U.T. System Seal links to U.T. System Home Bar graphic with photo of professor. The University of Texas System Faculty Advisory Council
 

 

Home

Guidelines

Committees

Membership

Meetings

Minutes

Travel for FAC

Academic Affairs

Employee
Advisory Council

Student
Advisory Council

 

 

Dates: March 02-03, 2006
Committee Reports: Faculty Quality | Academic Affairs | Governance | Health Affairs
Campus Reports: Health Institutions | Academic Institutions

Faculty Quality Committee :
(Report provided by Dan Formanowicz)

The Faculty Quality Committee discussed two issues:

The importance of keeping track of the Post-Tenure Process on the various campuses throughout the UT System including keeping in mind that Post-tenure review is not intended to be a recertification for tenure but is an absolute judgment of how well individuals are carrying out their responsibilities.

The committee discussed the status of full time, non-tenure track lecturers and decided that we would examine various issues having to do with these positions. This resulted in the following rather extensive TO DO LIST for the FAC:

What are the on campus policies for the following issues dealing with full time, non tenure track faculty and are the policies applied universally across campus or do they vary from unit to unit?

How are the hiring and firing of full time, non-tenure track faculty handled? Who is involved in the decision making? Do they have set length term contracts or are they simply renewed year-to-year?

Are there standardized teaching loads and what are they?

Are there annual reviews of their performance? If so, who conducts the reviews?

Do full time, non-tenure track faculty have access to perks that may be available to tenured or tenure track faculty (e.g., travel funds to attend professional meetings)?

Academic Affairs Committee:
(Report provided by Cynthia Brown)

Collegiate Learning Assessment: Pedro Reyes reported on the first year results from the Collegiate Learning Assessment. This was presented to the Board of Regents at their February meeting and was well received. His discussions with representatives from SACS indicate that SACS recognizes CLA as one measure of student learning outcomes of the general education requirements of each university. The plan is to continue to administer CLA over the next four or five years.

Distance Education

Commissioner Paredes’ January 2006 update on Closing the Gaps stressed the importance of distance education so that the Closing the Gaps objectives can be attained. Part of the rationale is that distance education reduces the need for additional expensive facilities. The most alarming statement is “we might want to mandate that students take a certain percentage of their courses on-line to mitigate the need for new classrooms and other facilities.”

There is a THECB Taskforce on Critical Issues Facing Distance Education in Texas. Of particular interest are the subcommittees on “Regulatory and Accrediting Issues” and “Distance Education Course and Program Quality Assurance and Assessment.”

Academic Affairs committee members will be monitoring this situation and evaluating whether it would be helpful to write a letter to Commissioner Paredes regarding a mandate that all Texas higher education students take a fixed percentage of their coursework using distance education.

We are going to see if Geri Malandra has information on how the UT System assesses the program and student outcomes of the Telecampus.

Governance Committee:
(no electronic report submitted)

Health Affairs Committee:
Chair: Mark Winter; Co-chair: Ted Pate

Committee Members: Margaret Brackley, Jim McDonald, Christine Baker, Karen Fuss-Sommer, Christina Gonzalez, David Shafer; Angela Shoup, (Ex-Officio); and Patrick Francis, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs (Ex-Officio)

The committee decided to continue to collect data on Leave Polices for the following types of leave: Maternity, Paternity, Adoption, and Elder Care. The committee divided up the United States into regions and the members will search for policies at: 1) large teaching system or institution and 2) smaller teaching institution, if possible. The committee will be looking at other Texas University Systems and larger Texas Departments (e.g., TxDOT, TDH) for their written policies for these types of leave. A data collection tool was designed during the committee meeting to facilitate data collection from each of these places. In addition, an attempt will be made to locate the contact information for the Women’s Group at each teaching institution/system.

It was decided that UT System needs to:

Unify leave policies across the institutions

Suggest that each institution needs a Family Work Balance section of its Web site

Utilize Family Work Balance as a recruiting tool for future faculty

The committee will utilize the UTMB Parental Leave policy as a base model and integrate outstanding policies from competing institutions from around the country for development of an ideal leave policy for the UT System. The URL for the UTMB Parental Leave Policy is: http://www.utmb.edu/Policies_And_Procedures/Search_Results/PNP_004899

ONGOING: Drafts of a sick leave, sick leave pool, and parental leave policies were distributed to the membership of the committee. The platform of these leave policies was utilized from existing UTMB policies and changes were made to integrate policies from competing academic and health science institutions from around the country. The committee made additional changes towards these policies. These changes will be incorporated into these draft policies and distributed to the membership of the committee. The committee members will then compare these drafts to the existing policies at each of their respective institutions. Additional comments will be solicited from the committee members with the goal for the production of a series of documents to be distributed to the membership of the entire FAC. An ultimate goal for this item is to have a resolution for the Chancellor or the Board of Regents in an attempt to unify the leave policies across all UT System institutions.

** UTSW | UTMB | UTHSCH | UTHSCSA | MD Anderson | UTHCT

UT Southwestern, Dallas
(Report provided by Angela Shoup)

General report

A new program was announced, the Disease Oriented Clinical Scholars (DOCS) Program. This program is intended to “facilitate the growth of state of the art research in clinical departments at UT Southwestern. The purpose of this program is to foster the recruitment and career progression of young clinical scholars who are interested in disease oriented research.”

On January 30, Dr. Wildenthal announced that he has recommended Dr. Al Gilman (current Dean of the Medical School) as Provost of the University and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs. Because of this appointment, a new Medical School Dean will need to be identified. Dr. Wildenthal noted that a search process will be initiated in the near future and he will announce the composition of the search committee in the next several weeks. Dr. Wildenthal also requested input from all faculty.

Dr. Wildenthal announced the initiation of a search for a “Medical Vice President in the Health System who has knowledge and experience in both medical and business affairs.” Dr. Wildenthal noted that a search committee will be appointed and he welcomes input from all faculty.

UT Southwestern was discussed in an article in the Dallas Business Journal entitled “New hospital to replace St. Paul, Zale Lipshy over time: The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas has embarked on a $2 billion, 25-year plan to combine its two hospital buildings, recruit more faculty and treat patients in a more modern setting. “ Some initiatives in the plan include replacing the St. Paul building with a larger hospital, ceasing patient care at Zale Lipshy and selling that building, and adding 3 million square feet of research space. The article also noted that “According to a state board that calculates the space needed by higher education institutions, UT Southwestern had an 814,372-square-foot "deficit of space" as of Aug. 31.”

Dr. Al Gilman made a number of recent announcements:

David Mangelsdorf will be the new Chair of the Department of Pharmacology, effective March 1, 2006. Dr. Mangelsdorf has been on the UT Southwestern faculty since 1993. He is a Professor and an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and holds the Doris and Bryan Wildenthal Distinguished Chair in Medical Science at UT Southwestern.

Newly created Department: the Department of Clinical Sciences; The Chair is Milton Packer the Vice Chair is John Rush. Dr. Gilman noted that “Milton and his faculty will provide campus wide leadership and assistance in our efforts to train new clinical investigators and help all clinical investigators be more effective and productive.”

Dr. Gilman reported that a task force chaired by Dr. Chuck Ginsburg is currently examining all aspects of clinical research at UT Southwestern. Their recommendations will be implemented in the near future.

From Dr. Al Gilman: The creation of a new Center: The Advanced Imaging Research Center (AIRC); Dean Sherry will direct the Center and Craig Malloy will serve as its Medical Director. The AIRC is unique in that it will be a cooperative venture between UT Southwestern and the University of Texas campuses at both Dallas and Arlington. As firm evidence of this, Dean Sherry's primary appointment is in the Chemistry Department at UTD. The goals of the AIRC are to promote basic and clinical research in imaging technologies and to apply these technologies to important biological and medical problems, especially in neuroscience and cancer. Initially, magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy, functional magnetic resonance imaging (especially of the brain), and optical and other molecular and cellular imaging technologies will be the foci of research collaborations across all three institutions. Newly purchased magnetic resonance imaging equipment will include 3 and 7 Tesla human imaging systems and a high field small animal system.

From Dr. Al Gilman: The arrival of Joel Elmquist from Harvard. Joel is now a Professor of Internal Medicine at UT Southwestern and Director of a new program whose focus will be on the hypothalamus and central regulation of feeding behavior and energy metabolism. This program will be a cornerstone of efforts being spearheaded by Jay Horton in Internal Medicine to establish a Center of Excellence in Obesity, Diabetes, and Metabolic Syndromes. Many UT Southwestern faculty are intimately involved in this collaboration, which will also take unique advantage of the capabilities being developed in the Advanced Imaging Research Center. We acknowledge with thanks assistance from the STARs faculty recruitment program initiated by Ken Shine, Executive Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs, UT System, in facilitating this recruitment.

Homework:

How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HoOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that.

There is no specific policy followed for all of UT Southwestern

IR makes available a “shared” drive for all to use. Each person has allocated space on this drive. This drive is backed up regularly and is protected by 3 firewalls.

IR encourages those using laptops or who choose not to use the offered network drive to develop another plan for back up of local data.

Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”?

From the Compact for FY2006-2007; Updated 09/17/2005: Compact Development Process: The administration through the Office of Business Affairs and the Office of Academic Planning began the development of the Compact by reviewing both the Presidential Work Plan and the university’s Six Year Plan. The Six Year Plan is a faculty and administration collaborative document which is revised every two years. The most recent revision is now in its final draft. From these documents, a group of senior administrators compiled a list of various projects, initiatives and ideas that could be used for the short-term and long-term priorities and initiatives section. The details for each priority and initiative were drawn heavily from the Presidential Work Plan and the Six Year Plan, but additional details and information included suggestions by other officials of the university who have expertise in specialized areas. The first draft of the plan will continue a review process to include faculty and student leadership. When the final plan is submitted, the process will have included a broad section of faculty, represented by the Six Year Plan, senior administration, and student leadership. Update: The Compact is a planning document and an expression of the university’s goals that goes hand-in-hand with the Six Year Plan, which is finalized and adopted by faculty university-wide. Many of the major priorities and initiatives in the Six Year Plan were incorporated into the Compact. Committees have been formed for development of the new Six Year Plan, which will be used in writing our new Compact next year. Meetings will begin in the fall.

Broad faculty and staff input is solicited. Periodically, memos will be sent that give an overview of the importance of the strategic planning process, highlight some of UT Southwestern’s accomplishments that originated from incorporation of faculty suggestions into the strategic planning process and soliciting suggestions for the updated plan or compact.

From reviewing strategic plans over time, it is evident that many talented people are involved who evaluate the suggestions from all directions. Careful planning, including attention to fiscal responsibility, impact on our relationships with our neighboring institutions, available resources, etc. are all detailed in the plans.

What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. This policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy?

From the UTSW HOP: 1.3.15.2 Other Administrative Officers. The Regents' Rules and Regulations, Part One, Chapter II, Section 14.3 provides for reasonable faculty and student consultation in the selection of administrative officers of the component institutions, but the chief administrative officer is responsible for final nominations to the executive vice chancellor for health affairs.

Will discuss with faculty senate development of a more specific, detailed proposal as indicated above.

Allied Health – UT Southwestern
(Report provided by Cristina Gonzalez)

Dean Search is underway.

Our school has proposals that now are being considered for two new programs, a Radiation Therapy Program and a B.S. in Public Health Program.

The Academic Affairs Committee plans to distribute a questionnaire soon to all SAHSS faculty members to ask whether they would like to have in-services on topics that they may need to discuss with students when they hold student advising sessions with their students.

The Research Committee of our school is planning a Research Forum for the morning of April 17. The theme for this Forum will be diabetes mellitus. Guest speakers will be drawn from SAHSS departments/programs.

Nominations for Schermerhorn Scholarship (named for a former SAHSS Dean, Dr. Schermerhorn) Awards are being solicited. The deadline for submission is March 6. Three awards are given: one to an undergraduate student, one to a graduate student, and one to either an undergraduate or a graduate student. Awards are based on scholarship (GPA) and service to the student's community, professional field, and to SAHSS.

Students who will graduate in August 2006 and who are selected by their departments for membership in Alpha Eta, the allied health national honor society, will be initiated on April 7.

UT Medical Branch, Galveston
(Report provided by Mark Winter)

UTMB and Minority Students:

Building upon its role as a leader in minority student recruitment and retention, UTMB has received a $3.2 million grant that will continue to support academic, clinical and mentoring programs for Hispanic high school, college and medical school students and faculty.

The grant from the Health Research Service Administration will sponsor various UTMB programs through the Hispanic Center of Excellence to encourage and prepare Hispanic students aspiring toward careers in medicine. UTMB officials have maintained a longstanding partnership with the HRSA funded HCOE. Since 1992, the program has contributed funds that have helped UTMB to continue diversifying its student population.

Of the state’s medical schools, UTMB ranks first in overall minority enrollment, with 21 percent of its 826 medical students coming from underrepresented groups. Founded in 1891, the university enrolled its first Hispanic students in 1917 and its first black student in 1949, five years prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that deemed segregated education unconstitutional. In July, Black Issues in Higher Education magazine listed UTMB as the top producer of Hispanic physicians in the United States. Only the University of Puerto Rico Medical Sciences Campus and Universidad Central del Caribe graduated more Hispanic students than UTMB.

The current grant will benefit approximately 400 students each year for the next three years. The grant will support programs that introduce high school students to health careers, prepare college undergraduates for medical school admissions tests and provide academic support once they begin medical school, as well as provide faculty development to UTMB’s Hispanic junior faculty.

Changes in UTMB Administration, Dean of Medicine Valerie Parisi was appointed by President Stobo as Chief Academic Officer and Vice President for Academic Program Administration and Services, effective January 1, 2006. In her expanded role, Dr. Parisi will lead the newly created UTMB Council of Deans (formerly the Academic Executive Committee). The council—consisting of deans Parisi, Charles Christiansen (Allied Health Sciences), Cary Cooper (Graduate Biomedical Sciences) and Pamela Watson (Nursing)—will be responsible for developing joint strategies for advancing UTMB’s academic enterprise. In their roles as deans of individual schools, each will continue to report directly to the President. As Chief Academic Officer and Vice President for Academic Program Administration and Services, Dr. Parisi will, in January, assume direct oversight of several student-related functions that previously reported to the Office of the Vice President for Business and Administration. The Council of Deans will serve as a steering committee. These services include the Moody Medical Library, Classroom and Technical Services, Biocommunications, Enrollment Services (Registrar and Student Financial Aid), Student Life, Student Wellness, Student Housing, and Accreditation and Academic Planning Support. Aligning the services that support teaching and research will strengthen our educational environment and enable us to achieve greater integration of the curricula in each of our health science schools. It will also position UTMB to compete more effectively for multidisciplinary awards, particularly those designed to take basic research from the bench to the bedside to the community. Dr. Parisi brings to this new role valuable understanding of the ways in which an integrated infrastructure can advance the academic mission of a health sciences center. Her expertise, coupled with her commitment to enhancing the learning environment for all UTMB students, makes her eminently well-suited for this expanded role.

UTMB Improving Patient Safety: Nationally, there is a growing movement to improve patient safety and eliminate mishaps that can happen in a hospital. UTMB is striving to take the lead in this revolution, making the protection of patients a primary focus in all aspects of care. To aid in this process, UTMB has entered into a partnership with a patient safety consulting firm run by airline pilots. Using checklists and other standard procedures [from the aviation field] has produced dramatic and lasting improvements in patient safety everywhere the program has been fully implemented. Members of UTMB senior leadership have proven their commitment to developing a safety culture for the benefit of patients and staff by spending several days at “LifeWings Boot Camp” in Nashville, where the company is based. Since boot camp, the UTMB operating room became the first area to participate in the program, which is designed to enhance the communication and teamwork among staff to promote patient safety. The program is helping UTMB improve patient safety, increase efficiency, and enhance team effectiveness. Over the course of more than two months, all members of the operating room team—nurses, technicians, surgeons, and others involved in the OR—attended a full day of LifeWings training. During this training, all members of the operating room team were encouraged to think like a team, to give continuous feedback, and to focus on solving problems without placing blame. However, medical research estimates that up to 100,000 hospital patients nationwide die every year as a result of human error, miscommunication and lack of effective teamwork. The training served as the beginning for changes to take place in the coming months. Since August, several safety tools have been developed to help reduce the opportunities for human error. The first of these tools implemented was a time-out briefing that is more detailed than what was previously used in the operating room time-outs. It provides an extra step to make sure the operation being conducted is correct, with the correct equipment and medication, for the correct patient, and at the correct site on the person’s body. Reactions to this change from OR staff has been positive, and the continued rollout of error-prevention practices will produce dramatic and lasting improvements in patient safety at UTMB.

Senate Issues

Still working on a policy for tenure for part-time faculty. The chair of the senate committee is asking for wording assistance from all UT Institutions that have policies in the works. Please send your policies to cboodley@utmb.edu.

In preparation for SACS reaffirmation, the UTMB senate has been given the job of aligning the academic calendar across all four schools.

The results of the Faculty Satisfaction Survey have been disseminated to the deans and faculty. The senate is currently looking at pressing issues brought forth by the survey in order to begin implementation of steps to improve faculty satisfaction at UTMB.

TO DO LIST

How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HoOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that.

Backup of servers are done in a central location daily. Desktop computers, if on contract, are backed up daily. Personal computers are backed up at the discretion of the user. Most faculty have availed themselves of utilization of central servers for their research data.

Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”?

Our strategic plan was done internally with leaders that were trained in strategic planning. The committee consisted of 60 members from all areas of the campus and from all schools. There was a heavier weight towards the research areas at UTMB. The strategic plan is currently being utilized by the administration to construct the Compact with the BoR. The Compact will pass through the senate and be open for comment from all faculty prior to a final being sent to the Board of Regents.

We are deep in developing strategic plans and compacts using very formal processes. Strategic plans have been reviewed and updated on a continuing basis and have documented the university’s direction for the future. The institutions planning processes are open and include broad based participation of administrators, faculty, staff, students, standing committees, and community representatives. UTMB has continued to refine its planning process, increasing participation among faculty and students and improving data collection, analysis, communication, goal setting, budgeting, and performance monitoring. Most notably, in 1999 UTMB initiated a broad-based scenario planning process to further enhance strategic planning. The process was conducted again in 2005. The scenario planning process creates plausible views of the future environment the institution may find itself having to face and the supporting strategies for improving institutional flexibility and decision-making in addressing the uncertainties of the future. The SOM and SON are currently conducting bottom up, faculty driven strategic planning processes. They are using the scenario plans, the existing institutional strategic plan, the compact, environmental trends, etc to develop their plans. These plans are targeted for completion by September 2006.

We are also updating the UTMB Compact for the period FY 07 -08. The Compact process is led by the President's Council, a multi-disciplinary group consisting of UTMB’s top-level administrators. The council reviews the status of existing institutional strategies, and identifies the major priorities that should be considered for the Compact. Compact teams collaborate with administrators, faculty, and staff to develop the content. Presentations are made to institutional constituents including leadership groups, faculty groups, the Faculty Senate, students, and staff as part of the institutional consultation process. A Compact website has been created to communicate the draft Compact priorities to the institution and to solicit feedback. Feedback provided during this consultation process is incorporated in the Compact. The final compact is approved by the President’s Council and the President.

What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. This policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy?

There is no policy requiring faculty representation to search committees for upper administrators. However, there is ‘automatic’ faculty representation to all search committees. In cases for Department Chairs, Deans, and even for the Office of the President UTMB has had a student serve on the search committee. We have not implemented this policy on our campus.

UT Health Science Center, Houston
(Report provided by Ted Pate)

The Interfaculty Council (IFC) is in the process of developing an online evaluation tool to be used for annual faculty evaluation for all six schools. The objective is to make an online form that is easy for faculty to use, while providing the basic information required by all schools for annual evaluation. There will also be a section stating goals, how the individual has supported the mission of the department/school/HSC, and their progress toward promotion, tenure or both (depending on track). This will create consistency in the evaluation process across campus. Each school may have additional information that they require. The online tool will also include a final evaluation page or section to again provide consistency across campus. This project will also aid in meeting SACS standards that require a central repository for faculty evaluations.

The IFC has been inviting various campus leaders to address different topics at each of our meetings and subcommittees have been charged with generating questions in advance for each speaker. This seems to be working very well and has increased faculty interest in the discussions.

The IFC officers continue to meet with our EVP/COO and EVPAA prior to our IFC meetings and they continue to attend most of the IFC meetings. This has improved communications between the faculty and senior administration and generated several joint projects (including #1 above).

The president of our HSC has been asking each dean to present his/her school at the Executive Council meetings each month. These presentations have been very beneficial in educating the senior administration about what is going on in each school and creating a sense of community.

A new clinical skills lab will open at our medical school later this spring. It will have the latest equipment and software for simulating a wide variety of medical and surgical conditions. The lab will be used by students, residents and faculty across the campus and also for continuing education.

New Frontiers campaign to support the Institute of Molecular Medicine has reached its goal of $200 million, all from external sources. There will now be a campaign to help the six individual schools as well as analogous stem cell research. There is also a collaborative effort with GE to work on nanotechnology and imaging, and we are breaking ground for a new Mental Sciences Institute building.

Homework Questions

How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HoOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that.

The following answer is from our Chief Information Officer.

Desktop backups are the responsibility of the desktop user. If the desktop user isn't backing their desktop up, it's not getting backed up.

Servers and shared storage systems are backed up by the server administrators. Most server administrators report either directly or indirectly to IT. The ones who don't should still be backing up the servers.

We encourage people to store files on shared storage systems because they will be backed up...among other reasons, like security, etc. 

Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”?

The strategic planning and compact development processes are at an early stage and currently seem to involve only central administration. We have made clear the desire of the faculty to be involved early on.

What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. This policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy?

The Handbook of Operating Procedures at the UTHSC includes all the prescribed components as passed at last October’s FAC meeting and these are followed. The policy is also listed on the Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity web site (http://www.uth.tmc.edu/eo/fap.html). We were just audited by the Texas Workforce Commission and there were no citations for deficiencies.

UT Health Science Center, San Antonio
(Report provided by Margaret Brackley)

Assistant VP for Academic Administration : Dr. Robert Kaminski comes to us from the UT Health Science Center at Houston. In the Dental Branch, he has most recently served as Director for Quality Assurance, giving him many opportunities to serve as a liaison among administration, faculty, students, and staff. He has also served as Senate Chair.

Medical School :

Dean of the Medical School and Vice President for Medical Affairs: Dr. William Henrich from University of Pittsburgh, and prior to that UT Southwestern, started March 1st with the specific focus of increasing the research mission of the medical school.

The Medical Arts and Research Center clinical service building has been approved by the Regents and is scheduled to open in 2008. This will be the first overt sign that UTHSCSA is in direct competition in the community for funded patients.

San Antonio Cancer Institute: Thomas J. Slaga, Ph.D. will serve as interim director as the search for a permanent director continues. Dr. Slaga came to San Antonio from Denver, where he served as scientific director at the AMC Cancer Research Center and interim deputy director of the Comprehensive Cancer Research Center at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center. Prior to that, he spent 15 years at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, where he was director of the Science Park – Research Division, a center dedicated to understanding the causes of cancer and studying the effective and rational approaches to cancer prevention and control.

The Open House for the Clinical Skills Center funded by SBC was held on December 8th. This is a state of the arts skills lab which all the schools will use to enhance technology and education.

The ACGME recently informed the UTHSCSA that the Internal Medicine Residency Program at the RAHC has received a four year accreditation.

Dr. Robin Brey was named the Director of Research with focus on the medical students.

Dr. Roberto Villarreal was named as the Interim Regional Assistant Dean for Research at the RAHC. A research facility is opening in Edinburgh; its focus will be infectious diseases.

Nursing School : Dr. Jill Hayes has been hired as the new Assistant Dean for Students.

Graduate School recruitment :

Final candidates are being considered to fill the chair of the Department of Molecular Medicine.

The search for a new chair of for the Department of Cellular and Structural Biology will begin in March. Self study is complete and they are in the process of forming a search committee.

LEAD (Leadership and Education Development) Institute starts in April; twenty-six people are involved for 1 year commitment. The Institute is aimed at improving leadership skills in mid-management level positions.

A Faculty Development Council consisting of Faculty Senate, Women’s Faculty Association, Hispanic Faculty Association, Medical School Hispanic Center of Excellence. This group with the Faculty Senate co-sponsored 2 Promotion & Tenure workshops on January 20 th and February 3 rd. One was for non-tenure track and one for tenure track faculty. Several hundred faculty attended both sessions. It was judged very helpful by the faculty who filled out an evaluation.

Research Update: Bridge Funding and Space Policies

Dr. Brian Herman, Vice President for Research, provided an update to the Senate and held 2 town hall meetings on his efforts to develop 1) plans for bridge funding for investigators facing a very difficult funding climate, and 2) plans for more effective utilization of research space.

Proposed Bridge Funding Program:

As the NIH budget for research becomes more restrictive and the NIH puts in place its roadmap initiatives, it has become much more difficult for investigators to sustain uninterrupted NIH funding. It is expected that currently funded competitive investigators will suffer lapses in NIH funding. To address this issue, the Office of the Vice President for Research (VPR) is establishing a “Bridge Funding Program” for the institution. This program is intended to provide bridge funding for previously funded NIH investigators whose competitive renewal applications do not receive a fundable priority score. The program will provide matching funds to those provided by the department chair, center director and dean to allow the investigator up to 3 cycles of bridge support (i.e. through the A2 submission cycle).

Points of concern expressed by senators on Bridge Funding were:

How is equity to be insured if bridge funding is only to be offered for support of NIH-funded projects?

Do the resources exist to guarantee that department/school matching funds will be available?

Proposed Research Space Allocation Policy:

Research space allocation is to be based on a research space productivity index (RSPI). This is a rolling three year average of direct plus indirect income divided by assignable square feet of research space, and can be calculated for an investigator, a department or a school. A percentile rank can be calculated for one’s RSPI in comparison to a target RSPI determined for each school based upon national norms for like schools. For example, the Graduate and Medical schools, judged by the same national standard, have a target RSPI of $350/sq. ft.

The Senate sent a response to Dr. Herman which stated: The UTHSCSA Faculty Senate is concerned that the proposed space allocation policy:

does not adequately consider significant differences that exist in indirect costs allowed by federal vs. private funding agencies.

does not adequately consider inherent differences in the fundable cost of performing different kinds of research.

does not adequately consider differences in the space needs of research faculty who require that large, space-consuming equipment items be placed in their laboratories.

does not adequately consider possible differences in the number of personnel that may be assigned to different laboratories supported by equal grant funding.

does not adequately consider the possible negative impact on the teaching/training mission of the UTHSCSA.

reflects a formulation based on expectations at other institutions.

reflects a formulation based on expectations associated with a time of significantly better funding opportunities.

does not adequately consider how research space policies may directly influence other space-requiring missions of the university.

that, taking items 1-8 together, the proposed space allocation policy does not adequately consider the possible negative impact on faculty morale.

UTHSCSA Strategic Plan

The drafted strategic plan was sent to the Faculty Senate on 7 February for review at our monthly meeting on the 8 th. Dr. Theresa Chiang, Vice President for Academic Administration, requested feedback by 1 March 2006. Because the Senate was not scheduled until March 8 th, the Senate voted to disseminate the Strategic plan to the general faculty body by 13 February for review and feedback, and then to have a special senate meeting on 22 February 2006 which it did. Senators collected responses from faculty at large.

A document, “Response of UTHSCSA Faculty Senate Regarding the Proposed Strategic Plan” was passed unanimously by the Senate and sent to the VP for Academic Administration. It commented on both the process “top down” and product. Basically:

The UTHSCSA Faculty Senate is anxious to provide whatever support it can as the Administration strives to create a Strategic Plan that is useful and well-respected by all at the UTHSCSA, as well as by the University of Texas System.

“Top-down” planning misses areas of concern to both the Administration and the Faculty; perceived by the Faculty as a fragmented wish-list of the Administration and not an actual strategic plan.

Need for each school to provide school-specific strategic plans that funnel into and support the institutional plan.

Resources/funds to support the plan unclear; priorities need to be set.

Format of plan unconventional; No section focused solely on faculty issues.

Ambiguous Objectives, vague language.

Quantitatively specific Strategies should be used only if appropriate justification can be documented.

Outcome Measures should provide precise descriptions of how outcomes are to be measured; clearly stated assignments of accountability.

The Senate Chair, Chair Elect and Past Chair met with the VP for Academic Administration and Assistant VP. Basically, the Deans left the faculty out of the loop. A plan for getting faculty involvement was developed and will be implemented this month starting with our March 8 th Senate meeting.

To-do list items and include them in your campus reports:

How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HoOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that.

Central e-mail servers are backed up each night and backup tapes are maintained for two weeks. These procedures are in place for emergency restoration of e-mail services and do not meet record retention standards.

data backup policy Policy 5.8.23 Creating a backup of data on magnetic tape, CD ROM, or other removable media that can be safely stored in another location is essential to the data recovery operation in the event of loss of the computer system or media on which the data resides. A clear, defined and documented backup strategy is an industry best practice, and each department should ensure that routine data backup processes and procedures are in place whether using central services or local resources.

Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”?

See above information in the report

What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. This policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy?

1.3.11 SELECTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS The Board endorses the principle of reasonable faculty and student consultation in the selection of administrative officers of the Health Science Center and the primary operating units, and expects the President, as he or she deems appropriate, to consult in the selection process with the representatives of the faculty and student body. However, the President is responsible for executing the duties of the office and consequently shall not be bound by nominations to administrative positions by campus selection committees.

UT M.D. Anderson

No representative present to provide a report.

UT Health Center, Tyler
(Report provided by Vijay Boggaram, Ph.D.)

Data backup: According to our Handbook of Operating procedures (HOP), all employees are required to backup data from desktop and laptop computers. In the research departments, individuals are responsible for daily backups. A net work server dedicated for backup is available. PCs can be programmed for automatic backup to the server on a daily basis.

Strategic plan and Compacts: The Fiscal year 04-07 Strategic Plan for the University of Texas Health Center at Tyler was developed through the efforts of the Health Center Employees (Administrators, Faculty and Staff), UT System Administrators and local community leaders (Business and Political leaders). The process involved review of key environmental factors, overall state of the Health Center, the growth of the East Texas Market, and the market potential of the core Health Center Programs. The key priorities set forth in the plan were developed following an assessment and inventory of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the Health Center. Aspects of the Strategic Plan relevant for research are discussed with faculty on a regular basis for feedback and recommendations. Dr. Steven Idell, Vice President for Research and Professor of Medicine served as a member of the Committee that developed the ‘Compacts’.

Policy on search committees for upper-level administrators: As of now there is no policy that requires representation of faculty on search committees for upper-level administrators. In the past, faculty have been represented on such search committees. The Research Faculty Assembly will initiate discussions with the administration to consider including faculty representation in search committees for upper-level administrators.

**UTA | UT | UTB | UTD | UTEP | UTPA | UTPB | UTSA | UTT

UT Arlington
(Report provided by Daniel Formanowicz)

1) QEP and SACS Reaffirmation

The QEP Steering Committee was formed late in the fall semester and consists of 19 members, one from each college or school, and one each from the Faculty Senate, the Graduate School, the Library, Academic Affairs, the Honors College, the Advising Office, and one student. The chair of the committee is a faculty member who is currently serving as an intern in the Provost’s Office. The Steering committee has been divided into three Working Groups (Research, Process, and Assessment). The basis of the QEP is Active Learning

The committee issued a cover memo and Request for Preproposals (http://sacs.uta.edu/qep/dsp_ref.htm) based on active learning on the 16 th of Feb. and preproposals are due on 3 March. The committee will review the preproposals and select exemplars to be developed as the basis for the QEP. Total available funding has not been determined but the Provost has pledged to do everything possible to support the implementation of the exemplars.

2) Branding Initiative

The university revealed its new Logo and advertising campaign in a grand ceremony on 15 Feb., 2006. The ceremony was held in two large ballrooms at the University Center and was filled to capacity within 15 minutes of the door opening (approx. 2,000 attendees) and as many as another 1,000 students, faculty and staff were turned away. The University also completed a web survey to determine whether or not to change UTA’s mascot and 65% of those voting favored changing mascots. There will be a university and student sponsored contest to determine the new mascot.

3) Faculty Senate Business

The senate held its first meeting of 2006 on 15 Feb. It was primarily an organizational meeting in which we set up committees but we also heard from President Spaniolo whose comments focused on the branding initiative and from Provost Dunn who reported on the results of the University Promotion and Tenure Committee. We also received a progress report from the Chair of the QEP Steering Committee. On the senate’s agenda for the coming year is consideration of reorganization of our standing committees, continuing examination of our faculty retention problems, and evaluation of the Student Evaluation of Faculty Teaching instrument, as well as issues related to the QEP and SACS.

4) UTA/UTD and UTA/UNTHSC Joint Seed Grant Programs

We discussed these two collaborative seed grant programs at the December, 2005 FAC meeting. For the UTA/UNTHSC program, in 2006 there were 14 proposals submitted, 4 of which were funded. This was the second year for this particular program, in 2005 there were 15 proposals and 5 of those were funded. For the UTA/UTD program, there were a total of 31 joint proposals submitted and they are currently being reviewed. I will report on the funding of those proposals at the next FAC meeting.

5) Homework

a) Server administrators are responsible for backing up their servers and beyond that any backing up is the responsibility of the individual user.

b) A Strategic Plan (http://www.uta.edu/president/strategicplanning/) has been developed and is being implemented. It has been passed down to the department level at this point and chairs have been asked to begin the process of merging the plan into departmental plans. Faculty were involved in a series of ‘strategic conversations’ and several members of the Faculty Senate were involved in drafting a series of planning priorities on which the plan was based. These priorities were passed onto the Deans who then developed the Strategic Plan at a retreat. The Dean’s managed to weaken and generalize the plan to the point where it does not have much substance. The compact is currently being revised by the administration and President Spaniolo has indicated that a draft will be forthcoming to the Senate for our comments. In both cases the processes have been primarily ‘top down’.

c) UTA does not have a written policy on inclusion of faculty representatives on search committees for upper administrators included in its HOP.

UT Austin
(Report provided by Alba Ortiz)

Presidential transition William Powers, Jr. has completed his first month as President of UT Austin. He met with the Faculty Council and the Graduate Assembly on his first day in office to reinforce his commitment to shared governance.

Task Force on Curricular Reform We are engaged in a review of the Task Force on Curricular Reform. The report contains 5 key recommendations: (a) that students take a specially designed course each of their first two years (Signature courses) designed to expose them to broad issues that transcend individual disciplines and that introduce them to the outstanding faculty and resources of the University; (b) that the core curriculum be organized into clusters or thematic strands to provide undergraduate students a more coherent, integrated experience; (c) to establish university-wide advising to help students "find their way"; (d) to establish a new “University College” as a single portal for entering freshmen and to give a specific administrative unit responsibility for the core curriculum and the undergraduate experience; and (e) to generate additional financial resources to support the core curriculum and, in general, undergraduate education. The plan is to have broad-based discussion and debate this spring and to present specific recommendations for consideration to the Faculty Council in the Fall.

Course Instructor Surveys At its November, 2006 meeting, The Faculty Council approved a resolution that would retain the numerical evaluation data as the official University evaluation but reinstate “ownership” of student written comments to the faculty member as was the case when the Course Instructor Survey (CIS) was first adopted in November, 1990. The resolution had four components: (a) The official University CIS will consist of only objective questions. (b) Student written comments will be elicited via procedures that make them not subject to potential problems associated with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). (c) When a faculty member submits student comments (with the FERPA waiver) from a class (or classes) for purposes of promotion, etc., the faculty member must submit all written comments received from that class - not just selected ones, recognizing that in doing so the documents will then become official records and may be subject to open records act. (d) The University must inform faculty in writing of their rights and obligations with respect to CIS evaluations, including the storage, handling, and retention of past and future student written comments relating to FERPA law, the open records act, records retention regulations, and any other applicable legal requirements, and the University should continue to explore alternative means of soliciting student input, and educate faculty about alternative CIS evaluation tools available now and in the future.

Roundup Assignment

We do not need to have a university wide policy specific to backing up individual desktop/laptop computers.

The provost oversees the strategic planning process for the colleges and schools. Each Dean is provided an array of college specific statistical data and management information by the Office of Institutional Studies and the Provost's Budget Officer and this information serves as the initial basis for discussion. On a two-year cycle, the Provost, the Dean, and their respective staffs, meet in the Spring to conduct an exhaustive review and assessment of the college. This process results in a written agreement between the Provost's Office and the individual colleges and schools (Compact) that defines the issues, goals and objectives, plans and strategies, resources available, and specific activities to be undertaken for the coming year. The Compacts are tailored to the individual needs and aspirations of the colleges and schools and recognize both the differences and similarities among the colleges and schools. Taken together, the Compacts represent a comprehensive plan for the University characterized by greater departmental and college autonomy, annual accountability, 12-month budgets, and detailed management, statistical, and financial data. Faculty are involved at the college and school level, but nature and level of involvement varies by unit.

We have written requirements for faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators. The following are the key provisions for consultation in the selection of certain key administrative officials:

The following procedures for faculty consultation in the selection of certain key administrative officials for the University shall be followed except in circumstances, when, in the opinion of the chief administrative officer, the best interests of the University can be more effectively served by some other method of consultation.

The composition of consultative committees shall be as follows:

The Executive Vice President and Provost. Nine voting members of the General Faculty, six elected by the faculty by the Hare System and three, not including administrative officials, appointed by the President; three students appointed by the President from a panel of not less than five nor more than ten selected in a manner to be determined by the Students' Association; and such other persons as the President may deem appropriate. No more than two of the elected members of the committee shall be from any one school or college.

The Vice President and Dean of Graduate Studies. Nine members of the Graduate Faculty, six elected by members of the Graduate Studies Committees by the Hare System and three, not including administrative officials, appointed by the President; three graduate students appointed by the President from a panel of not less than five nor more than ten selected in a manner to be determined by the Students' Association; and such other persons as the President may deem appropriate. No more than two of the elected members of the committee shall be from any one school or college.

Deans of Established Schools and Colleges. Five voting members of the faculty of the school or college for which a dean is being sought, elected by that faculty by the Hare System, and two voting members of the General Faculty, not including administrative officials, appointed by the President; three students appointed by the President from a panel of not less than five nor more than ten names selected by the student council for that school or college; and such other persons as the President may deem appropriate.

Deans of New Schools and Colleges. Nine voting members of the General Faculty, six elected by the faculty by the Hare System and three, not including administrative officials, appointed by the President; three students appointed by the President from a panel of not less than five nor more than ten names selected in a manner determined by the Students' Association; and such other persons as the President may deem appropriate. No more than two of the elected members of the committee shall be from any one school or college.

UT Brownsville
(Report provided by David Pearson)

Tuition and Fee Policy:

Each UT System component is required to develop a tuition and fee policy for the 2007-2008 time period, and this has been a major concern on our campus since the December 2005 meeting of the FAC.

Our VPAA assembled a 20-member committee of faculty, students, and staff to develop the policy. Public hearings were held to gather campus input, and presentations were made to the Academic Senate, Staff Senate, and SGA. The committee determined that new monies were necessary to accommodate the anticipated 4% enrollment growth during 2007-2008. Specifically, additional funding was required for the following:

33 new faculty lines.

New programs, including new doctoral programs.

Additional support staff.

Utility increases.

Scholarship set-asides.

In 2006, statutory tuition was set at $50.00 per semester credit hour. It will rise to $52.00 in 2007 and to $54.00 in 2008. In 2006, designated tuition at UTB/TSC was $44.00 per semester credit hour. It will rise to $56.00 in 2007 and to $62.00 in 2008. In total, in 2006 a student at UTB/TSC paid a combined statutory/designated tuition of $94.00 per semester credit hour. In 2008 this figure will rise to $116.00.

Compulsory Fees for new library, advising, computer use, student services, and athletic fees will rise from $47.00 to $76.00 per semester. Incidental fees will increase in the areas of library print, nursing exam, and various lab fees. Our graduate tuition differential will increase from $19.00 to $30.00 per semester credit hour, in order to add eleven graduate assistantships.

Even with these increases, UTB/TSC will still have the lowest tuition of any UT component.

Doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction :

On Thursday, January 26, 2006, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board gave approval for UTB/TSC to move forward with its plans to implement a doctorate in curriculum and instruction, with an emphasis in bilingual education.

The approval allows the university to present a full doctoral proposal to the UT Board of Regents in either this spring or summer. If this is done, and if the regents approve the proposal, it would then go before the Coordinating Board for final approval. If final approval is given, the university could offer the new doctoral program as early as the fall of 2007.

Certified Public Management Program

UTB/TSC will soon be participating in a Certified Public Management Program. The program is operated by Texas State University’s William P. Hobby Center for Public Service, designated by the Governor to deliver the program throughout Texas, and will be offered in cooperation with UTB/TSC. Similar CPM programs are offered in twenty-five other states.

The CPM program is designed for present and future leaders in public service, and is intended to enhance the skills and abilities necessary to deal with real-world problems and situations. The program consists of seven separate tracks: Public Personnel Administration, Managing for Quality, Organizational Communication, Public Finance and Budgeting, Productivity and Program Evaluation, Information Systems for Managers, and Applied Projects Practicum. Courses are taught by both academic and practitioner faculty.

Participants who complete the program are eligible for membership in the Texas Society of Certified Public Managers.

Other Items

A memorandum of agreement has been signed between UTB/TSC and Goddard Space Center, some of whose members will come to our campus as adjunct professors.

The George Truan Sculpture Garden, named after former art professor George Truan, is now under construction across the street from to the Barnes and Noble Bookstore. 

UTB/TSC will be partnering with Pizza Hut, which will be a “campus franchise” decorated with UTB/TSC items and paraphernalia. Among other activities, Pizza Hut will hold a “UTB Day,” where profits go to the university scholarships, and laptop computer giveaways.

The Winter Commencement was held on the Student Union Lawn on Saturday, December 17, and included 1,155 degree candidates.

Homework Questions

How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HOOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that.

We have a Computer Use Resource Policy, (HOOP 10.2.14), but there is no specific mention of requirements for backups or who is formally responsible. In practice, individual users are responsible for backing up files.

Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”?

We have several areas of activity either completed or currently underway. All have been “top down” processes with substantial faculty representation.

UTB/TSC Compact with UT System

In our Compact, UTB/TSC has identified five short-term priorities:

Develop academic programs across disciplines.

Improve student support services and campus life programs to increase student success.

Maintain momentum in developing facilities.

Strengthen efforts in civic engagement and economic development.

Analyze institution for organizational efficiency and productivity.

Our Compact also lists f ive long-term priorities:

 

Sustain and support enrollment growth at a level at least consistent with the population growth in the region.

Strengthen and develop quality programs that attract top students and faculty.

Sustain and strengthen our activities in support of economic development.

Maintain momentum for the expansion of sponsored programs and institutional advancement.

Expand outreach programs and distributed education.

UTB/TSC Futures Commission : The Futures Commission was a group of community leaders and UTB/TSC representatives charged with helping the University develop goals and priorities through 2020. During fall 2004 and spring 2005, six task forces of thirty people each addressed:

the kind of academic programs that should be developed.

aspects of student life that should be expanded.

how recent property acquisitions should be integrated into the overall campus plan.

how continued growth should be financed.

how to increase external support for scholarships and research.

how expansion of workforce training and continuing education programs should occur.

Ampersand Agency

UTB/TSC has retained the Ampersand Agency of Austin to conduct Strategic Marketing Plan workshops on campus with the aim of developing a strategic marketing and communications plan. The intention is to assess where we are today in terms of assets, programs, services, and degree plans; where we would like to be in the year 2020; and how we might best market ourselves in order to successfully effect this transition.

Ampersand has involved both faculty and staff in developing marketing plans for:

admission and recruitment

the university website

arts and entertainment

student affairs/student life

athletics/sports

news and information

fundraising/endowment

Task Force on Student Success : A Task Force on Student Success was established by our VPAA. Twenty-one subcommittees were established, including administrators, faculty, staff, and students, to address twenty-one criteria of success:

A UTB/TSC student will attain personal educational goals.

A UTB/TSC student who completes requirements for a certificate or a degree will receive documentation of that accomplishment.

A UTB/TSC student will graduate as quickly as possible.

A UTB/TSC student will qualify for entrance to a desired program, if requirements exist.

A UTB/TSC student will persist, despite personal barriers.

A UTB/TSC student will persist, despite institutional barriers.

A UTB/TSC student with less than a 4.0 in the freshman and sophomore years will increase the GPA in upper division courses.

A UTB/TSC student will be successful in fulfilling learning outcomes of each course attempted.

A UTB/TSC student will successfully complete courses on the first attempt.

A UTB/TSC student will attain professional certification in the chosen academic field, if applicable.

A UTB/TSC student who seeks to pursue a graduate degree will be successful in admission.

A UTB/TSC student who enters a graduate program will graduate.

A UTB/TSC graduate student will pass requirements for professional certification, if applicable.

A UTB/TSC student will attain employment in a career that rewards education.

A UTB/TSC graduate’s preparation will result in employer satisfaction.

A UTB/TSC student who wishes to transfer to another institution will be successful as a student in “good standing.”

A UTB/TSC student who wishes to transfer to another institution ultimately will graduate.

A UTB/TSC student will show evidence of a civic engagement experience.

A UTB/TSC student will seek to broaden knowledge and understanding of others’ cultures.

A UTB/TSC student will be the recipient of a “value-added” educational experience.

A UTB/TSC student will appreciate knowledge through life-long learning.

What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. This policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy?

We have specific HOOP policies for selection of chairs and academic deans. There is no such policy for higher-level administrators. In practice, members are appointed to such committees, and there is generally substantial faculty representation.

UT Dallas
(Report provided by Simeon Ntafos)

Homework

Backups : Backups for faculty/staff desktops, laptops are the responsibility of the individual computer user.

Strategic Planning : UTD’s Strategic Plan was formulated after President Daniel accepted the position at UTD. An initial committee chaired by the Speaker and made up with all the Deans and two individuals from each School met with President Daniel in Spring 05, and at that meeting, President Daniel charged the Speaker and the Provost to produce a document by September 05. The Speaker, thereafter, established 21 committees that dealt with everything from mixed land use, budget, Greek life, technology transfer, beautification, infrastructure, curriculum, graduate studies, diversity, research, community outreach, etc. On each of their committees, there was at least one Senator (often 2 or 3 Senators) and two students. An additional committee was established consisting of only Senators that was charged with defining the core values of the University. These 22 committees met during the Spring and Summer of 05 and produced three page summary reports. At the same time, each school, business affairs, and student affairs produced their own strategic plans. A writing committee was created to adapt these documents into a unified Strategic Plan. This committee was co-chaired by the Speaker and the Provost and had two deans, three faculty members, and two senior administrators on it. The writing committee asked the Schools to revise their plans around three distinct school initiatives in order to better focus the plans. From July through September, the writing committee crafted a new mission statement for the University as well as goals and metrics. On September 29, 2005, the Speaker presented President Daniel with version 7 of the Strategic Plan. From October to January 31, the Plan went through numerous revisions. The Senate was presented with one of those revisions in January. The President’s Cabinet and the Deans were also shown that version. Based upon the Senate, the Cabinet, UT System, and the writing committee’s feedback, the Plan underwent further revision. Version 27 is currently on the web for public comment. The Senate unanimously endorsed the Strategic Plan at its February meeting. During the first week of March, the plan will be revised one more time. The official version will be released at the President’s investiture on March 29, 2006.

Faculty representation in search committees for upper-level administrators : A policy was passed by the Senate three years ago but has not been forwarded for official implementation (initially due to disagreements over some of the language in the policy, then due to administrative turnovers). The Provost feels that the current draft needs improve governance agenda in April. Meanwhile, UTD has had good faculty and student representation in such committees. 

Academic Governance News : On 2/1/2006, Robert Nelsen was appointed Associate Provost charged with leading the university through the SACS accreditation process. Robert resigned as Speaker of the Faculty effective 2/1/06; elected for the remainder of the 2005-06 Academic Governance term were Simeon Ntafos (Speaker) and Jim Bartlett (Secretary). The latest “hot” issue is a new Latin Honors policy.

UT El Paso
(Report provided by Gregory Rocha)

SACS and the QEP: We are immersed in the SACS process generally and the QEP in particular. The finishing touches on the QEP have been made and it will soon be sent onward for review. The theme of our QEP is Student Success in the Middle Years and stresses two themes: academic and career advising and curriculum review and renewal. Both were studied closely and reported on by two faculty senate ad hoc committees. The recommendations of the committees form the basis for what UTEP proposes to do in these areas in the upcoming years. For example, the curriculum committee noted that reviews in this area are neither systematic nor coordinated across the campus. They recommended that the Senate create a standing curriculum review committee to oversee a rolling review of curricula. Likewise, the advising committee recommended the formation of a standing Senate committee to work in the area of advising. That also is in the QEP. The onsite visit by the SACS reviewers will be April 18-20, and plans are underway to publicize that to students, staff, administrators and the faculty.

Graduate School : At the last meeting of the Senate, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Pablo Arenaz, addressed the Senators about the Administration’s plans to restructure the Graduate School. Currently, there is no Dean because the past occupant, Charles Ambler, resigned to return to his duties in the Department of History. Provost, Dr. Richard Jarvis has since taken certain responsibilities, such as control over money for assistantships, away from the Graduate School and has given them to the academic deans. He will continue to give other responsibilities to them. Most importantly for the Senate, the Graduate Council, the faculty’s policymaking body in this area, will fall under the purview of the Senate. The Council was originally organized as an autonomous committee.

Faculty Evaluations of Administrators : Faculty members were recently notified that they are now able to evaluate administrators. Those who can evaluate are: all full time faculty members who are not administrators and all instructors and lecturers who are classified as full time. They will evaluate their department chair, their college dean, and the provost. Evaluation can be done either online or by hard copy. Each evaluation includes two sections: one with bubbled in responses and the other with written comments. Results will be given to the person evaluated and their administrative superior. A past concern has been the lack of feedback from the administrator evaluated to the faculty. We currently are working on some form of accountability.

To Do List

Backing up desktop and laptop computers: It is the duty of the individual user to back up whatever files they want to have backed up. That is done by connecting to a server and performing the operation. Should the computer user need help they would have to call PC Support to get assistance.

Strategic Plans and Compacts: Because UTEP is undergoing its SACS review, the development of strategic plans and compacts has been an ongoing project for well over a year. The responsibility for completing them has rested with the academic deans, who have overseen the creation of plans and compacts by the departments of their colleges. That information was given to the Provost’s office and a campus strategic plan and compact was developed.

Search Committees for Upper Administrators: Faculty members are included in searches for upper administrators, and the procedure is to go through the Senate President for names. No procedure is codified, but I will work on getting that done.

UT – Pan Am
(Report provided by Ala Qubbaj)

Provost and VPAA Dr. Rodolfo Arevalo has accepted the Presidency of Eastern Washington University effective April 1 st. An interim Provost has been named and a search committee will be appointed soon by President Cárdenas to conduct a national search. The University is in the process of hiring a search firm for that purpose. The President wants to have a new Provost in office by September 1 st.

Faculty Sponsored Evaluation of Administrators: the Faculty Senate is currently administering an evaluation of administrators (traditionally done every three years). In this evaluation, each full-time faculty member has been requested to evaluate the President, and his or her respective Dean. The Provost is not included in this cycle as he his leaving UTPA but usually the Provost is evaluated as well! The President has given us the Okay to go for it and was very supportive of that.

Graduation rates continue to be one of our President’s highest priorities. The records indicate substantial improvement in our four-year graduation rates (from 5.9 percent in 2000 to 10.2 percent in 2004, almost doubled).

Our Campus hosted the 3 rd Minority Serving Institutions Research Partnerships Conference Feb 2-4, held for the first time at a Hispanic Serving Institution. It was a successful conference which brought to our campus more than 1,000 participants from small business, academia, corporations and government.

We are drafting a faculty code of conduct, for the fist time ever at UTPA. If you have one in place at your component, we would be interested to get a copy of that.

 

TO DO LIST

How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HoOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that?

Answer: There is no uniform answer. Every one of the things mentioned is done in one or more departments at UTPA. The IT division is currently looking at offering a campus solution and will be providing guidelines for people who do their own in the next few months.

Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”?

Answer: Under the direction of President Cárdenas, the University has been engaged in “outcome directed planning” since the Summer of 2005. At that time, a retreat of over 60 university academic and administrative leaders resulted in the University’s strategic plan or “map” for 2010. That map guided the President and Vice Presidents in the development of divisional ODP maps in late Fall 2005. The divisional ODP maps will be used by academic and administrative colleges and departments as they create their own ODP maps in Spring 2006.

What is faculty involvement? Faculty were included in the upper level administrative retreat in August 2005 that developed the 6 goals for the university. Faculty from each college are also represented on the Institutional Planning and Assessment Committee (IPAC), which developed the objectives and strategies for the six goals. Faculty are included in the 21 teams of facilitators who were trained and are conducting retreats at the unit level. Faculty were involved in the development of the ODP map for the Division of Academic Affairs, and in the development of ODP maps for each of the six colleges.

Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”? The answer is “both”. The ODP maps are being developed from the top-down, with the institutional map with the University’s 6 goals as reference for the development of all plans at lower levels. However, once all plans are developed, senior administrators will review lower level plans for synergies, strategies, new ideas developed at lower levels that can be integrated into upper level plans.

What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. This policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy?

Answer: We do have a policy for Dean Searches that requires faculty representation from all departments in the college. However, there is no written Policy on VP searches, nevertheless the President has requested the Faculty Senate to make nominations for appointments to the prospective VPAA/Provost search committee, which will include faculty representation from all colleges and will be chaired by faculty.

UT Permian Basin
(Report provided by Doug Hale)

Business: In a bit of an unusual move, the Faculty Senate passed a resolution supporting a dean and reprimanding an (unknown) faculty member who wrote and circulated via email a rather scurrilous note concerning the dean. The Senate has also approved our first honors program, a Director has been appointed, and it is anticipated the program will begin in the fall 2006 semester. Happenings: The School of Business is happy to announce that it has been accredited by AACSB. We have announced the move of our athletics programs from NAIA to NCAA Division 2 status beginning with the fall of 2006. The men’s basketball team made it into the top 25 for the first time ever and our swimmers continue to clean everybody’s clock. More than 20 team members have recorded times qualifying them for competition in the national tournament, many in several events. UTPB is in the early planning process for the construction and operation of a nuclear test reactor to be located in nearby Andrews County. Three million dollars in local funding has been raised to cover the costs of the preliminary design work. Four other UT System components will join with UTPB in using the facility (UT Austin, UTA, UTD, and UTEP). Homework: How are desktop/laptop computers backed up on your campus. Each HOP (HoOP?) should have details describing the requirements for backups. Some possible answers for who performs the backups include (a) the individual computer user, (b) the central IT department (c) the server administrator for the computer on which all data files reside, (d) the departmental IT or admin, (e) etc. If the answers are different for different schools or departments, please indicate that. There is no policy enforcing regular backups. However, the Information Resources Division provides central backup of any desktop if the owner requests it. This is accomplished by allocating space on a central server and then making that space a virtual disk on the desktop. There is an IRD policy that says users should back up data files on a regular basis, though no specific mechanism is suggested. Each campus should be deep in the process of developing strategic plans and compacts. Is the strategic plan on your campus being developed by a recognized, legitimate process (including e.g., an internal and external environmental analysis, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats assessment). Or, is it being developed by a less legitimate process which might result in more of a wish list than a strategic plan? For both strategic plan and compact, what is faculty involvement? Are the processes “top down” or “bottom up”? The University has a Budget and Planning Committee. This committee makes budgetary and strategic planning recommendations, both on process and substance. This committee has been the leader in the compact and strategic planning processes. It is at the moment engaged in revision of the current compact for next year and will embark on the strategic plan within the month. Membership is as follows: Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs (chair), Business Affairs, and Student Affairs Directors of Accounting, Human Resources, Information Resources, Institutional Planning, and Physical Plant One academic department chair and one dean Three faculty members Presidents of the Faculty and Student Senates The initial compact was drafted by the upper level administration and reviewed by the campus community and, in particular, the B & P Committee. Open discussions were held to gather faculty, student, and staff input. Once the University’s compact with the UT System was agreed upon, each department in Academic Affairs was asked to formulate its own compact with the University. These compacts were reviewed by the B & P committee and feedback given to the various units. Since then revisions of the compact have originated with the B & P Committee and/or arisen from unit compacts. An external committee of 30 prominent area persons has just completed a year long study which resulted in the identification of several critical strategic initiatives for UTPB. The actual impact of their findings on the University’s strategic planning is yet to be seen. However, as a former UTPB President often said, “If you keep asking them for advice, once in a while you have to take some of it.” All members of the B & P Committee have been supplied with copies of the draft report. What is the status of the written policy on your campus to require faculty representation on search committees for upper administrators? In last October’s FAC meeting we passed the following resolution: “ Search Policy. Every institution shall have in their Handbook of Operating Procedures a policy for filling upper-level administrative positions. Thi s policy must be developed by the faculty governance body and the administration. The search policy should describe the size, composition, and process by which members are nominated and appointed to such committees.” Is your campus implementing this policy? This policy has not been developed yet. The current Handbook contains this statement regarding appointment of higher level administrators: In seeking to fill vacant administrative positions within The University, the President may choose to use campus search committees to recommend persons for appointment to such positions. In no case, however, will the President be bound by any such recommendations. The Regents’ Rules seem to demand the last sentence appear.

UT San Antonio
(Report provided by Mansour El-Kikhia)

General Report 

The new bio-medical-engineering building is now complete. It has 70 labs. Parking crunch still plagues UTSA. Expansion of the existing student center and the new recreation facility will also begin next month. Phase II of Chaparral Village student residence accommodations will also begin in May. A third project, the expansion of the University Recreation Center, will also begin in June.

UTSA is still $600,000 sq ft short and is looking for innovative ways to deal with the rapid need in office space.

No new faculty hiring has taken place but anticipate 40 new faculty hires for next year.

The Senate now working on the following issues:

Updating section 2 (segment dealing with faculty) of the HOP

Changing the student grading system to include pluses and minuses

Travel funds for attending conferences. Target $1200 at minimum per academic year.

Changing the faculty evaluation IDEA with a homespun version

Much like other UT campuses, UTSA is focused on emerging and continuing challenges and opportunities associated with rapid growth.

To do:

The University has established two months ago two IT committees, and oversight committee to ensure the functioning of IT on campus, and a strategic planning committee to meet IT needs during the next five years. The Chair of the Senate is a member of both committees.

Additionally the Interim Provost has established a strategic Planning committee to review student retention and graduation. However, the committee has been entrusted for developing sub committees to evaluate all aspects of university life including issues relating to training of faculty and faculty satisfaction. Again the faculty Senate is represented on that committee.

The UTSA faculty Senate passed a resolution mandating that faculty is to be involved in all faculty and faculty/administrator hires. The President, a firm believer in faculty representation, approved the resolution and has since operated on that assumption.

UT Tyler

No representative present to give report.

ement; the issue will be on the academic

 
601 Colorado Street  ||  Austin, TX 78701-2982  ||  tel: 512/499-4200
U. T. System   ||
  Email Comments   ||   Open Records   ||   Privacy Policy   ||   Reports to the State
© 2002 U.T. System Administration