The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair and Presiding Officer Jory Hancock at 3:06 p.m. in the College of Law Room 146.

Present: Senators Armstrong, Auxier, Benson, Bickel, Caldwell, Dahlgran, D. Davis, G. Davis, Eribes, Graff, Grant, Gruener, Hancock, Hogle, Houtkooper, Howell, Ivey, Kidd, Larson, Likins, Marchalonis, Medine, Merkle, Mitchell, O’Brien, Pitt, Regan, Richardson, Romer, Schooley, Sheridan, Silverman, Smith, Spece, Szilagyi, Taren, Walsh, Warburton, Warnock, Weinand and Zwolinski. Thomas Volgy served as Parliamentarian.

Absent: Senators Aleamoni, Becker, Dalton, T. Davis, DeYoung, Hartman, Hurt, Impey, Jenkins, Joens, Kosta, Kurzer, Mishra, Parsons, Pepper, Perches, Quinn, Tal, Witte, and Zilm.

2. OPEN SESSION

Ms. Darci Thompson and Ms. Caryn Jung – Ms. Thompson, Director, and Ms. Jung, Program Coordinator from UA Life and Work Connections informed faculty of the services available to faculty and all staff including counseling, worksite wellness screenings, dependent care issues, childcare and eldercare lifecycle support services.

Dr. Sam James – Dr. James expressed concern with irregularities and a conflict of interest in the process involved in the University Committee on Ethics and Commitment’s (UCEC) 1997 inquiry of the Kay case.

Ms. Lauren McElroy – Ms. McElroy, Coordinator of the Commission on the Status of Women expressed the Commission’s support of the Senate’s passage of the Sexual Harassment policy as it is presented today.

Senator William Bickel – Senator Bickel expressed concern about the harm to the UA’s reputation among national and international scholars due to the continuing procedures against Dr. Marguerite Kay. He read a letter of protest about the current proceedings from a professor who participated in Dr. Kay’s July 2000 enhanced performance review.

Senator John J. Marchalonis – Senator Marchalonis addressed two inaccuracies in Senator Walsh’s e-mail message to the Senate.

3A. ASUA President Benjamin Graff

Senator Graff reported that the Arizona Student Association (ASA) is taking a proactive role in the elections and has just concluded its first "ASA Day of Action." At 9:00 a.m. on Saturday morning, students from ASU, NAU and UA all went door to door in their communities talking with the public about Proposition 301. Last month, ASUA registered over 2400 students and has arranged for five vans to be available to transport students and others from campus to their polling places and back for Election Day tomorrow. The Advising Task Force will be a group with broad, cross-campus representation and has named three co-chairs to lead the effort.

3B. GPSC President Jason Auxier

Senator Auxier reported that Student Showcase takes place this Friday and Saturday on the mall. Judging of over ninety exhibits will take place from 10:00-2:00 on Friday, and the exhibits will be open from noon to 4:00pm on Saturday. He thanked the faculty members who agreed to judge and support the Showcase students’ efforts. Several awards have been added in addition to the President’s award for Best-of-Show. GPSC is beginning to study the issue of child care for student employees to determine need as well as the fact that there is no avenue for TA’s to declare their teaching time under the current student subsidy program.

3D. Secretary of the Faculty Wanda Howell

No report.

3E. Chair of the Faculty Jerrold Hogle (attachments)

Chair Hogle encouraged everyone to vote in tomorrow’s election and commended the ASUA for its efforts to get out the vote. The Board of Regents has asked the Arizona Faculties Council to combine the three university whistleblower protection policies into one policy for the state system. The UA Task Force on Advising will be co-chaired by the student body president, one faculty advisor and one professional advisor. In accordance with the principles of shared governance, the Interim Vice President for Undergraduate Education has asked the Committee on Committees to recommend faculty members to serve on this committee. He has also asked for direct representation from the Senate and SAPC. Senator Romer will ask the SAPC to elect a member who is also a Senator to serve. According to a public information request forwarded from the Office of Decision and Planning Support, Chair Hogle advised the Senate that Pickaprof.com has requested all course evaluations from all formal courses retroactive to 1993. The Senate approved posting course evaluation scores to a website in March 1997, but recovering course evaluations prior to that may involve intensive effort and considerable, billable expense so the University has sent an inquiry asking if this request is for commercial purposes. Chair Hogle said he would be vigilant about the protection of faculty rights with this issue. For three semesters beginning in Spring 2001 and ending in Spring, 2002, an assessment sub-committee of the University-wide General Education Committee (UWGEC) will conduct two pilot studies that address the effectiveness of the Gen Ed curriculum in improving critical thinking and writing. The ICPC believes it would be premature to replace or eliminate the Undergraduate Writing Proficiency Exam (UDWPE) until the results of the two pilot studies are known. Faculty members are strongly encouraged to participate in continuing assessment of writing and to serve as UDWPE graders. Chair Hogle thanked Provost Davis for his recent financial support of this effort.

Provost Davis reported on the UA Diversity Workshop held on October 24, 2000, as part of the National Week of Dialogue on Race; the second portion will focus on K-12 connections to the University to attract more students into science and technology, business, agriculture and engineering. Forty-five people representing faculty, staff, and students attended the workshop and are now providing feedback and initiatives. Provost Davis invited Senators to offer him their suggestions to increase campus diversity. The search committees for the Vice-President for Undergraduate Education and for the Vice President of Health Sciences/Dean of the College of Medicine have been framed in accordance with shared governance principles and are now complete with assistance from the Committee on Committees, the College of Medicine’s Dean’s Advisory Committee, and the student organizations. The Five-Year Review Committee for the Dean of the College of Education is being appointed. Shared governance procedures require that the Provost select at least four faculty members from the top eight vote-getters in the college balloting process. In addition to the five faculty members Provost Davis has selected from the balloting process, he has appointed five additional faculty members of his choosing as well as one staff member and one graduate student. The same process was followed in selecting the review committee for the Five-Year Review of the Dean of Libraries. The Acting Director of the Computing Center for Information Technology (CCIT), Pete Perona, whose leadership has been embraced by both faculty and staff, has been appointed to the position of Director of CCIT. Provost Davis provided reassurance that The Center for Creative Photography’s (CCP) integrated mission of research, education, the archival-curatorial function and the international exhibition museum function will remain unchanged following the Provost’s review of a recommendation to change CCP’s reporting structure from the Dean of Libraries to the Vice-President for Research. He is working with faculty leaders to develop a process to identify the unit’s core activities and their relationships with other campus units as well as with the community. He then will recruit a CCP director.

3G. President Peter Likins

President Likins explained in general, how money from Proposition 301will be distributed if it passes in tomorrow’s election. The money will flow directly to the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR), who will then distribute it directly to the three universities, which differs from the normal process in which university funds flow from the state legislature. The proposition also establishes substantial constraints and accountability and requires ABOR to submit annual reports about the disposition of funds. President Likins predicted that ABOR may allocate money focussed more on function rather than on individual institutions, such as inter-institutional research and technology transfer, research and technology transfer initiatives at each institution, expanding access, and assisting in the development of the professional workforce. The inter-institutional research topics that were defined by the Governor’s Task Force on Higher Education are bioscience and biotechnology, and information science and technology. Research topics unique to our institution are optics and water-related studies.

QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

Senator Silverman inquired whether a search for the Interim Director of CCIT was conducted prior to his being appointed director and suggested the principle of conducting open searches should be honored whenever possible. President Likins replied that he agrees with Senator Silverman and explained that during the time when Mely Tynan’s position was vacant, Pete Perona continued with his responsibility for managing CCIT as he had within Mely’s administration. Former Provost Sypherd then appointed Mr. Perona interim director without conducting a search. In the continuing absence of a decision about the overall management structure, Provost Davis recognized that Mr. Perona had been functioning as interim director for over 18 months and appointed him director.

Senator Gruener observed that all of the faculty on the search committee for the Dean of the College of Medicine and Vice President for Health Sciences are full professors and asked that a more vigilant effort be made to include associate professors and to enfranchise the middle faculty in such committees. Provost Davis agreed and thanked him for that observation.

Senator Szilagyi asked about faculty’s rights to privacy with respect to releasing course evaluations retroactive to 1993. Chair Hogle replied that he intends to protect faculty rights and to ensure that nothing more than the numerical scores on the University Teaching Center course evaluations are released.

Senator Marchalonis inquired whether the College of Medicine is eligible to be included in the distribution of Proposition 301 funds. President Likins affirmed that it would be, especially considering the research emphasis on bioscience and biotechnology.

Senator Auxier asked if any funding is available to expand advising. Chair Hogle anticipates the Task Force on Advising will make recommendations to the Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee and that funding will be determined by this group as well as by the budget team of the President’s cabinet. Senator Richardson responded that Campaign Arizona has also received a request for advising funding.

Senator O’Brien stated that J. Glenn Songer is from the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, not Architecture.

Senator Medine corrected two passages under item 8, New Business. In the first paragraph, second sentence, he added "as followed" "to his knowledge," so the sentence should read, "Senator Medine explained that the procedures as followed leading to Dr. Kay’s dismissal have been faulted by the Superior Court, and that, to his knowledge, no university professor in the United States has ever been dismissed because of scientific misconduct even when the charges have been proven or sustained. The minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting on October 2, 2000 were approved as corrected.

CONSENT AGENDA ITEM FORWARDED FROM THE SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON CORPORATE RELATIONS POLICY REGARDING USE OF CORPORATE LOGOS ON UNIVERSITY APPAREL (attachment)
Item returned to committee.

INFORMATION ITEM: UNIVERSITY STRATEGIC PLAN (attachment).

Chair of the Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee Andy Polk distributed a draft of a strategic plan including an environmental scan and a request for feedback from Faculty Senators. In addition to the Senate, the plan is also being disseminated to the college academic advisory councils, student organizations, Staff Advisory Council, and the cabinet. The committee hopes for a three-part product including a comprehensive strategic plan that is a broad declaration of intentions, an implementation plan focusing on University priorities for the next five years, and a strategic budget. Dr. Polk asked Senators to provide feedback about anything that is missing or any misplaced priorities in either the draft plan or the scan. He also asked Senators’ to provide priorities and guidance about choices that need to be made in the implementation plan.

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY (attachment)

Senator Mitchell presented a seconded motion [Motion 2000/01-12] from the APPC for the Senate to approve the "Revised Final Draft Sexual Harassment Policy 11/2/00" distributed at today’s meeting. Using an overhead projector, Senator Mitchell explained each change individually, with deletions noted by strike-throughs and additions in all caps. The beginning paragraph on page one was suggested by the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) and provides a context for the policy. On page two the added text was also suggested by the CSW and emphasizes that some reporting agencies have deadlines and corrects the agencies’ contact information. The first change on page three replaces "after learning of" with less-vague language, "after being informed of." The next change emphasizes the importance of supervisors not taking disciplinary action unless a supervisor has reasonable belief of imminent danger of serious bodily harm and is unable to reach a member of the Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Office. The policy also removes the University Attorney’s Office as a contact point for reporting independent action by supervisors. On page four, Senator Mitchell reviewed the questions from the October Senate meeting regarding the section about anonymous complaints and shared the responses to those questions. The difference between "reasonable response" and "appropriate action" is that "reasonable response" is standard legal language specifically used in the Department of Education’s Guidance on Sexual Harassment and is basically synonymous with "appropriate action," a term that was used to provide variety. Senator Warnock commented that variety is not appropriate in this type of document --consistency is. How a reasonable response or appropriate action is determined is outlined in the anonymous complaints section of the policy and varies on a case by case basis. In the third line of the anonymous complaints section, Senator Likins suggested the word "name" be made plural. In the last sentence of this section "and" indicates a compound requirement. Senator Spece suggested the term "fully" be inserted before the word "respond." Senator Mitchell asked Sue Ellen Schuerman of the University Attorney’s Office to respond. Ms. Schuerman commented that the meaning of "fully" is inherent in the present wording. Senator Warnock moved [Motion 2000/01-13] to amend the passage to read " . . . names not be revealed, and there is insufficient corroborating evidence . . . ." Senator Hogle seconded the motion. Senator Spece emphasized that every protection possible should be offered the accused, including the name of the accuser. Randy Richardson suggested adding "adequately" following the words "could not respond." Senator Likins suggested adding the word "independent" before "insufficient" and the phrase "so that," following "evidence" in Senator Warnock’s motion. Senator Weinand asked about the Constitutional guarantee for an accused to be confronted by his accuser. Senator Spece explained that this provision really applies only in criminal prosecutions. Senator Hogle withdrew his second. Senator Warnock restated his motion: However, a reasonable response would not include disciplinary action against an alleged harasser if an accuser insists that his or her name not be revealed, if there is insufficient independent corroborating evidence and if the alleged could not respond to the charges of sexual harassment without knowing the name of the accuser. Senator Hogle seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. On page five, Senator Mitchell indicated the final revisions were merely minor wording changes. Senator Schooley called for the question. The motion to approve the Sexual Harassment policy passed with two nay votes.

Vice Chair Hancock advised Senators that following the last Senate meeting, the Senate Executive Committee requested a chronology of the events of this case and this has been distributed today. Senator Medine spoke for the motion noting that the procedures as followed have been faulted by the Superior Court and the substance of the charges have been called into question by an enhanced review. The signers of the memorandum would like the process to begin anew with the University Committee on Ethics and Commitment (UCEC). He also asserted that the aim of the memorandum is a just conclusion and is not intended to impugn the colleagues who have served in these committees. In response to Senator Hogle’s memorandum to Senators that accompanied the chronology, Senator Medine said the recommendation to return the proceedings to UCEC is urging fairness to Dr. Kay. He also responded to Dr. Hogle’s statement in the third sentence of the penultimate paragraph concerned with drawing conclusions about evidence; Dr. Medine said he is observing facts about procedures and charges that have been called into question, not drawing conclusions. Senator Gruener asked whether the term "fact" should be substituted with "the opinion of the court." Senator Medine disagreed. Senator Hogle noted it is not within the Senate’s prerogative to comment or advise on cases before the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure (CAFT) and read from his memorandum. In addition, Dr. Kay’s attorney recently appealed to the court to have the CAFT proceedings halted and the judge declined to intervene. Senator Hogle commented that the Senate should trust CAFT. Senator Romer commented that to him, this case is only about procedures and he views it as an assault on a tenured faculty member’s rights as well as an attack on tenure. He also questioned why the University is willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to pursue this case. Senator Schooley remarked it is dead wrong for the Senate to micromanage elected committees. Senator Silverman agrees with the substance of the motion, that the case be returned to UCEC, but he also agrees that a legislative body (Senate) should not be imposing its opinions on a judicial body (CAFT). He noted that the memorandum has been sent to CAFT so they are aware of how some senators feel that this case should be returned to UCEC and also acknowledged that Kay’s attorney can raise this issue. Senator Silverman said he would abstain from voting on the motion. Senator Szilagyi commented that the Faculty Senate is the highest body elected by the faculty, and that it can do anything it deems appropriate. Since, according to the chronology, the case was brought before UCEC in 1997, Senator Kidd asked why the case should be brought to UCEC again. Senator Spece replied that this case is dividing the faculty and reminded Senators that as professors, they are to profess truth and they are given academic freedom, tenure, and due process rights as protection. He reminded Senators that Dr. Sam James was a UCEC member in 1997 and that in open session today he stated that the committee found no scientific misconduct yet the charges went forward improperly and his protests were ignored. Senator Spece urged that, if the former procedure as followed was ruled arbitrary and capricious, then the findings are null and void and the process should begin anew with UCEC. Furthermore, if reasonable minds differ on the interpretation of these policies and procedures, a faculty member’s due process rights should take precedence. Senator Hogle cited a letter from UCEC dated April 15, 1997 signed by all of the members of the inquiry team including Dr. James, which made no conclusions about the allegations of fabricated data but recommended a formal investigation by CAFT because of concerns related to research and lab safety. Senator Spece countered that the scientific misconduct allegation was improperly pursued and that resulted in Kay’s dismissal. Senator Spece stated, "The repeated theme that ‘we’ve got to get her guilty this time because if we don’t, it’s going to make the people who found her guilty last time look bad,’ will be evidence that will be presented in court if this ever goes to court." Senator Sheridan stated that this discussion had degenerated to an emotional level and he agreed that the Senate should not intervene in CAFT proceedings. Senator Gruener moved [Motion 2000/01-14] to table the discussion until the next meeting. Motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:16 p.m.

Wanda H. Howell, Secretary

Appendix*

"Policy regarding use of corporate logos on University apparel"

Memorandum from Senators Bickel, Garrard, Medine, Romer, Spece, Szilagyi, and Witte to Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure regarding "Pending CAFT Hearings on Allegations against Dr. Marguerite Kay"

Life and Work Connections information sheets

Faculty Senate and General Faculty Standing Committees 2000-01 revised rosters

"Excerpts for Faculty Senate minutes dealing with WRIMCAT"

"Please Help the University of Arizona Plan for the Next 5 Years!" strategic plan draft

"Revised Final Draft 11/2/00 Sexual Harassment Policy"

October 10, 2000 Memorandum from Anna Wilkinson to Jerry Hogle re: public records request for all course evaluations retroactive to 1993.

"Chronology in the Case of Dr. Marguerite Kay, Requested by the Senate Executive Committee"

"Statement by the Chair of the Faculty"

*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.