May 3, 2001 Senate meeting (Udermann/Gizzi). The motion passed.

A motion was made to approve the draft minutes of the August 23, 2001 Senate meeting (Zimmerer/Thomas). The motion passed.

President O'Roark distributed the 8/29/01 draft agreement prepared by CCHE describing various changes that should take place if Metro State College is removed from the state college system. The Trustees and the state college presidents are preparing comments.

Senate Vice President John Sluder reported that the assignment of faculty to committee vacancies is not yet complete. Because department chairs are so busy with other responsibilities at the beginning of the school year, he proposed that we shift this task to the end of the spring semester. (This new practice would begin next semester for the 2002-03 school year). The chairs he talked with support this change. He noted that chairs would still have the option of reserving some assignments until the beginning of the fall semester for incoming faculty. A motion was made to approve his proposal (Sluder/Udermann). The motion passed.

Mike Gizzi announced that there are still two Mesa faculty spots open for the Office of State Colleges Faculty Professional Development Conference on September 28-29. We also need an additional faculty member to prepare a poster illustrating new developments in teaching and learning here.

Phil Kavanagh noted that the topic of the upcoming CCHE Faculty to Faculty Conference will be transferability of general education courses and a "common core". Given the importance of this topic, Mesa needs to be well-represented. MSC Vice President Sam Gingerich stated that he would soon issue a call for volunteers.

Cindy Lueb (Director of Sponsored Programs) announced that MSC had received $1.3 million in grants during the preceding year. This is an increase of $1.1 million over the previous year. Most of the grant money was received for science- and math-related projects.

Lueb reported that she will draft for Senate discussion and approval policies required by federal agencies (e.g., NSF, NIH) on misconduct in science and whistleblowers. She is also developing a liability waiver consistent with state law for student participation in research.

President O'Roark reported that Representatives Berry and Smith and Senator Teck had not yet responded to his invitation to attend a Faculty Senate meeting.

The Senate discussed various aspects of the draft Academic Master Plan that was distributed at the preceding meeting.

A question was raised about the meaning of the term "core mission". Vice President Gingerich pointed out that our Trustees require us to determine program priorities consistent with our core mission, and that establishing our core mission is part of what we must do to implement the master plan.

A concern was raised regarding the role of "local needs" in determining our priorities. Gingerich noted that CCHE expects Colorado labor needs to be a factor in program priorities, and that responding to the "education needs of students" includes responding to students who are vocationally-driven.

A recommendation was made to include the bulleted items from page 13 in the executive summary. Jim Brock agreed to make this change.

The first action item listed in the executive summary will be revised to read "Increase student success, enrollment, and retention…".

The date of the quote on page 10 was questioned. Brock agreed to verify the date.

Section V.A.4. on page 30 will be revised to read "To annually review support needed and provided by Media Services, Information Technology, and the Center for Teaching and Learning".

Included on page 41 are objectives for awarding stipends to faculty for teaching preparation and scholarship. A proposal was made to change the group responsible for making these awards from the Faculty Development, Assistance, and Enrichment Committee to the Center for Teaching and Learning. The ensuing discussion included: concern for transferring this responsibility to a group that is not appointed by the Senate; the make-up of the advisory board for the Center; and the workload of the Faculty Development Committee. Gingerich emphasized that the plan is meant to be a living document that can be changed as needed. O'Roark postponed further discussion of this specific proposal to a future meeting.

In response to a question on program reviews and prioritization, Gingerich stated that Academic Affairs and the Faculty Senate would have responsibility for establishing and overseeing a prioritization mechanism. CCHE requires all institutions to follow a program review process, and this mechanism will allow us to comply with this policy. Brock noted that the experience of other schools suggests that it is more difficult to set up the mechanism than to carry out the reviews. A concern was raised that this process would require programs to generate a lot of paper work with little value.

A motion was made to accept the Academic Master Plan (Zimmerer/Schruers). The motion passed. The Senate commended Jim Brock and all the others who worked on the plan. Sam Gingerich praised the faculty's degree of engagement in the process, and Jim Brock complimented the Senate in particular. Barbara Borst expressed the gratitude of the library staff.

The draft Guidelines for Tenure Portfolios were distributed to the Senate at the preceding meeting. These guidelines were developed by the deans with input from the tenure committees. The Academic Policies Committee is believed to be working on its own guidelines. A motion was made to table further discussion pending the efforts of Academic Policies (Zimmerer/Sluder). The motion passed.

There was little discussion of the draft Four-Year Graduation Plan, which had been discussed more extensively at the preceding meeting. A motion was made to approve the plan (Udermann/Sluder). The motion passed.

Due to a lack of time remaining for discussion, this item was postponed.

A motion was made at 5:00 to adjourn (Walker/Slauson). The motion passed.