Home Campus Directory | A-Z Index

Attendance:
A. Benharbit, W. Cantor, M. Casteel, D. Coho, C. D. Creagh, H. Darling, S. Dwivedi, R. Farrell, C. Gaston, S. Gill, S. Gladfelter, F. Haag, H. Hartman, A. Hasan, C. Heydl-Cortinez, M. Hoch, K. Ishida, A. Kara, O. Kucukemiroglu, A. Landis, F. Lugemwa, K. Magni, M. Marcus, J. Nesbitt, L. Newcomer, S. Shah, A. Siddiqui, N. Sloboda, S. Staton-Taiwo, J. Sutton, K. Swalgin, K. Trout, V. White, D. Winters.

  1. Approval of the minutes from the October 2, 2007 Senate meeting:
    1. Joel Rodney— #2—hiring former students as assistants was a remark about new housing—the developer will hire our students. We will have no official connection.
    2. Abul Hasan: University Senators - 3rd item -it’s diversity committee, Education Equity and Campus Environment EECE -- the amount should be 35,000. Working to establish multicultural, not diversity. Announcement—vice provost had mentioned assessment of critical thinking.
    3. Sue Werner — Cynthia Jones is the new hire for staff assistant.
    4. Fulgentius Lugemwa—Another correction for the attendance list - F. is the first initial
    5. Approval of minutes as corrected
  2. Communications from administration, faculty, and committees
    1. Announcements from the Campus Chancellor, Dr. Joel Rodney
      1. The last few weeks were relatively calm. Dr. Romano cancelled one meeting on academic leaders, so things must be running smoothly. Something Penn State York related - make a pledge to United Way. This year we are a little behind. Help the community. It’s a good cause.
      2. We had visitors for new vice provost for international studies— A proponent of international education. He commended the campus for what we’ve been doing. Funds are available to support those efforts.
      3. One development of interest - Joel Rodney attended a session of the economic development corporation. The City of York is seriously considering building a technology transfer in conjunction with Harrisburg Area Community College (HACC). We’ve been asked to be a partner. For those who have done research that might be commercialized, this partnership is an opportunity, with a team of experts from Wisconsin. Technical colleges have been doing this for about twenty years. It doesn’t require capital investment from the university.
    2. Announcements from the Director of Academic Affairs, Dr. Joe McCormick (Announcements to the Senate):
      1. We now have a full-time staff assistant, Jane Pflaum.
      2. Update on faculty search: the HD FS search has interviewed
      3. Academic affairs is working with student affairs—100 percent response rate from all FYS staff. Anna Backstrom is diligently coding the information.
      4. This Friday will be the second in diversity speakers and features Anna Backstrom, student intern from Finland.
      5. Travel money looks good.
    3. Announcements from University Senators
      1. Casteel - We changed the wording to need at least one and one-half times
      2. Casteel - As a representative, we are looking at proposing a three-credit FYS requirement. Should we list FYS as a graduation requirement or a course that has to be on the books? Should we make it optional as a graduation requirement? The two co-chairs will be meeting, not to vote, just to hear pros and cons. Then the proposal will go to relevant senate committees. We’re unanimous in reference to a three credit FYS.
        1. Farrell - Can’t see what we can do in a one-credit course.
        2. Casteel - We want to incorporate these things in a currently existing class, if we want this as a graduation requirement. The committee is just saying we need to put something forward
      3. Hasan – announcement - The major expense of the University is salary. Concerning our involvement in strategic planning, there is a difference between faculty involvement and faculty representation. Will there be faculty representation? The provost made it clear that there will be faculty involvement, not faculty representation. Faculty involvement means faculty members speak on their own behalf, not on the behalf of the faculty as a whole.
        1. Each unit was using its own definition of diversity. The committee will come up with a uniform definition of diversity to be used with all units.
        2. (McCormick input)—Check with the Office of the Vice Provost for Educational Equity; there is a broad definition. The problem with that uniform definition is that it’s so broad, it covers everyone you can imagine.
        3. Hasan— We are one year late.
      4. Jane Sutton— Faculty Council Update - regarding an email distributed, with attachments
        1. Today, faculty council is working on drafting a constitution. Look at the constitution and provide feedback before the next meeting, November 15. The goal is to have a discussion group about the constitution. Curricular Affairs, Faculty Affairs—the dean has made troublesome comments about the committees. We need to help with defining who we are as a college.
          1. Heydl-Cortinez—regarding Sandy Gleason’s comments—three members of curricular affairs could decide. What was the set-up in the previous college?
            1. Sutton—Gleason mentioned the document called University College Operating Guidelines. How do we as a college then create an oversight/connection that will allow us to think through some of these programs at all these locations? What role can faculty play in that as a college to exert pressure on how these programs are run at various locations? What kind of problems does that create? We had envisioned a faculty affairs committee. These are some of the ways we’re trying to envision the structure as it is moving forward.
              1. Swalgin - How does the concept of the division head relate?
              2. Sutton Answer - I’m not sure how that is going to play, because there is this tendency to move back toward our departments in handling matters related to our own programs.
              3. Abul - Tenure was moved from the college to the campus. With that, the move back to departments will take a push, because the connection is not there anymore.
              4. Rodney inputs - The provost made it clear - the change is designed to cut across the former stand-alones, the former commonwealth college. It will take continued pressure. Involving colleagues and students is one way to do that; it will take money, and that money can’t come from the campuses.
              5. Casteel - respectfully suggests you call a special meeting just to deal with this one issue and to draft the constitution.
              6. Gaston—We need the meeting to be before November 15. Wednesday the November 7, 2007, works. We will send the York All e-mail out on that.
              7. Gladfelter—We want to send out to York Senate, not York All.
    4. Announcements from Faculty
      1. Jane Sutton - Regarding women on the tenure line (Surprised to see that on the list). It’s increasingly clear we’re not sure what we are supposed to be doing for promotion and tenure. It would be nice to have a panel. The disciplinary community may have expectations for a book. We might want to get faculty affairs to look into this issue, to have more of a panel, like those at national organizations.
        1. Gaston - Are you proposing a meeting?
        2. Sutton - I just sent an email to see if the Faculty Affairs Committee was interested. Ishida, Magni, and Sutton are on that committee.
      2. Harley Hartman:
        1. TLTAC Committee: E-Learning Proposal
          1. The committee desires to coordinate all the technologies and anything to do with committees. Suzanne Shaffer can hopefully give background. The project looks complicated and out of the realm of the TLTAC design. We would like to propose a committee.
            1. Shaffer -This is a good time to get faculty input as to how we want this process to go, such as regarding those interested in developing courses to online format. Other campuses are having their own e-learning strategic plans.
            2. McCormick - Two years ago, we got a memo asking us to propose e-learning. What was once the instructional design specialist would be the appropriate point-of-contact. An example would be faculty working from home teaching for the World Campus. This is the way things are going, especially in engineering technology.
            3. Abul - We should make a distinction between distance learning and purely e-learning; those two are not connected. Distant learning—that’s synchronous communication. Regarding e-learning, I’m not sure that’s good for science and engineering, not sure you can present it online as easily. You cannot teach science and engineering online right away. Science and engineering develops subject matter sequentially.
            4. Casteel - We already have problems getting chairs for committees.We do not have enough faculty for one more committee. That’s my one concern
          2. Hartman -The concern: distant vs. online, whether the facility has electronics/equipment in place. How much faculty gets compensated is out of the purview of TLTAC. The compensation model would probably be uniform across campuses, but the idea of another committee would be taxing.
            1. Rodney - Question: Has the World Campus made its presence known?
            2. Shaffer - The majority of people was staff, resources, programmers, designers. Faculty may be interested, but do we have the resources and personnel to create what was just shown—working outside of ANGEL? We have no equity between the two. We’re talking about rubrics to control the design, but no one here has a voice in that process. That’s my concern. We need your voice in the process.
              1. Gaston - Anyone interested in this committee?
              2. Creagh –Answer -Creagh is on that committee and is interested.
              3. Gaston -We need a clear definition of what that group would address.
              4. Shaffer- If you have one idea or member willing, to discover the roadblocks.
              5. Gaston - Sounds like two now
        2. TLTAC Committee: Digital Commons Proposal
          1. Our part in the program is to provide space—with 202, moving a door. Security issues were laid out. An alternative space would be where the vending machines are. That would not require much movement of equipment, other than vending machines, which could be moved upstairs to the left of the elevators. It seems like a done deal with the equipment. It’s up to us to provide the space: 12 X 10 feet.
            1. Abul - What about the multimedia room upstairs?
            2. Shaffer - An issue is the room is closed after six. Students need external access.
            3. Werner - A concern is with the price of putting in a door with keyless entry. $8-10,000. Loren had looked at general overviews.
            4. Hartman -We’d actually move the door rather than buy a new door. The vending area would be more expensive, as compared to room 202. But no, we have no numbers in reference to price.
            5. Werner - I don’t think the campus has the money.
            6. Trout - Where the money comes from, we don’t see that as our responsibility.
            7. Gaston - Do we need an official response?
            8. Shaffer -There is no official end date. If we don’t do it soon, they’ll contact us to find out why.
            9. Gaston - Two clearly possible locations have been found, and we’ll leave it to administration to decide which.
            10. McCormick -The larger question is do we want to get involved in this? There hasn’t been a resounding groundswell of yes. This is an unfunded mandate. The equipment is provided, but the campus has to assume the cost of location.
            11. Rodney -This technology would allow the students to do something they can’t do now. We have to do this. If it means using our own labor, we could do it.
            12. Werner - Holly says it’s not a cheap proposition.
            13. Gaston - The TLTAC committee has done its job, it came up with two recommendations.
            14. McCormick -We have to put some dollar signs on each of the recommendations. It’s a recommendation, not a motion, no need to vote.
            15. Hartman -The Pullo Center would have to serve as an area where faculty could move—recognizing that the area up there designated for faculty development would be expanded also to students and physically moved.
            16. Gaston - Moving to vending would be more expensive.
            17. Rodney- It has a name on it; let’s see if we can expand the name
    5. Announcements from Staff
      No announcements.
    6. Announcements from Student Government representatives
      None
    7. Announcements from Senate Chair, Chuck Gaston
      None
  3. Unfinished Business
    None
  4. New Business
    1. Curricular Affairs (B. Cantor)
      1. Motion for Commencement of Hiring Recommendations: In support of the baccalaureate and associate degrees in Information Sciences and Technology (IST), the Curricular Affairs Committee endorses the attached IST hiring recommendations. The search for these positions should commence as soon as possible
        1. Curricular Affairs Committee was presented with a proposal from Gladfelter representing IST.
        2. Background: Two near-term retirements will leave IST with FTY and FT1 faculty in 2008. There is difficulty obtaining adjunct faculty. The recommendation is for two tenured positions and a replacement for Samir short-term.
        3. Sutton—Does this fall at rank three now? Where does this hiring recommendation stand in relationship to English and CAS?
        4. Cantor—We’re not ranking or prioritizing. We are forwarding the request as a recommendation. This is just an additional recommendation, but we didn’t propose to rank or prioritize.
        5. Hasan - The number of positions is two tenure-track, one multi-year, one FTY to replace Samir—four positions
        6. Cantor - Immediately, we need someone to take over Samir’s load, then the tenure track. Samir starts this spring.
        7. Gaston - The action we take simply forwards the recommendation.
        8. Cantor - The motion is that we forward out to the campuses.
        9. Gaston - Questions or discussions?
        10. Casteel - We are proposing two full-time, part-time FT1. (not part-time). How many majors?
        11. Gladfelter -The proposal didn’t have a number of students. Most of our associate students will re-enroll in the baccalaureate, since it is 2 + 2. We have about 110 students. IST is an expensive program. We offer thirty different courses in an academic year. These courses are all required. We offer no electives. With the five faculty, we teach 30 courses plus service courses.
        12. Casteel - I see the need. How can we possibly make these recommendations?
        13. Gladfelter -The person replacing Samir is fully funded. We need to think about funding the other positions. We would be looking for a Ph.D.
        14. Casteel -That’s expensive faculty.
        15. Gladfelter - Bottom line, we’re looking for one
        16. Gaston - Because three would be replacements.
        17. Gladfelter - One of these requirements would not occur until the end of the year. Since the program is going strong, we should. We can’t increase our class sizes and put two into one.
        18. Hasan - Samir could actually apply for one of the tenure-track positions.
        19. Gladfelter - And so could Bill, since Bill is just short of his Ph.D. right now.
        20. Gaston - Do we have a quorum for a vote? A motion from a committee doesn’t require a second, these are recommendations.
        21. Heydl-Cortinez -This is going to strategic planning. The motion is passed.
  5. Forensic Business
    None
  6. Adjournment

NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 12:05 p.m. in ISTC 107


This page last updated: December 7, 2007 2:44 PM
This server is provided and maintained by the Penn State York Office of C&IS. If you need to communicate with our staff regarding this website, send electronic mail to: York campus webmaster.