logo
FACULTY SENATE

2016 - 17 Committee Annual Reports

 

General Education Annual Report for 2016-17

 

Faculty Senate Planning and Budget Committee 2016-2017 Annual Report


Members:    Ray Hull (Health Professions), Chris Brooks (LAS Humanities), Carolyn Shaw (LAS Social Sciences), Terrence Decker (Business), Abu Asaduzzaman (Engineering), Paul Rillema (LAS Nat Sciences), Samuel Willis (University Libraries), Kirsten Johnson (Fine Arts), Janice Ewing  (Education), Bayram Yildirim      President (Chair, President, Engineering), Peer Moore-Jansen (Past President, LAS Social Sciences), Carolyn Shaw (President-Elect, LAS Social Sciences)
The committee met approximately nine times during Spring 2017 semester. The charge of the committee was to provide feedback to Faculty Senate and President’s Budget Advisory Committee on initiatives that could shape the 6% cut planned for 2018 and 2019 fiscal years. Several members of the committee attended President’s Budget Advisory Efficiency, Priority and Revenue Sub-Committee open meetings, and reported back to Faculty Senate Planning and Budget Committee. The summary of discussions at this committee were presented at President’s Budget Advisory Committee meetings and Faculty Senate meetings. In addition, major recommendations were shared with President Bardo.


Faculty Senate Executive Committee 2016-2017 Annual Report

Members:   Bayram Yildirim (President, Engineering), Carolyn Shaw (President Elect, LAS Social Sciences), Peer Moore-Jansen (Past President, LAS Social Sciences), Jeff Pulaski (Vice President, Fine Arts), Janice Ewing (Secretary, Education), Masud Chand (Business)  and Victoria Mosack (Health Professions), George Dehner  (LAS Humanities); Ex-Officio: Tony Vizzini (Provost and Senior Vice President)
The committee meets first and third Mondays of each month, 3:30pm-5:00pm, 16 times during 2016-17 academic year.  In addition, the committee met for a retreat on 8/17/201712pm-5pm to discuss priorities of Faculty Senate for the 2016-17 academic year.  During the bi-weekly meetings, the executive committee set the agendas of 16 Faculty Senate meetings and two General Faculty meetings.  The agendas can be found at http://webs.wichita.edu/?u=facultysenate&p=/a1617/.

Court of Academic Appeals Annual Report for 2016 - 2017

Faculty Members: Kirsten S. Johnson, College of Fine Arts Dan Close, College of LAS Ray Hull, College of Health Professions

Student Members: Motahareh (Sara) Bahrami Zanjani, Graduate Representative Hannah Fernandes, SGA Undergraduate Representative
Faculty Alternates: Jeff Hayton, College of LAS Rajiv Bagai, College of Engineering Frank Rokosz, College of Education
Alternate Students Members: Demetrius Sterling, SGA Undergraduate Representative Anna Turosak, Graduate Representative
Meeting Schedules and Committee Activities: The Court meets whenever an appeal case is presented to be heard by Linnea Glenmaye, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Fall 2016 and Spring 2017 semesters had little activity.
There was one case presented to the committee in late October that the Chair had a confusion on the student’s email. I thought I read it correctly from the appeal form, but I was wrong. The email never bounced back as an undeliverable address, so the chair thought the email was reaching the student. The first email notification went out on 10/28/2016, and the last on 11/29/2016. By this time, I was unable to handle convening the court, as I was having double knee-replacement surgery on Dec. 12, 2016. Rajiv Bagai, previous chair of this committee, graciously accepted the responsibility of handling this grievance.
We are going to meet Friday, April 28th to hear an appeal. In the meantime, I have been in contact with Dr. Glenmaye off and on answering questions which arise.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kirsten S. Johnson Associate Professor of Graphic Design School of Art, Design + Creative Industries April 18, 2017

Faculty Senate Executive Committee 2016-2017 Annual Report  

Members:   Bayram Yildirim (President, Engineering), Carolyn Shaw (President Elect, LAS Social Sciences), Peer Moore-Jansen (Past President, LAS Social Sciences), Jeff Pulaski (Vice President, Fine Arts), Janice Ewing (Secretary, Education), Masud Chand (Business)  and Victoria Mosack (Health Professions), George Dehner  (LAS Humanities); Ex-Officio: Tony Vizzini (Provost and Senior Vice President)

The committee meets first and third Mondays of each month, 3:30pm-5:00pm, 16 times during 2016-17 academic year.  In addition, the committee met for a retreat on 8/17/201712pm-5pm to discuss priorities of Faculty Senate for the 2016-17 academic year.  During the bi-weekly meetings, the executive committee set the agendas of 16 Faculty Senate meetings and two General Faculty meetings.  The agendas can be found at http://webs.wichita.edu/?u=facultysenate&p=/a1617/.

Faculty Affairs Committee   2016- 17

End of the academic year Report

Submitted by Dr. Pina Mozzani, Chair

Fall 2016:

Committee Members: Dr. Pina Mozzani, Carol Bett, Syed Taher, Soon Chun Lee, Atul Rai, Lorraine Madway, Deepak Gupta, Fred Besthorn, Ariel Loftus

Attendance: Because we have an itinerant committee whose members travel frequently and far, attendance at the meetings has been inconsistent.  Most of the members are there when not called away for pressing reasons.


September:
Pina Mozzani was appointed to chair the committee.
A Thursday 12:30 time was selected by the committee members.
The committee met weekly

Meeting:  The committee met weekly from October 13th throughout the fall because of the charges made to us by the senate. The Faculty Affairs Committee was charged with three tasks during 2016-17 academic year.
1. The first charge required development of a feedback survey for the Provost evaluation -- a priority charge. This project was turned into the Senate between the Fall and Spring semesters.
2. Study the UNISCOPE Model
3. Begin the process to align the Faculty Activity Report with the UNISCOPE model, adopted by the senate, to the faculty activity report. The charge was to provide a draft by Spring Break, 2017.

Task #1:
Our Process:
1. Interviewed Dr. Vizzini to ask if there was specific information that would be important to him before crafting questions.
2. Interviewed an instructor at the Kansas Leadership Center.
3. Interviewed a former WSU Dean
4. Interviewed a former WSU Vice President for Academic Affairs to discover past processes, and to search out questions that would be helpful to WSU and to the Provost
5. Met weekly to work on the project.
6. Researched and read articles the 360 evaluative process
7. Researched and compared similar processes at the following institutions:

University of Kansas
Southeastern Louisiana Stat University
Georgia State University
Western Illinois University
West Liberty University

Spring 2017:


Task #2:

While working on the Faculty Activity Form we were charged with the following charge to take precedence over task #2.

Task #3:

Study pros and cons of Department Head vs. Department Chair, and provide a recommendation to the senate for further discussion.  It would be great to have some recommendation by mid-march if possible.

While not possible to complete this task by mid-March, the committee will turn in our work by Friday. April 21.  We will be completing the final edit of our document, Thursday, April 20,

2017, at which time will return to the alignment of the Faculty Activity Report Form with the Uniscope Model.

Task #4:
While working on Charges 2 and 3, our committee was charged with another task:

“The LAS T/P committee would like to request that the Faculty Affairs committee review Policy 4.16 – the T/P calendar - and consider whether the mid December deadline for anything further to added to the secondary dossier is reasonable.   The question was raised that if a candidate was given some major award or something that ought to be considered, shouldn’t that be added to the file at any point (recognizing that it may be after deliberations have begun).”

This was sent to the senate this last week.

Charge #1 – Completed Fall of 2016.  The Senate needs to consider creating a more complete evaluation of the Provost and VP for Academic Affairs. This should be an ongoing process of development.

Charge #2 – Postponed until April due to two more pressing charges, recently assigned.
   It will probably not be complete by the end of this semester.
Charge #3 – Complete and slated to be turned in on April 21 after a final edit.
Charge #4 – Complete – turned in this week.

Pina Mozzani

 

Faculty Support Committee
Annual Report Academic Year 2016-2017

1. Current Members: 
• Rick LeCompte, Chair (Business)
• Rocio DelAguila, (LAS)
• Jeremy Patterson, (Education)
• Betty Campbell-Smith, (Health Professions)
• Gerald Scholl, (Fine Arts)
• Kyoung Lee (LAS)
• Paul Rillema (LAS)
• Meghann Kuhlmann, (Library)
• Gamal Weheba (Engineering)
• Karen Davis, (Research) serves the committee in a non-voting capacity to provide administrative support.

2. Meeting Schedule:  The committee meets four to five times during the academic year depending on application due dates and committee availability.

3. Committee Activities:  The committee oversees a fiscal year budget of approximately $120,000 to be used to fund three internal grant programs the University Research/Creative Award (URCA), the Multi-disciplinary Research Projects Award (MURPA), and the Research/Creative Award (ARC).  During FY17, the committee recommended funding 26 of these awards for a total of $113,989. The committee also reviews applications made to the Flossie E. West Foundation.  And, the committee is responsible for selecting award winners from nominations submitted for the following Excellence Awards:  Excellence for Creative Activity Award, Excellence Award for Community Research, Excellence in Research Award, Faculty Risk Taker, Young Faculty Risk Taker, and the Young Faculty Scholar.  The committee was notified that the Flossie E. West award was moved to Kansas State University, and the remaining balance of $499.59 was awarded.  All recommendations for funding are made to the Vice President of Research and Technology Transfer.  Committee members are also charged with reviewing applications for sabbatical leave and making recommendations to the Provost and Senior Vice President of Academic Affairs.

Overall in FY17, 36 grant applications, 28 nominations for faculty awards and 10 applications for sabbatical leave were reviewed and voted on by the committee.

4. Pending Issues:  All awards for Fiscal Year 2017 have been made.  The committee will meet again one more time before the end of the academic year to review and make recommendations to the Vice President for Research and Technology Transfer for the first round of FY18 URCA proposals.  No additional items are pending.

5. Recommendations:  None

Library Committee

First Meeting - Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Present: Chase Billingham, Kathy Downes, Robert Feleppa, Keith Gray, David Hunsicker, Cathy Moore-Jansen, Tiruvadi Ravigururajan, Carolyn Shaw, Elaine Steinke, Semih Tartaroglu

Absent: Donna Sayman, Huzefa Kagdi

1. University Libraries Updates – Dean Kathy Downes
a. Dean Downes reported that University Libraries is currently searching for two positions, the Coordinator of Library Instructional Services and the Dean of University Libraries. 
i. Interviews are being conducted now for the coordinator position with an anticipated start date late this semester.
ii. Provost Vizzini has delayed the Dean’s search for budgetary reasons.  The priority review date is October 3 with an anticipated start date of August 6, 2017. 
b. Dean Downes reviewed selected information from recent presentations she gave to the Foundation and the Strategic Planning Review for FY2016.  Highlighted information includes:

Second Meeting - October 26, 2016
Invited: Chase Billingham, Kathy Downes, Robert Feleppa, Keith Gray, David Hunsicker, Cathy Moore-Jansen, Tiruvadi Ravigururajan, Elaine Steinke, Semih Tartaroglu, Huzefa Kagdi, Carleigh Camacho.
1.) Update on Dean’s search:  Dean Kathy Downes
2.) General update on activities: Dean Kathy Downes
3.) Questions & Answers
Third Meeting April 27, 2017

Robert Feleppa                   Accepted
Donna Sayman                    Accepted
David Hunsicker                  Declined
Chase Billingham                 Declined
Semih Tartaroglu                No response
Elaine Steinke                      Accepted
Huzefa Kagdi                       Accepted
Keith Gray                            No response
Carleigh Camacho              Accepted
Michelle Adler                     Accepted
Kelly St. Pierre                     Declined

1.) Update on Dean’s search:  Dean Kathy Downes
2.) General update on activities: Dean Kathy Downes
3.) Need for a Committee chair for 2017-2018

Faculty Senate Planning and Budget Committee 2016-2017 Annual Report

Members:    Ray Hull (Health Professions), Chris Brooks (LAS Humanities), Carolyn Shaw (LAS Social Sciences), Terrence Decker (Business), Abu Asaduzzaman (Engineering), Paul Rillema (LAS Nat Sciences), Samuel Willis (University Libraries), Kirsten Johnson (Fine Arts), Janice Ewing  (Education), Bayram Yildirim      President (Chair, President, Engineering), Peer Moore-Jansen (Past President, LAS Social Sciences), Carolyn Shaw (President-Elect, LAS Social Sciences)

The committee met approximately nine times during Spring 2017 semester. The charge of the committee was to provide feedback to Faculty Senate and President’s Budget Advisory Committee on initiatives that could shape the 6% cut planned for 2018 and 2019 fiscal years. Several members of the committee attended President’s Budget Advisory Efficiency, Priority and Revenue Sub-Committee open meetings, and reported back to Faculty Senate Planning and Budget Committee. The summary of discussions at this committee were presented at President’s Budget Advisory Committee meetings and Faculty Senate meetings. In addition, major recommendations were shared with President Bardo.

Rules

Annual Report for 2016-17


Committee members: Carolyn Shaw- Chair; Masud Chand, Mary Walker, Hyuck Kwon, Chris Brooks, Hussein Hamdeh, Danny Bergman, Julie Bees, Kathy Strattman, Jeff Pulaski

Committee meeting dates:  Friday mornings, once a month on average.

Committee activities:
• Filled existing vacancies for 2016-17 standing senate committees
• Reviewed representation options for teaching faculty and proposed expansion of Senate membership.
• Reviewed policies related to the grievance pool.
• Reviewed proposed revisions to Policy Manual on Chapters 4 and 5 regarding faculty.  This work will continue into 2017-18.
• Filled vacancies for expiring terms on standing senate committees (2017-18)

For Senate Action:
• Nothing pending

 

University Admissions and Exceptions Committee (UAEC) 2016-2017 Annual Report

Members:    Amy Chesser (Health Professions); Katherine Cramer (Education); Rachel Crane (Chair; University Libraries); Deepak Gupta (Engineering); Kirsten Johnson (Fine Arts); John Perry (Business); Brigitte Roussel (LAS Humanities); Mark Walsh (LAS Math/Natural Sciences); (LAS Social Sciences)

We hope to fill the vacancy for a representative from the LAS Social Sciences. The student representative is Jason McCarty.
The committee meets approximately 14 times per year, including summer months. Meetings were held on the following dates: August 10, August 11, September 15, October 20, November 17, and December 15 of 2016 – January 11, January 12, February 16, March 16, of 2017. Upcoming meetings are scheduled for April 20, May 11, June 15 and July 20. A new chair will be elected at the April meeting.
In the last academic year, in addition to the continual review of student petitions, the committee reviewed pre-approval criteria for each college. Petitions meeting stipulated criteria are automatically pre-approved and in most cases, then provided with designated restrictions. Petitions granted pre-approval status are those having commonly recurring circumstances that would be routinely approved.  Pre-Approved cases appear on the agenda but are not heard by the committee. The committee determined that no changes were deemed necessary.
Meeting agendas are  comprise of petitions ruled on by the college-level admissions and exceptions advisory committees, including rulings on readmissions, late adds, late drops, withdrawal requests and other exceptions to established rules. As cases of exceptions for admission to the University are now considered solely through the Office of Admissions, we would like the Senate to consider a revision to the committee’s charge, particularly item number 2: “Consider applications for admission of students who do not meet University standards for admissions, and exceptions to existing rules for students requesting them.” The committee would then like to complete the revision of its respective handbook to reflect these changes.
The committee expects to continue to review policies and procedures regarding exceptions to existing University rules.

Respectfully Submitted,
Rachel Crane, Chair
April 14, 2017

WSU Faculty Senate
Undergraduate Research Committee: 2016-2017 Final Report


1. Undergraduate Research Committee: 2016-2017 Membership

Name College Term ends
Anthony May Business 2017
William Flynn Fine Arts 2017
Trisha Self Health Professions 2017
Susan Sterrett LAS - Humanities 2017
Dinorah Azpura LAS - Social Sciences  2018
John Hammond - chair LAS – Natural and Applied Sciences 2018
Aaron Bowen University Libraries 2018
Shuang Gu Engineering 2019
Janice Ewing Education 2019
Kimberly Engber Dean, Honors College N/A
Sandra Carlo Student Member N/A


2. Undergraduate Research Committee: 2016-2017 Charge

The 2016-2017 charge of the Undergraduate Research (UR) Committee was to organize, administer, and review the 17th Annual Undergraduate Research and Creative Activity Forum (URCAF) that took place on Tuesday, April 4, 2017, at the Rhatigan Student Center. The UR Committee was assisted greatly in its URCAF charge by Sheri Light, Conference Coordinator, Office for Workforce, Professional and Community Education. Her contribution was essential to the overall success of this year’s URCAF. 
3. WSU Student Participation in the 2017 URCAF

The UR Committee focused its attention during the early Spring 2017 academic semester on URCAF submission recruitment across the University’s Colleges. We had a total of 37 undergraduate students presenting this year. The College- and category-specific submissions are presented in the following table:
Oral Presentations  Poster Sessions
WSU Senate division NS & Ea SS & Hb CA & Pc  NS & Ea SS & Hb APd
College of Business 0 0 0  0 0 0
College of Education  0 1 0  0 3 1
College of Engineering  4 0 0  7 0 0
College of Fine Arts  0 0 0  0 0 0
College of Health Professions  0 0 0  2 0 1
Fairmount College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 2 6 1  7 2 0
Total Across Colleges 6 7 1  16 5 2
aNS & E=Natural Sciences and Engineering. bSS & H=Social Sciences and Humanities.      cCA & P=Creative Activity and Performances. dApplied Learning


4. 2017 URCAF Highlights
a. Multiple observers (judges and non-judging faculty and staff) positively commented about the overall level of quality in this year’s presentations. Whereas the winners in the six URCAF competition categories demonstrated exemplary work, all of the undergraduate students displayed impressive expertise in their respective research areas, and professionalism in their presentations. (A list of the 2017 URCAF winners can be found at http://www.wichita.edu/urcaf.)
b. The committee received especially positive feedback from several observers for hosting the event at the Rhatigan Student Center rather than the venue used in prior years (Eugene Hughes Metropolitan Complex). The committee is hopeful that the new venue will lead to increased numbers of presenters and observers in future years.
c. Undergraduate presenters were provided specific feedback from a minimum of three judges in the month following their presentations.

5. Recommendations for the 2018 URCAF

a. Increase the number of undergraduate student presenters across WSU, particularly in the Fine Arts and Health Professions colleges. Action Plan: The UR Committee, working in conjunction with the Honors College, will begin the recruitment of undergraduate student researchers early in the Fall 2017 semester.

b.  Increase the number of presenters in the Applied Learning category. Action Plan: The UR Committee, working in conjunction with the Honors College, will begin the recruitment of undergraduate student researchers early in the Fall 2017 semester.
c. Reduce the UR Committee’s annual requirement to self-fund the URCAF. Action Plan: The UR Committee will express to the Faculty Senate the importance of a dedicated University-level budget line to support the annual URCAF, particularly given the importance of undergraduate research at WSU.

 

University Tenure and Promotion Committee   2016-17

Report on Review of Tenure and Promotion Guidelines and Other Issues

The University Tenure and Promotion Committee met on February 23, 2017 to review college tenure and promotion guidelines and to discuss issues that arose during tenure and promotion deliberations. Members present were Ed Baker, Timothy Craft, Rachel Crane, Doug Parham, Jean Patterson, Carolyn Shaw, and Charles Yang. The committee reviewed and discussed documents from the College of Education and the status of the College of Engineering policies.

College of Education:
The committee reviewed the College of Education’s tenure and promotion policy, which has been significantly revised to align with the UniScope model. The committee did not have any major recommendations.

College of Engineering:
The College of Engineering has drafted a new policy, but the faculty has not yet voted on it.

An Engineering faculty member did independently raise a concern regarding the summary statements written by committee chairs, per WSU policy “When the committee's discussion of a candidate is complete, the committee chair will summarize in writing the committee's evaluation of the candidate” from http://webs.wichita.edu/inaudit/ch4_18.htm. The concern related to the committee chair downplaying opposing views in the summary statement they write.

The University T & P committee felt this issue should be addressed internally at the college and department levels. The Committee did, however, agree that the normative practice is to ensure the department committee reach consensus on the letter. There was also agreement that if the vote is not unanimous, it would be helpful to have a brief explanation (without going into too much detail or weighing a minority vote too heavily).

Other issues:
1) The new Positive Risk Taking section of the FAR. The Committee discussed this new addition to the FAR, which was added late in the evaluation year, did not come from any faculty committee but from Academic Affairs, and with no guidance for how to fill it out or what to include. The Committee had the following recommendations:
1. Clarify the confusion over the addition of this section to the FAR.
2. The language of positive risk taking does not acknowledge that taking risk often leads to failure before success. It would be helpful to ensure faculty understands that failure in risk taking attempts are acceptable.
3. Involve faculty in further development and/or changes to the FAR.

2) The Committee discussed at length the current policy on separate votes for Tenure and Promotion. This issue frequently comes up, as there is often at least one case in which the vote for Tenure and the vote for Promotion are split. It has been the practice in recent years to view these as a single process as directed by the Provost.  That is, if a faculty member is tenurable, then she or he is promotable. This year, the committee was asked to vote only on Tenure in two cases where the faculty had appealed a negative vote and were instructed not to vote on Promotion, which the Committee felt put us in an awkward position. Therefore, the Committee made the following suggestion:
1. Faculty Senate discuss the T & P policy of separate votes for Tenure and Promotion. as well as whether the allowed one appeal is to both Tenure and Promotion votes or only one of these two. Why have a policy if the Provost supersedes the policy? Is there a benefit to the candidate to have those votes separate?  Is there an argument for keeping those votes separate?