The Faculty Senate convened at 3:30 p.m. in Cashion 303, Hankamer School of Business, with Chair Dan McGee presiding.

Present: Adams, Baird, Beck, Beckner, Bowery, Buddo, Carini, Chinn, Conyers, C. Davis, E. Davis, Dunn, Farris, Genrich, Gilchrest, Hillman, Jensen, K. Johnson, P. Johnson, Johnston, Longfellow, Losey, McGee, Stone, Weaver, Wilson, Yelderman, Young

Absent with notification: Abbott-Kirk

Absent: Supplee, Tipton

I.	Invocation and Welcome Rosalie Beck gave the invocation.
II.	Agenda At the chair's request, the following items were added to the agenda: Implications of the expanded enrollment Report and Discussion on the selection of a Law School Senator to replace Beth Youngdale Buddy Gilchrest will speak briefly regarding the Newsletter Discussion of the new Travel Policy
III.	Election of Secretary Youngdale, Senate Secretary, left the University, leaving the Secretary position empty. McGee reported that the Executive Committee had nominated Chuck Weaver to replace her. Bob Baird moved that Weaver be approved by acclamation, and the motion passed.
IV.	Guest: Richard Scott, VP for University Development. Scott briefly addressed the Senate regarding plans for a proposed $500 million "Campaign for Greatness," intended to bring the University endowment to the $1 billion mark by 2005. Currently, plans are to allocate the $500 million in these ways: $100 million for student scholarships $115 million for endowed faculty chairs $110 million for "state of the art learning," with $25 million for technology, $20 million for library facilities, and $65 million for facilities enhancement $50 million for athletics, with $20 million for men's scholarships, $20 million for women's scholarships, and $10 million for an unrestricted Athletic Director's fund $125 million for academic excellence, with $75 million designated for schools, institutes, and centers, and $50 million unrestricted The actual details of the campaign, including final goal amounts and distribution, await a soon-to-be-completed report, evaluating every current fundraising campaign throughout the University. The project will begin with a feasibility study in which approximately 150 potential donors (able to contribute significant sums) will be interviewed face to face. It is anticipated the donations from this group of approx. 150 will ultimately provide 80-85% of the entire campaign. Those interviews should begin within a few months, but only after the Development Office has firmly settled on specific plans. These 150 individuals will be asked to review the campaign's case statement, the present state of the University, and will ultimately determine the final campaign goal. Scott then answered the following questions Q: Why was the figure $500 million chosen? Is there reason to believe these numbers are meaningful and reasonable? A: The $500 million figure is considered possible, but not necessarily feasible. The goal is to expand the base of serious donors. The figure may ultimately be revised. Q: Will this campaign have an adverse effect on current fundraising campaigns? A: Not likely. The law school's fundraising will proceed largely independently, and it appears the final portion of the funds to cover the student life center have been secured. However, some facilities--the Science Building was mentioned specifically--cannot wait for the campaign to conclude. Development is currently seeking funding from 3 or 4 foundations who have funded similar buildings at other universities, and it's possible that money will be borrowed to build the Science Building. Q: What role will so-called "small" contributors play in this campaign? A: Small contributors will be targeted, but they will not be expected to fund a significant proportion of the campaign. Rather, the goal is to increase the percentage of alumni who contribute, with recognition that those who contribute small amounts today may eventually become substantial donors. Q: Will this campaign adversely effect our efforts to secure [academic] grants? A: No. Grants currently are pursued by Gary Carter and those in the Office of Sponsored Programs. Development has little substantive input for those funding sources, and in no way will the development campaign harm any granting possibilities. Q: How can faculty participate? A: Faculty are encouraged to provide the Development office names of contacts who might be in a position to fund specific programs, especially those that combine academic merit and "emotional appeal." Large gifts almost always have a substantial emotional component. Q: Does Development currently have systems in place which promote regular contact with and input from faculty? A: No; the best outlet would be through the Council of Deans. Development would be willing to work with "liaisons," however, should the need exist. Q: Many proposal projects involve interdisciplinary (and inter-departmental) collaboration, which lead to accounting and administrative difficulties. Would Development encourage moving toward a different model, one in which many of the obstacles can be eliminated? A: Yes. In fact, this is exactly what must be done if we are to secure substantive contributions. Preliminary discussions with Associate Dean Ben Pierce (A&S) and Harold Cunningham have already started. Q: Would you be willing to engage in further discussion with the Senate? A: Yes.
V.	Review of issues raised at Senate Retreat A. Parking McGee spoke with Jim Doak regarding the parking difficulties, though it appears there will be no resolution in the near future. B. Faculty Promotion Policy Baird reported that the Executive Committee proposed that the Committee on Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Environment nominate a 5-member task force to review the problem and offer recommendations. At least one committee member should be from the AFRAE committee, and one from the Senate. The task force will be presented to the Senate for confirmation. In the interest of time, the confirmation will be accomplished via e-mail. The motion was approved by acclamation. C. Chair Search Process McGee met with Don Schmeltekopf, who referred the matter back to Arts & Sciences. Schmeltekopf suggested discussions between himself, Dean Daniel and Baird. Several Senate members disagreed with Schmeltekopf's indication that the problems with chair searches were restricted to Arts & Sciences. A brief discussion ensued concerning the upcoming retreat for members of faculty search committees.
VI.	Grievance Process At the Retreat, the Senate was informed that the administration's response to the Grievance Process document was imminent. As of this meeting, however, no response had been made by the administration or the University attorneys.
VII.	Committee Reports A. Faculty Committee on Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Environment (Bob Baird) Committee will meet this week. Also, Kathy Hillman will assist as the committee monitors the implementation of the new tenure policy B. Faculty Committee on Enrollment Management (Elizabeth Davis). E. Davis reported that official 12th day attendance figures show 2938 new Freshmen and 512 new transfers. The Senate discussed several concerns relative to enrollment management. First of all, the role of the committee vis-a-vis the admissions process is not well delineated. McGee suggested that Senators Deborah Johnston, E. Davis, and Don Farris--who are currently members of the Enrollment Management Committee--serve as an advisory panel for the Senate on enrollment management. McGee discussed a letter he received from Dianna Vitanza, in response to his published comments expressing some concern regarding the enrollment increases. During discussion, several issues were raised: o Has the increase in faculty hirings, especially those in tenure-track positions, kept pace with the increase in student enrollment? o Along with the sizable increase in freshmen admissions, the university has implemented a very aggressive retention procedure. What are the implications of increased retention, in addition to the increase in admissions? o While larger lower-division classes are not uncommon, the University has always been able to keep upper-division courses smaller. What are the implications of the increased enrollment on increasing upper-division class sizes, and how will the University address this? o Is the increase part of a strategic plan? If so, what are the ultimate enrollment goals? McGee will consider these questions as he continues discussions with Vitanza. C. Faculty Committee on Physical Facilities (Joe Yelderman). The student center and parking garage projects are proceeding. D. Faculty Committee on Student Life and Services (Gary Carini). No Report E. Athletic Council (Mark Dunn). No report. F. Staff Council Liaison (Nancy Chinn). No report. G. Committee on Committees (Chris Buddo). a. The OPAS committee, formed a number of years ago because of NSF requirements, is no longer required. NSF Officials said it could be renamed or abolished. Sara Stone moved that the committee be dissolved, and Baird seconded. Motion passed. b. The Calendar Committee asked that for reasons of continuity, a Chair-Elect be named each year, who will assume the Chair duties the following year. Questions were raised about whether this will set a precedent for other committees which might also benefit from a chair-elect. Following discussion, Buddo moved that the Calendar Committee's request be granted, seconded by Farris. Motion passed. Hillman moved to ask the Committee on Committees to examine other committees which might also benefit from designating a chair-elect. Motion was seconded by Yelderman, motion passed. c. Dennis Myers, Chair of the University Committee on Committees, submitted 5 recommendations to McGee for action by the Senate (see Appendix A, COC memo). The first recommendation asked that members of National and International Scholarship committee be appointed to serve 5-year, rather than 3-year appointments. This was requested because the nature of the committee requires a lengthy period of orientation and knowledge building. Furthermore, many such scholarships (i. e., Truman, Rhodes) demand continual "mentoring" of qualified students, often over a several year period. Several concerns were expressed regarding this request. First of all, this raises the possibility (with re-appointment) of members serving on the committee for 10 years. Furthermore, the committee would have no tactful way to remove unproductive committee members (as happens now with the expiration of a 3-year term). Because of these concerns, action on Item 1 (see Appended Memo) was deferred. Items 2-5 dealt with replacements for various committee members, and were considered collectively. Dunn moved that Items 2-5 be approved, seconded by Hillman. Motion passed.
VII.	Election from Law School to fill unexpired term Karen Johnson reported that two names were submitted from the Law School to fill the unexpired term of Beth Youngdale. One nominee consented to being placed on the ballot, but the second had not responded (and is unavailable for several weeks). After brief discussion, the request was made that the election proceed with the name of the one nominee who has agreed to serve if elected, and this was approved by acclamation.
VIII.	Newsletter (Buddy Gilchrest) Gilchrest reported that the deadline for submitting material for the upcoming newsletter is Oct. 5.
IX.	Miscellaneous A. President's Forum. McGee reported that the first President's Forum had been moved to Thursday, October 8, 1998, in Bennett Auditorium. Hillman noted that this was the same afternoon as the Library's "Authors and Artists" Display and reception, and McGee agreed to contact the President and reschedule. McGee will also look into the possibility of transmitting these forums via "distance learning" technologies. Senators will be notified of the rescheduled time and location via e-mail, and were encouraged to notify those in their departments, as well as those from other departments as noted in their "communication responsibilities." (See Appendix B). B. Travel Policy. Some concerns were expressed about the newly implemented Travel Policy. Specifically, there were questions regarding the policy of reimbursement for previously-bought airline tickets vs. buying the tickets via a purchase order. Also, some faculty have reported that they are able to find flights which are substantially cheaper than those from the "approved" agencies, and the procedure for dealing with this situation is not well-specified. The Chair and Chair-Elect will appoint a Senator to look into this and report back. C. E-mail distribution and approval of minutes. Weaver suggested that in the interest of timeliness, the minutes from each meeting would be distributed via e-mail for correction. After any corrections had been made the minutes would then be distributed via e-mail, and Senators were asked to respond via e-mail with the votes as quickly as possible. Any subsequent changes to the minutes can be address at the next monthly meeting. This action was approved by consensus.
X.	Minutes of May 12, 1998 Ray Wilson moved that the minutes be approved as distributed, with the correction that the meeting room was Blume Conference Center and not Cashion 303. Second by Buddo, approved. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:35. Respectfully submitted, Chuck Weaver

Appendix A. Memo from Dennis Meyers, Committee on Committees
Date: To: From: Subject:	9/9/98 Dan McGee, Ph.D. Chair, Faculty Senate Dennis Myers, Ph.D. Chair, Committee on Committees Approval of Committee Changes