September 14, 2010

You are here

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version

Approved 10-12-10




Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Auditorium, Radiology Building

President Simon, Provost Wilcox, E. Alstrom, K. Ames, G. Bice, M.W. Chang, W. Corser, E. Cushman, D. Dougherty, R.K. Edozie, J. Gagilondo, S. Hassan, M. Jain, R. Jones, M. Kaplowitz, N. Khanna, G. Kortemeyer, M. Largent, L. Leavitt, T. Levine, K. Lovell, R. Maleczka, R. McCormick, H. Melakeberhan, P. Menchik, T. Monberg, D. Moriarty, M. Nalla, M. Noel, J. Owen, C. Parker, D. Pathak, H. Perlstadt, J. Powell, R. Putnam, F. Rauscher, P. Rogers, L. Roman, M. Sciarini, G. Stone, S. Tekalur, T. Tims, S. Watts, J. Wright, E. Yakura

Absent: J. Boughman, S. Carey, S. Carter, M. Chavez, S. Conrad, C. Constantinos, W. Davidson, M. Fillmore, C. Frilinigos, J. Funk, K. Goldsberry, R. Hall, J. Hoehn, H. Hughes, D. Hyndman, S. Kendall, B. Luke, R. Mabokela, T. Marsh, R. Ofoli, N.B. Oliver, K. Phillips, S. Pratt, B. Scott, M. Shapiro, M. Sticklen, L. Udpa, J. Vargas, B. Zandstra

The meeting began at 3:19 p.m. with a Bass quorum and a full quorum was reached at 3:25.

Approval of Agenda:
The agenda was approved as distributed.

Public Comments:
Professor James Anderson addressed Council members regarding the scheduled demolition of Morrill Hall. Professor Anderson distributed some data he gathered on the current status of the building and proposed it would be better to renovate the building rather than demolishing. He noted that to his knowledge none of the relevant documentation regarding the building was ever submitted to the faculty. Professor Anderson estimated the cost for renovated Morrill Hall would be $7 million dollars as compared to the $38 million dollars to renovate Wells Hall.

Approval of Minutes:
The minutes for April 13, 2010 were approved as distributed.

President’s Remarks:
President Simon announced that the final event for the opening of the Secchia Center in Grand Rapids occurs this evening. The building was financed in part through the generosity of the Spectrum Health System as part of their contribution to the project. In addition there was also a $50 million dollar fund raising goal for the Project. The fund raising goal was met.

The President noted that Professor Anderson raised a number of very important questions. There are two projects being funded through General Fund allocation that were made about four years ago. One project was the Morrill Hall replacement and the other project was the addition to the Plant Science building. The UCFA does review the capital outlay requests which include all of the projects so there is a visibility of the projects. The data provided by Professor Anderson is the “just in time” list that includes the things that need to be replaced immediately and it is not a renovation list of the building. The renovation costs of Morrill Hall are much more substantial to make it to programmatically meet the needs of the tenants.

President Simon reported that there is no Budget at this time. The preliminary numbers out of the joint subcommittees in the Senate suggest that the University may be better off by a half percent than was planned for the University budget.

Provost’s Remarks:
Provost Wilcox indicated that the second year of the new Fall welcome and thanked everyone for how the process has evolved. The experience for the first year students allows them to engage with their professors right away and it has been very positive. The work on the first year experience has provided a different way of thinking about the engagement and support of the undergraduate students. The Neighborhood concept describes something geographical but underlying the concept is an attempt to think differently about the roles and responsibilities of all of us and particularly those in charge primarily to support the undergraduate students. Fundamental to that is a deeper and a more real connection between the academic enterprise and student affairs on campus. The evolution should come to fruition this year. A pilot project is being undertaken in Hubbard Hall where there are groups of student support people working with students.

The Provost reported on a meeting with Professors Powell, Wright and Maleczka regarding the Academic Program Review. Once every seven years a Program will be reviewed in a formal process. The first year, there were six Program reviews to work through the process and last year there were fifteen to twenty Programs. The process is one of a Programmatic self study, usually at the departmental level and sometimes within departments. There is consultation and feedback from the Dean and then in turn consultation and feedback from the Provost and a series of meetings to provide feedback. The Provost noted the process is working well and is effective because of the freedom and space allowed in the process. In most cases there is an action plan with expectations for next steps and direction for the Programs. Part of the direction from Governance was that the Provost report annually to Governance, which specifies the Secretary for Governance and the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of ECAC. There is a summary of the Programs reviewed during the last two cycles and the schedule for programs to be reviewed on the website The Provost indicated that there is intentionally no format or template for the review to allow each program to think about what is important etc.

Executive Committee Chairperson’s Remarks:
Professor Powell commented on the discussion during the Faculty Voice times and the debate around the recommendation for Program Reviews. Professor Powell noted how well the process has worked.

Proposed Motion by Professor Perlstadt:
Professor Perlstadt proposed the motion to rescind Professor Hill’s motion of April 13, 2010 regarding the SIRS. The motion was seconded. There was some question by some for rescinding the motion. Professor Bice, UCAP Chairperson, indicated the committee is currently looking into SIRS as the committee shares concerns about representativeness, accuracy and having a large number of students respond. A pilot study was conducted during the summer and the committee will be reviewing. The issue of SIRS is under review and UCAP will report in late Fall or early Spring to ECAC and Faculty Council. Professor Maleczka noted that the spirit is to support what UCAP is doing it and sees no need to rescind the motion. Professor Bice noted one of the objections to Professor Hill’s motion is that it is not actionable as it stands. One member commented that it appears that we all want better input from more students about how we are teaching. The Hill motion was an attempt to catalyze action. The motion to rescind passed. Professor Perlstadt commented that Faculty Council is concerned about the validity of methods to obtain student ratings of instructional performance. These ratings are one essential component in the assessment of instructional quality. Faculty Council recognizes that student participation in such survey’s is voluntary and that biases undoubtedly occur. Professor Perlstadt proposed the following substitute motion: Faculty Council strongly endorses a study of the administration of student instructional performance forms in class and on line. The motion was supported. The substitute motion passed.

Update on Health Care:
Professor Moriarty reported that a Prospectus for an MSU CARE Program was passed by UCFA in April and that UCFA will be meeting with Consultants in October. She also noted that the data on the Generic Prescribing Program appears to show that money has been saved. Additional information will be provided.

Other Business:
There was no further business.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:06 pm.

Respectfully submitted,


Jacqueline Wright
Secretary for Academic Governance


Tapes of complete meetings of the Faculty Council are available for review in the office of the Secretary for Academic Governance, W32 Owen Graduate Hall, 355-2337

Committee Meeting Date: 
Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - 3:19pm
Committee Type: 
Minutes Status :