October 16, 2002

Jill Olmsted called the meeting to order at 1:50 p.m.

Present: Professors Ahrens, Brenner, Burke, Doolittle, Douglass, Forst, Hakim, Heintze, Irvine Belson, Jennings, Jernigan, Kehoe, Kravetz, Langbein, Olmsted, Riddick, Riley, Rosenbloom, Rubenstein, Schaeff, Sha. Provost Kerwin.

Absent: Professor Williams

Welcome and Introductions
Jill Olmsted, chair, opened the meeting by welcoming the members of the new Faculty Senate. During her comments, she observed that 2002-2003 would be a year of dramatic transition, as the committees redefine their roles, and as the Senate redefines itself. She called on the senators for their patience and their positive energy, as the university’s faculty take on these complicated tasks. She also asked that they encourage their colleagues to be constructive in building the new governance structure.

Introductory Remarks
Neil Kerwin also welcomed the members of the Senate, remarking that to the best of his institutional knowledge, this was the first new governance body created by a referendum of the faculty. He then provided an abbreviated history of the steps leading to the ratification of the new governance structure, noting, as the initial step, President Ladner’s call, in his speech of October 3, 2001, for the creation a new model of governance “to provide a more flexible, consultative, and efficient system of decision making.” He said the Board of Trustees unanimously endorsed that recommendation, along with 14 other recommendations for strategic changes within the university, at their November 2001 meeting.

Provost Kerwin then told the Senate that the Project Team on Governance had based its deliberations on the following fundamental principles:

• The new body needed to be clearly representative and closely linked to faculty constituencies in the schools and the college.

• There needed to be a direct linkage between the key committees of the Senate and the full body.

• The university-wide nature of the body needed to be preserved.

• The new body needed to be smaller than the former University Senate.

• The number of standing committees needed to be reduced.

• The strengths of the old University Senate needed to be to be preserved by leaving the Committee on Faculty Relations intact and fully operational during the process and by continuing the Grievances and Hearing Panel processes essentially unchanged.

• The new body needed to fully and accurately reflect the substantial obligations that faculty bear under the university by-laws.

• The strong working relationship between the Provost and the Senate needed to be preserved.

Dr. Kerwin also said it was critical for President Ladner to meet with the Senate as soon as possible. He therefore proposed that the next meeting of the Senate be scheduled for November 13th , with a portion of the agenda set aside for a conversation with President Ladner.

Report of the Chair
A major portion of the discussion during the chair’s report centered upon the transition of leadership—the election of a chair and vice chair. The senators raised a number of issues for consideration, including the following:

• Should the current chair be asked to continue until the end of the fall semester, with the new chair assuming office in Spring 2003?

• Should consideration be also given to shifting the term-of-office for senate leadership to a January to December term, rather than basing it on the academic calendar, as was the practice under the old Senate?

Several senators spoke in favor of having the new leadership assume office as soon as possible, while others were in support of Professor Olmsted remaining as interim chair until the end of the semester. Professor Olmsted indicated that she was willing to continue until the end of the year; she emphasized, however, that whatever the Senate decided, she would continue to be available in her role as immediate past chair.

With respect to the term-of-office, it was noted that a shift away from a term that coincides with the academic year may prove to be problematic, due to sabbaticals and other faculty leaves.

Action: John Douglass introduced a motion for Jill Olmsted to continue until the November meeting, until the Senate can elect a new chair and vice chair. That motion passed unanimously.

Report of the Provost
Neil Kerwin’s report covered several items of significance to the Senate.

Graduate Program Review – The academic units responsible for graduate programs had been requested to provide mission statements for each of the graduate offerings. The units had also been asked to provide data that corresponds to the full range of criteria pertinent to the review of the programs. Provost Kerwin said he would ask the deans for progress reports on October 17th.

University College – Provost Kerwin appointed Nanette Levinson, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, School of International Service, to chair a working group to consider the concept of a University College, another of the recommendations from President Ladner’s speech of October 3, 2001. The working group is expected to present its report in the spring semester. Any proposal that will cause a change in the curriculum will be reviewed by the Joint Committee on Curriculum and Academic Programs.

Middle States Review – Almost ninety members of the university community, most of them members of the faculty, are engaged in eight task forces to develop a self-study for presentation to the Middle States Commission. Dr. George Santiago, the case manager from Middle States, will visit the university on October 31st.

Budget Development – The Committee on Instructional Budget and Benefits met with Provost Kerwin to begin work on budget development guidelines for the next fiscal year. Provost Kerwin said the single most important elements of those guidelines will be academic, including the commitment to maintain faculty salaries for tenured and tenure-track faculty at AAUP Level 1.

Enrollments for Fall 2002
• The university enrolled a freshman class of more than 1300 students.
• The university had an especially strong showing of transfer students.
• Graduate enrollments were 4 percent higher than the budget target.
• The Washington Semester came in slightly below budget, but preliminary numbers for the spring semester suggest that any softness in the fall will be offset by spring.
• The Washington of Law had a dramatic increase in the size of its first-year class, with almost 200 students more than expected.

University Council – Provost Kerwin reported that President Ladner was in the process of naming his University Council. The chair of the Senate will serve as an ex-officio member of that body.

Report of the Committee on Instructional Budget and Benefits
Pat Kehoe, vice chair of Instructional Budget and Benefits, reported on negotiations with the university’s two health plans, Kaiser and Blue Cross/Blue Shield. He said the committee had initially faced proposals from the plans that would hike premiums by 17-20 percent. He noted that once the negotiations are complete, the committee’s recommendations could conceivably bring those increases down to somewhere around 13 percent.

In response to requests for additional information, Professor Kehoe subsequently prepared a report to the Senate, which was distributed electronically. A copy of that report is appended to the record copy of the minutes.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.