FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
December 4, 2002
Attendance: †Apilado, Rasheed, Dickinson, Eakin, Liu, Spindler, Preist, Jolly, del Carmen, Horvit, Estes, Rinehartz, Maizlish, Silva, Sol, Bogle, Nussbaum, Young, Maher, Kinsel, Liu,† Kribs-Zaleta, De, Amster, Rosado, Patrick, Fincher, Pillai, Witt, Wilding, Chrzanowski.
Call to Order:
2:40 p.m. Ė Senate Chair Thomas Chrzanowski called the senate to order.
Approval of Minutes:
Senator Young (Sociology) requested a correction to his comment regarding Faculty Development Leave to read: The problem in getting faculty to apply for faculty development leave is that the perception that the structure of the evaluation process is such that those projects donít get funded because they are not appreciated by the evaluator thatís assessing the evaluation.
Senator Kinsel (Chemistry) requested that under the Committee business, the Kinsel committee name be changed to Ethics.
All members were in favor of previous minutes with the above corrections.
Remarks by the Chair:
Chair Chrzanowski attended the Board of Regents meeting.† There were four presentations:† Lisa Ann Wuermzer of UT-Southwestern discussed technology transfer focusing on the cost of benefit ratio and how much of the technology income should be redirected back to the faculty member who developed the technology.†
Jim Bartlett of UT-Dallas discussed the Faculty Satisfaction Survey.† The regents were interested in the outcomes of the survey.
Senator Reinhartz also attended the Board of Regents meeting where he discussed the importance of Faculty Development Leave and its importance to the UT System.† This benefit is not used and he urged the regents to encourage the faculty.
Robert Nelson of the UT Faculty Senate made a presentation and offered to make a resolution on the establishment of executive councils.† The resolution requests the regents to establish a policy where faculty members have representation at the upper administration levels for a voice when policies are implemented.
The presentations were well received by regents.
The chancellor commented on the changing culture in academics.† In the future, there will be more tolerance for entrepreneurship.† There must be balance of entrepreneurship and academics.
Regent Oxford emphasized the need for research and for future money and grants.† The UT System must make the effort to attract venture capital.† The future of academics is moving towards venture capital and the marketability for the products invented via academic entrepreneurship.
Senator Reinhartz added that the UT System was the most generous nationwide in technology transfer with 50% going back to the inventor.† The national average is 42%.† The UT System is trying to lower their transfer percentage to the national average with the possibility of the balance of funds being diverted back to the inventorís lab for research.
Chair Chrzanowski updated the senate on the Criminal Background Check Policy.† A revised document has been established and was forwarded to all units earlier this week.† UTA will create their own policy based on these guidelines.
Chair Chrzanowski also discussed the Tenure and Promotion issue raised at the last Executive Board Meeting.†† Tenure and promotion policies are not being following rigorously in some departments.† Faculty members are not receiving timely and thorough reviews.† The issue was brought to the President.† The President then brought the issue to the Provost who sent a memo to deans insisting they follow the established evaluation rules.† Chair Chrzanowski then thanked Drs. Witt and Wright for their attention to the matter.
Dr. Witt said that Dr. Wright found that the policy and procedures were being followed in spirit and not letter.† In the future, a list will be provided to the deans describing items that should take place in reviews and the required sign-off of the person being evaluated.
Senator Young (Sociology) asked for examples of the things not being done in the evaluations.
Chair Chrzanowski said that some annual reviews were not being conducted at all.† Furthermore, faculty members under review were not informed of the outcome. There have also been cases of faculty not being given access to teaching evaluations.†
Dr. Witt added that the Provost investigated the issues and concluded that the most common reason policy and procedure were not followed was because the evaluator did not want to relay negative information.† Consequently, training will be developed on how to give performance reviews.
Chair Chrzanowski discussed the Revised Mission Statement.† The Mission Statement was revised with some faculty input and was sent to him 3 weeks ago.† The new Mission Statement is required by SACs and is now available.† Senator Reinhartz added that Dana Dunn informed him that when the Mission Statement is approved, it can be revised again.† The Faculty Administration Committee will redo in the future.
Chair Chrzanowski discussed the organizational changes in the Faculty Senate.† The senate has been operating under bylaws that were established in the late 1960s.† The founding document is close to 40 years old.† Chair Chrzanowski has been instituting changes to the bylaws as to how the Faculty Senate operates to bring it in line with its current operation.† UTAís Faculty Senate doesnít operate like other units of the UT System.† For example, the committee structure for instituting minor actions of the senate need to be revised.† Chair Chrzanowski has also asked the Presidentís Advisory Group to meet 1Ĺ hour prior to meeting with the president to set the agenda for meetings.† In the past, chairs have set the agenda.† In the groupís last meeting, Chair Chrzanowski asked all chairs to join the group to integrate the decision-making.
Dr. Witt discussed UT Systemís emphasis on entrepreneurship and technology transfer for the future of academics.† He could not fully describe the implications, but felt that UTA was further down the road than other units.† One important issue is the reduction of royalties to the inventor.† Even if the UT System does decide to reduce royalties, a significant portion will be allocated back to the institution.† He also anticipated UT keeping the current plan of 95% going to the professor and 5% being allocated to the institution.† One problem with entrepreneurship is the importance of having your ideas patented before publishing about the technology discovered.† In a recent case, a manuscript could be not be published because the idea discussed in the article was not yet patented.† Another problem with technology transfer and entrepreneurship is the requirement of having to publish and research and how that applies to tenure.† The Faculty Senate should address these issues.
Questions to the President
Senator Eakin:††††††††††††††††††††††† Any updates on the Dallas Citizenís Council (DCC)?
President Witt:††††† The DCC is going forward with its project of collaboration between Metroplex universities.† UTA should be positive and see what comes of it, but there are many challenges to overcome.† The Georgia State System recently adopted the model.† The State of Georgia has gone from $300M to $900M in research funds from the federal government (NIH).† The advantage to this collaboration for UTA would be funding.† The NSF has a budget of $4.5 Billion compared to NIHís budget of $28 Billion.† The DCC will continue to push very hard for the collaboration.
Senator Reinhartz:†††††††† ††††††††††††††††††††††† Will the Faculty Senate have input on the latest security document?
President Witt:† ††††††††††† Yes.† A draft response will be prepared for the Chair of the Faculty Senate for review.† UT-Austin will be the first, so weíll let them lead us.
Senator Amster:††††††††††† In California, faculty members are required to sign a Patent Agreement upon being hired even before there is a product developed.† Can you check to see how useful that would be for us here?
President Witt:††††††††††† In the spring, we will review the current operating procedure and check with sister institutions to see if their procedures would be useful here.
Senator Liu:††††††††††† How will we recognize our own company work and UTA research work?† How will the benefits for the company and scientific research work for UTA be separated?† It would be beneficial to have a committee to give ideas on how to identify these identities.
President Witt:††††††††††† This is a very complex situation.† It would be best served as university policy and procedure.† Also, it would be best if it came from the Faculty Senate rather than central administration.† The Faculty Senate could develop guidelines that make sense.† The challenge will be implementing the policy.† An example of this dilemma would be the Faculty Development Leave selection.†
Chair Chrzanowski:††††††††††† The Faculty Development Leave issue was discussed at the last Executive Board meeting.† Dr. Witt is right in that the issue is not the policy but in educating ourselves.†
President Witt:††††††††††††† $4.2 Million has been awarded to UTA from NSF for nanotechnology.† UTA was awarded $2.4M from the Defense Bill which will be allocated to the Nanotech Center mainly to upgrade equipment.† Also, $400K will be used for a Nanoscience Center in the new Science Building.† This year there are no restrictions on earmarks.† Currently, there are 10-15 federal earmark requests.
Senator Liu:† ††† ††††††††††† How long will the money last?
President Witt:† ††††††††††† The money is a one-time grant for equipment, staff, etc.
Senator Amster:††††††††††† It is my understanding that you invited us to formulate a proposal to handle the change in emphasis.† Should it b done as a group?
President Witt:††††††††††††† Debate should take place within this group so that when asked for suggestions on policy and procedures, it will already have been discussed.
Chair Chrzanowski:††††††††††† This issue will be discussed at the next UT Faculty Meeting.
Senator Estes:†††††††††††††† A friend of mine at Stanford who had tenure was in the same situation as weíre discussing.† He resigned and started his own company.† This could happen here.† UT has the potential of losing tenured faculty.
President Witt:† ††††††††††† We want to keep our faculty and need to find way to make it beneficial for faculty to stay.
(President Witt left the meeting.)
Council of Faculty Senates:† Nothing to report.
Equity:† Nothing to report.
Academic Tenure & Freedom:†
Senator Crowder reported that the committee is working on tenure promotion policies.† Senator Maizlish who is head of receivership discussed President Wittís objections to the introductory paragraph, which he feels is too broad regarding faculty rights.† The committee will meet afterwards and resolve, then present changes to the Senate.†
Chair Chrzanowski:† The Receivership Document was brought from the UT Faculty Senate as a blanket document with the idea to establish a line of communication.† Can send to UT System before the end of the year.
Senator Maizlich:† the President objected to the general paragraph.
Operating Procedures:† Started discussion regarding issues related to reviews of Academic Administration.† Sent list of questions relating to current review policy.† Need a more specific list of which directors are included for review.† The policy doesnít address reviews for Asst. or Assoc. VPs.† The committee has requested positions and descriptions.† Title changes are also easily handled and will be discussed at the next meeting.† Some reviews have stopped and others are not being conducted at all.
Senator Young:† Who is responsible for initiating review procedure?
Chair Chrzanowski:† Michael Moore, but he wonít review while the policy is being revised.
Chair Chrzanowski will write a memo to Michael Moore regarding the policy and its effectiveness.
Senator Estes:††††† Deans are to be reviewed every 5 years.† When are we going to review deans?
Senator Reinhartz:††††† Deans may currently be reviewed, but may not be announced.† Not sure.
Senator Formanowicz requested the Operating Procedure Committee to stay after.
Research & Development:† Nothing to report.
Chair Chrzanowski:††††††††††† Your committee is to assess increasing administration vs. increase in faculty salaries to determine if salary compression is occurring at UTA.
Budget Liasion:† Nothing to report.
Academic Liasion:† The Committee met with Student Services Liasion Committee to complete the Faculty Guide.† The guide will be posted on-line hopefully next semester, then will hand over to Michael Mooreís office.
Student Services:† Nothing to report.
Ethics:† Met on Monday and discussed the issue of compensation for faculty who supervise summer graduate/dissertation students.† Compensation for faculty in the summer is only done by Engineering.† They have a mechanism in place to compensate their faculty.† When discussing with chairs and deans, their reason for not instituting a new policy on summer pay is that they didnít know it was done in other parts of the university.† The Faculty Senate should put forth a resolution so the faculty can be compensated.
Chair Chrzanowski :† Can you draft a resolution?
Senator Kinsel:† Maybe.† I have information on how engineering distributes money.† This is a touchy issue.† Need to know how much is brought in and spent on graduate students.† Iím open to suggestions.
Chair Chrzanowski will meet with the Provost on this issue.
Special Projects:† One nomination for Professor Emeritus.
Old Business: ††††††††††† None.
Dr. Kribs-Zaleta:††††††††††††††††††††††† Dr. Bernstein makes a suggestion of changing the UT-Flex because it is not economical.† The Attorney Generalís office uses a debit card for flex accounts.† That way when expenses are incurred, they are debited directly out of the flex account.† The cost is not incurred twice by the employee.
Senator Chrzanowski will call and get a speaker on the issue for the next meeting.
Senator Chrzanowski requested the 3 hottest items on campus.† They are:† Salary and Workload Inequities, Evaluation of Administration, and Receivership.
Senator Reinhartz will ask other representatives to see if these issue are present elsewhere in the system.
Senator Amster suggested changing the cycles of committee memberships.† Once major issues are started on committees, some representatives leave the senate.† Consequently, the process of researching issues has to be started all over again.
Meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.