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








Travel for FAC

Academic Affairs

Advisory Council

Advisory Council



The University of Texas System Faculty Advisory Council
Ashbel Smith Hall, 200 West 7th Street, 2nd floor
Austin, TX   January 26-27, 2012

Thursday, January 26 – ASH 208

Members Present: Dan Formanowicz, Tom Ingram, Tony Sol, Alba Ortiz, Dean Neikirk, Elizabeth Heise, Bobbette Morgan, Murray Leaf,  David Cordell, Carl Lieb,
Vladik Krenovich, Linda Matthews, Dora Saavedra, Derek Catsam, Todd Richardson, Carola Wenk, Amy Jasperson, Shelly Marmion, Danita Alfred, Amer Shakil, Lori Millner, Sharon Croisant, Carol Wiggs, Richard Castriotta, Donald Molony, Rajeshwar Tekmal, Kay Oyajobi, Ed Jackson, Carol Etzel, Tim Allen, David Griffith, Amy Tvinnereim.

All members of the FAC introduced themselves.

UT Student Assembly  - Tim Allen
The FAC was asked if we could put together a group to assist students with graduate students time off.  We will send the documents that the students shared to Academic Affairs and Faculty Quality for review.

Review of November BOR Meeting –
Dan attended as the FAC representative. There were changes to Regents Rules regarding the titles at UT Brownsville.  Very little was discussed in the public part of the meeting.

The FAC discussed the issue of asking again for a Faculty Regent. Faculty support having a representative, but the process for selecting the representative is the challenge.

The taskforce on Post Tenure Review has modified the revisions to RR 31102 that include many of the issues raised at the Sept FAC meeting in the resolutions. Copies of the revised proposed policy were distributed for the FAC to review.

Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa
There is a BOR meeting today.

David Daniel is chairing the search committee for the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

The meeting the Chancellor had with President Obama included discussions on student debt, while focusing on excellence in education.

There is good progress on the framework. The framework has resulted in several working groups – lowering student debt lead by Scott Kelly, Student advising and using technology in advising led by Pedro Reyes, and a group about student evaluation of faculty led by Pedro Reyes.

How can we augment the office of Federal Relations in Washington DC. How do we develop more liaisons with the federal agencies, NIH, NSF, DoE etc. We will increase the video conferences to Washington.

Scival and Academic Analytics is a bibliographic search looks for books published and articles published and citations. They take into consideration the impact factor of the journals. These are more comprehensive than other citation indexes. These are being considered to help with workload documentation.

Is it possible for System to look at the past decade for tuition per FTE, state appropriations, considering inflation rates, removing TRB’s etc. Then compare the campus’ to the peers?

We continue to update the post tenure review policy for the Feb BOR.

Unwinding the partnership for UT Brownsville and Texas Southmost College is a top priority.

Q – Has anyone looked at the students who attend CC and what the impact has been on the 3rd and 4th year of education of these students?
            A – Not sure anyone has looked at that yet.

Q- General point – Dan, Tim and Murray have visited UTB and it is a gem of a campus with a – How often do you get to start over a campus? It will take the chancellors full attention over the next few months.

Q- What is the vision for developing a medical school in the RGV and Austin?
A – the campus in Austin will be a part of UT Austin. The community is building consensus for the UT Austin medical school. Is there support for raising the hospital taxing district tax rate? Philanthropy? Other funding?

We will not move forward with the Austin med school at the expense of South Texas. The revenue streams are going to be different because there are different levels of philanthropy and taxing base.   No one entity can solve the funding by themselves and we don’t want to do anything to impact the other schools.

Q – Have we overcorrected in terms of student debt in the discussion?  The students need to have skin in the game. The students need responsibility for their role in education.
A – The public is emphasizing student debt. The dashboard will help educate the public about the debt issue and the value of UT. Reliable metrics will help with both the public and legislature. We need to manage the perceptions of the public regarding the relationship of debt and tuition.

Q- Another issue is to shorten the time to graduation by having undergraduate education prepare students for medical professional programs. Is this a move to eliminate the science depts. at the HSC’s?
            A – Dr. Tebow at Mass General is exploring how can we update the medical education system? Can the UT System produce a undergrad and medical program in 6 years?  This is not a move to eliminate the science depts.

Q – Post tenure review can you comment on the resolutions passed at the previous meeting?
            A- We want to categorize the faculty as doing work as more than satisfactory. We support peer review. The implementation is up to the individual campus’. The 2 unsatisfactory reviews can trigger remediation before the 6 year comprehensive review.  Faculty develop is included in the proposed language.

Q – The use of “may” rather than shall can cause issues on campus’ where the campus leadership takes the minimum.
            A- If the campus templates can have the support of system then the templates will have more support on campus’.
Kenneth Shine, Executive Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs
UT system is unique with a system wide academy of health professions. 12 members are elected annually. Each campus with the exception of HSC Tyler has a campus academy. The Health campus’ have awards for the excellence for teaching 40 awards per year. The Regents will have an award dinner for the new members of the academy and the winners of the outstanding teaching awards. The winners can elect to have the award given to the program rather than take it personally.

The STARS program has focused on persons who were within 5 years of election to national academies. The rising STARS portion has been introduced for younger scholars.  The awards can go to persons eligible for the national academies, leaders in translational research or for outstanding teachers.

The faculty at the Health campus’ thank the board and Dr. Shine for getting the awards for the health campus’.

The Cyberinfastructure group determined that connecting each campus with 10 Gigabite so they can participate with the national network. All will be at 10 Gigabite by June

Pilot project for data storage for joint research. The data is redundantly stored at UT Arlington and the TAC. This starts on Feb 15.

Price Waterhouse is going to do a roadmap plan for all IT needs at all of the campus’ in the next 6 months. They will visit each campus in Feb and March and meet with representatives of the faculty. The CIO’s will coordinate.

Q- We need to make sure that we have policies in place to make sure that the faculty have control of their own data.

  1. The consultants will also recommend how the system will be governed.

Q – Are the consultants going to consider how we can collaborate with other systems? 
            A – Yes the consultants will look at working on many different large databases.

There will be a RFP on Feb 15 for 2 system-wide pilot projects for faculty to learn how to compete in innovation. The process’ for developing an idea into a product. There will be courses and seed money for developing the ideas.

Transformation in medical education – begins with undergraduate education for medical education. This program will take students in 6 years from HS to medical degrees.

There is a new initiative for systems engineering for health. The program involves faculty from the academic and health campus’. The idea is to improve the care at the hospitals and make the operations more efficient.

There is a system conflict of interest committee. Made up of the chairs of the campus conflict of interest committees. This is for highly placed individuals at campus’ who need their conflict of interests and looking at their conflict of interest at the campus level.  Contact Ken Shine or Barry Bergdorf if there is a case that needs to be reviewed.

Q – Collaborations with medical data is a challenge for academic institutions to comply with HEPA. Will there be help
            A- Yes If the system is going to work we have to have a plan for handling HEPA security.

Report on student evaluations of faculty teaching taskforce
Dan, Ed, Tim and Alba are on the Taskforce for Student Evaluation of Teaching. There has been one meeting so far there will be another meeting soon. Tim co-chairs it with the rep from the Student Council.
Goals – need to bring student evaluation of faculty to a point where they can be used as part of the evaluation of faculty for promotion, tenure and raises.
Need to motivate students to participate so that the sample is representative.

How do we as a system evaluate the faculty on a course-by-course basis with meaningful participation and valid questions?

How do we use online systems to provide immediate feedback during the course of the semester?

How are the during in-course evaluations going to be used?

Can we hire a survey designer to develop a valid instrument? 

What is the scope that these data will be used for?

We should separate out during course feedback to the faculty regarding the course and end of course evaluation, too make things clear to the faculty, students, and administration.

We need to manage the perceptions of the public of how these data can be used and what they mean.

Committee Meetings

Friday, January 27 – ASH 208

Members Present: Dan Formanowicz, Tom Ingram, Tony Sol, Alba Ortiz, Alan Friedman, Elizabeth Heise, Bobbette Morgan, Murray Leaf, David Cordell, Carl Lieb,
Vladik Krenovich, Linda Matthews, Dora Saavedra, Derek Catsam, Todd Richardson, Carola Wenk, Amy Jasperson, Shelly Marmion, Danita Alfred, Amer Shakil, Lori Millner, Sharon Croisant, Carol Wiggs, Richard Castriotta, Donald Molony, Rajeshwar Tekmal, Kay Oyajobi, Ed Jackson, Carol Etzel, Tim Allen, David Griffith, Amy Tvinnereim.

Post Tenure Review Policy
Chancellor Cigarroa and Vice Chancellor Reyes met with the Executive Committee yesterday evening. We discussed the content of the policy and the FAC resolutions. We discussed some revisions to the policy and the development of the model campus HOP policy that will be supported by the Chancellor’s office.

Donald Molony moved to withdraw our previous recommendations on Rule 31102 labeled FAC recommendations.  Seconded by Richard Castriotta.
The model language that will be developed by the FAC if it is referred to in the RR then we can support our campus’.  The FAC must work together to develop the language to be sure that all campus’ are supported. We want to protect faculty rights as much as possible.

There was discussion about the question - does the rescinding of the recommendations weaken the role of the FAC and or does this strengthen the relationship between the faculty and the administration?

We can modify the language of the taskforce policy and insert a reference to the model policy and strengthen the RR.

There are concerns about the annual review process. Each campus develops it’s own campus policy with the faculty governess body. These issues should be addressed with the FAC developed model HOP policy.

Tom called the question. Passed by more than 2/3.

Vote for the motion to withdraw our previous recommendations on Rule 31102 labeled FAC recommendations.  24 Yes, 5 No, 1 Abstain – Motion passed.

By pursuing a unified approach we put ourselves in a position to continue to protect faculty rights.

Richard Castrioltta moved that the UT System Faculty Advisory Council endorse the unified taskforce recommendations for revising RR 31102 with amendments as discussed by the Executive Committee on January 27, 2012 with the substitution of shall with may in section 5.6 g 4, and support Chancellor Cigarroa. Donald Molony seconded.

Linda Matthews called the question. Passed by more than 2/3.

Vote by secret ballot for the motion that the UT System Faculty Advisory Council endorse the unified taskforce recommendations for revising RR 31102 with amendments as discussed by the Executive Committee on January 27, 2012 with the substitution of shall with may in section 5.6 g 4, and support Chancellor Cigarroa. 26 Yes, 3 No, 2 abstain. Motion passed.

All of the suggested changes in language were approved by OGC by the end of the day.

Michael Crosno, CEO and Chairman, MyEdu
Semester planning tools were developed to help students balance their workload. Using information about the professor to choose courses.

MyEdu is working with UT System campus’ to find a way to help students do semester planning. They are moving students off of a faculty member-based selection onto course-based selection

There was a demo of the current MyEdu and then the new version that was developed in consultation with UT System faculty and administration.

The student fills out a self-assessment of learning and studying styles.

The faculty member fills out  a content and workload assessment for each course. 

The star ratings are gone in the new version.  The recommendations are not posted until the faculty member approves the recommendation.

Grade distribution aggregated by course are on the site. Grade distribution by faculty member can be turned off by the faculty member.  There were concerns about the posting of grade distributions because of the implied endorsement of the UT System of grade shopping. Grade distribution is going to be used by employers to see the performance of recruits relative to the course grade distribution.

Sandra Woodley, Vice Chancellor for Strategic Initiatives – Report on UT System Dashboard

The Chancellor’s Framework for Excellence includes a Dashboard. The first phase is live on the System webpage.

The link at the top for Core Indicators takes a user into the dashboard. Data on Student Success, Faulty, Research and Technology Transfer, Healthcare, and Productivity.

The data can be drilled down and will automatically graphed.

If there are data that you would like available on the dashboard send an email to Sandra Woodley.

There are focus groups working to identify the data for the Topical Dashboards on Student Success, Faulty, Research and Technology Transfer, Healthcare, and Productivity.
The System is looking at SciVal ad Academic Analytics for data to add to the Research Productivity metrics.  These two services provide data for scholarly work.

SciVal already has data on MD Anderson available on the website.

There will be a Webinar with Academic Analytics

12:00 – 1:00 pm        Pedro Reyes, Executive Vice Chancellor, ad interim

Thank you for working with System on the post tenure review policy with the model policy will help with the future of the working of the FAC with the System.  The Chancellor welcomes the FAC input on policies.

The Chancellor’s Framework has working groups working on the different parts.

Q- Can information that is shared with a taskforce member be distributed to the rest of the FAC or is it confidental?  A- of course.

One thing that we are looking at is what are the best practices in peer evaluation of faculty? There is a group being set up to study the best practices.

There is a group looking at the department chairs. We know that there are some mediocre chairs. The group will work on improving the quality of the chairs.  System are looking for volunteers.

Q - UTSA has a chair development program that should be included in this.

System will be looking at the Administrations of the different campus’ to ensure that the scale is appropriate. The hope is to create efficiencies. 2 or 3 will be reviewed per year.

System is looking at ways to capture scholarship data on faculty to show a more complete picture of the faculty workload. SciVal and Academic Analytics are being looked at.

Q- What is the cost?  Has not yet been negotiated.  TAMU is paying $30-35 per faculty member for Academic Analytics.

The state is requiring the review of the existing all doctoral programs on a 6 year cycle unless it is being reviewed by a subject matter accreditation. The coordinating board changed the process for approving new doctoral programs now the System will review the programs and approved by the Regents prior to sending the proposal to the coordinating board for external review.

Q- Do you have any information on the Institute for Transformational Learning? A- Not yet. There will be someone hired to work on this.

UT Student Assembly 

We need to establish an Ad-Hoc committee on Graduate Student/Faculty Code of Conduct.  David Cordell will chair, Elizabeth Heise, Linda Matthews, David Griffith

Committee Reports

Health Affairs
Motion by the Health Affairs Committee to approve the following resolution and to seek UT System endorsement and support. Second by Murray Leaf

Given that each of the UT System Academic Health Science Centers is actively seeking to develop alternative models of care for our underserved population, the UT System Faculty Advisory Council suggests that the Academic Health Science Centers work together to plan uniform, consistent mechanisms of implementation and community health needs assessment, develop metrics for comparative effectiveness, derive both process and summative evaluation practices, and eventually, develop best practices that will serve the people of Texas, and potentially provide a model for our students and the nation in transformation of provision of care.  Furthermore, in so doing, we will develop programs that are comparable across the System and document not only the health effectiveness of a preventive model of managed care but also demonstrate the cost effectiveness of such measures.  Collaborative, cross-institutional initiatives will be especially important in the coming years since many of the institutions are in the process of applying for 1115 Medicaid waivers.

The UT System Faculty Advisory Council recommends that the Academic Health Science Centers establish a central, collaborative core to foster development of best practices for delivery of quality care for underserved populations.  We assert that by instituting partnerships with local and regional social service agencies to establish community-based clinics, it will be possible to develop models of care for indigent patients while also creating venues that will serve as training grounds for our medical, nursing, and health professions students. Doing so will address access to health care for all patients, will offer learning opportunities for our students with culturally diverse populations, will enable our faculty to model for our students ethical and professional behaviors, and will increase community health, safety, and resilience.

The FAC would like this to go the Chancellor Cigarroa and Vice Chancellor Shine and then to BOR.

Passed unanimously.

The committee wrote and distributed for signatures a Letter of Appreciation from the UT FAC to David B. Prior, PhD, Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Committee moved Bobbette Morgan seconded approved by proclamation.

Resolution #1:
To: Barry D. Burgdorf, Vice Chancellor & General Counsel
Re: OGC Model Policy: Handbook of Operating Procedures (HOP) Amendment Approval Process

It should be the policy of the UT System that faculty must have a major role in distinguishing which policies affecting faculty are addressed in the HOP and which are addressed outside of the HOP.

Policies affecting faculty that are not included in the HOP still require review by the faculty governance body.

In interpreting the OGC model policy for the HOP amendment approval process, it should be understood on all campuses that the university HOP Committee does not make academic policy and cannot override the bodies that do make academic policy.

Committee moved Murray Leaf seconded passed unanimously.

Resolution #2 – Establishment of Guidelines/Policies for Resolutions

The Governance Committee recommends that the UT FAC resolves that:
1) Each resolution reviewed by the UT FAC shall specify to whom the resolution is addressed.
2) Updates on actions taken on any UT FAC resolution or initiative shall be provided before or at the next UT FAC meeting.
3) The meeting agenda and minutes shall be distributed to UT FAC members at least one week in advance of each UT FAC meeting.
4) When significant actions or votes by the UT FAC are going to be requested during a meeting, relevant background materials shall be distributed to all members at least one week in advance of the meeting when possible.

Since the UT FAC only meets three times per year, communications of events and actions affecting the FAC that occur between meetings must be robust. How do we better enable effective communication within the UT FAC and provide effective follow-up to UT FAC member requests for information?

There are concerns that the time pressures of this meeting are causing concerns about the short notice and the ability for the body to meet the one week.  Also there were concerns that as a resolution this may limit the FAC’s ability to respond to items quickly. 

The evolution of the policy development by the FAC has led to some challenges to communication.

Resolution from the committee seconded by Linda Matthews.  Yea 13, No 5, abstain 5. Passed.

Academic Affairs and Faculty Quality
The committee distributed a document on Best Practices for Faculty Development to be sent to the campus’ by Dr. Reyes for comment.

Richard Castriotta moved that FAC should make inquiries be made to UT System to set up and fund for virtual meetings when needed. Second Linda Matthews.  Passed.

Move to adjourn Murray Leaf second Donald Molony

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