|
|
FACULTY SENATE
|
FACULTY SENATE
THE UNIVERSITY
OF ARIZONA®
February 14, 2005
These minutes may be accessed
electronically at:
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/senate/minutes.htm
Visit the faculty governance webpage at:
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/senate/
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Howell at 3:02 p.m. in the College of Law, Room 146
Present: Senators Baca, Brobbel, Bui, Burd, Chandler, Chapman, Cusanovich, D. Davis, G. Davis, Eddy, Garcia, Gruener, Hancock, Hildebrand, Howell, Jones, Kiefer, Kinney, Larson, Likins, Marchalonis, Mitchell, Mitchneck, Patterson, Pintozzi, Pitt, Powell, San Martin, Silverman, Smith, St. John, Sterling, Tomanek, Witte, and Zwolinski. An ASUA representative substituted for Worle. Robert Sankey served as Parliamentarian.
Absent: Senators Bixby Christenson, Conway, Cromwell, Dahlgran, Garrett, Jenkins, Joens, Mountford, Songer, Spece, Strittmatter, Swanson, Tatman, Timmermann, Ulreich, Vierling, Weinand, Willerton, Worle, and Zizza.
2. OPEN SESSION
A representative from Arizona Baseball invited Senators to attend the Faculty Staff Appreciation Day baseball game against ASU on Wednesday, February 23, 2005, and the softball game on March 4 against Eastern Michigan.
Senator Silverman of the Senate Task Force for Monitoring Labor and Human Rights Issues invited Senators to visit the Task Force’s “unseenamerica,” a national documentary photography exhibit of images taken by garment workers, day laborers, and other people whose lives go unseen and ignored. The exhibit will be in the Student Union Gallery from February 10 to March 10 and is sponsored by President Likins’ office and the Southwest Center for Economic Integrity (SWCEI) as well as several campus departments. The exhibit includes photographs from a number of Tucson day laborers who participated in a photography class sponsored by SWCEI.
3. REPORTS
3A. ASUA President Alistair Chapman
ASUA continues to work to increase the amount of state funds flowing into the Arizona Financial Aid Trust. Revised senate bill SB1487 would bring $5M more into the fund to increase affordability and accessibility and has passed the senate’s higher education committee 6-1. The Arizona Board of Regents support this bill and President Chapman asked for faculty support as well. ASUA’s formal proposal to ABOR for tuition increase calls for undergraduate resident tuition to increase by $320, UG non-resident to increase by $405, and graduate resident and non-resident tuition to increase by $430. The proposal includes a caveat that a minimum of $30 of each student’s increase in tuition goes to course availability and that the remaining amount to fully fund a 10 percent increase in graduate tuition remission, which would boost graduate assistant tuition waivers to 70 percent.
3B. GPSC President Amanda Brobbel
GPSC’s Student Showcase staged a successful visit on February 8 to the state legislature. President Brobbel and Senator Eddy met with legislators in both the house and senate to ask them to support the governor’s budget. President Brobbel and Senator Eddy will travel to Washington D.C. on February 16 as part of the Coalition for an Affordable and Accessible Graduate Education to talk to legislators about the Higher Education Affordability & Equity Act and other issues facing students. They have meetings with every Arizona representative, but only Senator Kyl will meet with the students personally. The Graduate and Professional Student Travel Grants Fund has received 128 applications as of February 2005, an increase over last year’s total of 140. Funding for the grants has not increased, however. Applications for nominations of faculty, staff, graduate students, best master’s project and best dissertation for the Graduate Student Appreciation Week April 8 are now available online at www.gpsc.arizona.edu .
3C. Secretary of the Faculty Robert Mitchell
Secretary Mitchell called attention to the list of candidates running in the upcoming election on Senators’ desks. He spoke with the Chair of the Committee on Elections this morning who advised him that Vice Chair Howell is running unopposed for Chair of the Faculty. This will vacate the office of Vice Chair for the remaining year of Vice Chair Howell’s term. Secretary Mitchell announced that he intends to resign as Secretary in order to run for this remaining year as Vice Chair, which will also create a vacancy for Secretary for a remainder of one year. These positions will be filled during the second, “General Election.” Petitions are available now for both the Vice Chair and Secretary positions, which require 40 signatures and are due in the Faculty Center on March 4.
3D. Vice Chair of the Faculty Wanda Howell
Vice Chair Howell announced that the online voting for the General Faculty Primary Election runs from February 21 through March 4, 2005 and results will be posted March 8. Vice Chair Howell asked Senators to vote online, although paper ballots are available from the Faculty Center by request. Nominating petitions are also for the remaining unsubscribed seat on the Committee on Committees and require 20 signatures and are due March 4.
3E. Chair of the Faculty Jory Hancock
Chair Hancock suggested that the faculty needs to do at least as well as the students in voter turnout for the upcoming faculty election and asked Senators to encourage colleagues to vote online, but above all, to vote. Turning to the statewide higher education redesign study, Chair Hancock attended a meeting on Saturday of the eight-member workgroup which reviewed stakeholders’ reports and began formulating a proposal for restructuring higher education in Arizona to manage the anticipated population growth and demand for accessibility and affordability in the next fifteen years. He attempted to qualify newspapers’ reports about that meeting indicating that a decision had been made, saying rather that it was a step toward making a decision. He also explained that the proposed five-university system was more of a question put forth, rather than a formal proposal, as evidenced by the study group being given 18 months to conduct the study. Saturday’s meeting began with describing the needs present in the state such as broader options in affordability, type of education, and choices of location. He said the discussion also helped to correct a misperception about UA’s admission requirement for entering freshmen in 2006, which will be raised to the top 25%, not 10%, of the high school graduating class, with the discretion to go to the top 50%. The meeting also helped members to understand that UA’s goal to increase financial aid is dependent upon the ability to increase tuition. The meeting resulted in a pledge from the community colleges for more dialogue about the needs and preparation of community college students who will transfer to the universities after two years. The workgroup endorsed a concept of a more prudent plan to “expand on demand” rather than preparing in anticipation for projections that are still some years out and difficult to trust. The plan requires greater flexibility and reinforces the value of differentiated missions, especially UA South’s. Next steps include an outline of the workgroup’s meeting to be sent to each university with a request for response to each point, and then the presidents and Regents will consider the redesign group’s proposal. Chair Hancock congratulated Vice Chair Howell on what appears to be an imminent victory in her run for Chair of the Faculty, and advised the Senate that she is well-prepared for this position.
3F. Provost George
Davis
Provost Davis congratulated Vice Chair Howell and said
he looks forward to working with her both at UA and at the Arizona Faculties
Council meetings. He announced that the Office of the Provost and the
Association for Women Faculty will host Deborah A. Freund, Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs and Provost at Syracuse University on Thursday, Feb. 17, as a
principal speaker on career tracks for women in academic leadership. Dr Freund
will be joined by Provost Davis later that day for an open campus conversation
comparing the challenges that public and private research universities face.
Provost Davis has extended invitations to 25 faculty members including several
department heads and deans, to serve on the search committee for the Vice
President for Research and Graduate Education and Economic Development (VPR).
Dean Sander will chair this search and is particularly effective in recruiting
outstanding research faculty and in crossing college boundaries in partnership
with other deans. He anticipates that this particularly large and diverse
committee will work hard to find the most outstanding nominees. Self-nominations
are appropriate and he hopes they will be submitted by March 7. When the
committee arrives at a short list, a series of campus-wide interviews with those
nominees will be conducted. The Provost hopes to announce the candidate who has
accepted the offer by May 1 and for that person to assume office on July 1,
2005. It is of critical importance for the University to have the office of Vice
President for Research filled before President Likins retires. Provost Davis
noted that a number of individuals and units currently report directly to the
VPR including BIO5, the Technical Park, C-Path Institute, University compliance
offices, and other affiliated units. There will be an opportunity to consider
whether this construct is the most effective and also how to go about replacing
Graduate Dean Hixon in August.
3G. President Peter Likins
President Likins said the higher education system redesign has been a substantial and valuable study which reinforced the realization that we must find ways to accommodate surging enrollments in both the community colleges and universities by developing cost-effective strategies, which is best done by differentiating missions. It seems unlikely that additional universities will need to be created. The concept of UA South with a very different mission with lower tuition and increased accessibility both academically and financially, and increased responsiveness to students’ immediate needs, such as place-bound or other needs will allow UA to continue its advanced education and research missions. President Likins’ tuition recommendation for UA South is therefore a freeze. He will propose to the Regents to increase UA’s undergraduate resident tuition by $400, non-resident by $500, and graduate students by $600, with TA and RA waivers increasing to 70%. In addition to tuition increase proposals, he will propose academic surcharges for several programs including engineering and architecture, in addition to increasing the Eller college’s surcharge and adding a $60 information technology fee for all students. He noted that the financial aid set aside is required to be 14%, but the UA far exceeds that. UA is now ranked 41st in the cost of public universities nationwide; the goal is to raise tuition enough to be at the top of the bottom one-third of public universities’ tuition costs. The Regents are struggling to recognize the massive shift of public higher education costs from taxpayers to tuition, contracts, and gifts. In Arizona, this cost shift is more dramatic than anywhere else in the country except for Colorado and South Carolina. Referring to the Senate’s Agenda Item 8, President Likins hopes the Senate will support a motion to endorse this concept to increase academic integrity in intercollegiate athletics (ICA), which is part of an important faculty-driven national movement among faculty athletic representatives and faculty senates to improve ICA. President Likins is currently serving as the Pac-10 Conference Division 1A’s representative to the NCAA, he serves on the Knight Commission, and he has been tapped by Miles Brand, President of the National Collegiate Athletic Association to chair a Presidential Task Force on the Future of Intercollegiate Athletics in an effort to assist athletic departments in controlling the rising expenses of college athletics. This is a daunting task, given that the Supreme Court has ruled that setting any limits on the number of coaches or coaches’ compensation is a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. All of these organizations, along with the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA) are vehicles that are trying to address similar concerns of improving ICA. As a result, enormous progress regarding academics in athletics has been made in recent years, and the NCAA has been implementing a number of recommendations to improve academic progress reporting and to determine serious contemporaneous penalties for institutions that fail in academic standards for student-athletes. A third aspect of reform that needs more work will be to consider student-athletes’ well-being.
4. QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD FOR AGENDA ITEM 3
Senator Gruener asked why the first election is called a “primary” and whether it in fact counts as the real election. Vice Chair Howell explained that the first election is called a Primary Election as specified in the Faculty Constitution and Bylaws, and that it does indeed count as a real election.
Senator Garcia asked whether degrees coming from UA South are labeled as UA and if the same standards apply to these degrees. Provost Davis explained that the diplomas clearly indicate UA South, and that while UAS may offer courses here in Pima County, its mission will remain clear and distinct from UA. An effective planning process must take place, however, to think about the outgrowth and implications of “Changing Directions,” which essentially eliminates “turf boundaries” and what the relationship with UA South should be. Provost Davis has charged Vice Provost for Instruction Jerry Hogle and UA South Dean Randy Groth with drafting preliminary set of charges for the a workforce here at UA to define specific possibilities to look into for UA South.
Senator Silverman commented that Arizona has no private alternatives to speak of, nor any public small liberal arts institutions, and he believes that Arizona should be looking toward that direction to provide more choice. Chair Hancock said this workgroup spent several sessions looking at small liberal arts models and determined that that kind of education is much more expensive and reached a consensus that Arizona simply cannot afford this alternative anymore than it can afford to have five universities. Nor can the state afford to build something now to anticipate student demand fifteen years from now. The “expand on demand” concept is a reality that the economy can manage. Provost Davis commented that Vermont’s legislature, noting the paucity of public universities, offers state financial aid to individual students who are then permitted to take that funding wherever they want to go, even out of state.
Senator Burd inquired if and how UA South courses will be differentiated on transcripts. Provost Davis said that Vice Provost for Instruction Hogle is working with the registrar’s office to prefix UAS courses to be certain that this is clear. The University also wants to make sure that the articulations between all of the universities are clear. Clarity regarding the product, where it was produced, and confidence that upper level courses from UAS will be accepted, transferred and articulated as upper division courses at UA, although the salary structure will of necessity need to evolve along different lines from the research institution or there will be no cost savings advantage.
Secretary Mitchell suggested that the Senate Executive Committee place this question on the Senate’s agenda for a future meeting.
5. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 24, 2005
The minutes of January 24, 2005 were approved.
6. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: EMPLOYEE SCREENING POLICY FORWARDED AS A SECONDED MOTION FROM THE ACADEMIC PERSONNEL POLICY COMMITTEE (attachment)
Chair Howell explained that the Revised Employee Screening Policy comes as a seconded motion [Motion 2004/05-29] from the Academic Personnel Policy Committee. Although the Senate passed a pre-employment screening policy last May 2004, because of state limitations and complications about the jurisdictions around the issue of fingerprinting, an ABOR directive is requiring several changes to that policy. Academic Personnel Policy Committee Chair Larry Aleamoni noted that the changes required by ABOR and the state are indicated on the enclosure by strikethroughs and underlined text. APPC reviewed these changes and felt that none were of a major concern to faculty and so forwarded it to the Senate. Human Resources provided several additional changes to this document immediately prior to the Senate meeting today. Titles added to section 1 of the “Security Sensitive Position Designation” include “assistant and associate vice-provosts,” and “business managers.” An additional change under “Security Sensitive Position Designation” section 2, replaces “children under age 16” with “minors who are not enrolled students of the University.” Senators questioned why the last sentence of the section “Criminal History and Identity” was struck. Chair Aleamoni recognized A. Vaillancourt of Human Resources who responded that the sentence about criminal background checks has been omitted from this final version because the University has found it extremely difficult to obtain information from the National Crime Information Center and our background-checking service can get the information more efficiently and economically by checking local records in counties and/or states where the prospective employee has lived. Getting information from other countries is extremely difficult too. The motion to approve this policy as amended by Human Resources immediately prior to this meeting passed unanimously.
7. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: COALITION ON INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS’ PROPOSAL (attachment)
Chair Howell announced that she is willing to honor a request to rearrange the order of the agenda so as to consider the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics’ (COIA) proposal at this time. Senator Silverman began by thanking President Likins’ for his earlier remarks today in support of academic reform in ICA. The COIA is a coalition made up of 47 faculty senates including five PAC-10 schools. By drafting proposals and then asking member schools to endorse them, the COIA provides a method for faculty to have direct input to the NCAA about reforms in ICA. This academic integrity document (AID) entitled “Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics: Principles, Rules, and Best Practices” was drafted by COIA members last fall and has been discussed electronically as well as at the COIA conference at Vanderbilt University in January 2005. Our Senate Executive Committee appointed a four-person committee consisting of Senator Andy Silverman, Senator and SAPC Chair Don Davis, Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR) Dudley Woodard, and ASUA President Alistair Chapman, to review COIA proposals to help the Faculty Senate to take a position. The AID includes specific proposed changes to NCAA plus a set of recommendations that can be called “best practices.” Coincidentally, NCAA President Miles Brand published an editorial NCAA News Online endorsing the COIA’s comprehensive approach to academic integrity and generally supporting the AID. If the COIA member schools approve the AID, the proposed Bylaws changes will go to the NCAA and member schools will be asked to begin implementing the best practices provisions within their campuses. Our COIA subcommittee reviewed the AID and recommended three revisions to the recommendations for changes to NCAA Bylaws. The subcommittee brought forth the following seconded motion [Motion 2004/05-30]: “The Faculty Senate of the University of Arizona approves of the COIA goal of improving academic integrity of the intercollegiate athletic program and the welfare of student athletes and, thus, endorses, in general, the proposal titled “Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics: Principles, Rules, and Best Practices,” and recommends that the President ask the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee to use the document for the purpose of conducting a self-study on this campus of the matters set out in the document and that the results of the study be reported to the President and to the Faculty Senate.” Senators inquired about who will pay for the advising personnel listed in section 5.2. President Likins said that these positions are paid for by the ICA department. UA’s advising personnel may not meet the degree requirements listed here and our reporting structure differs, so this might require some changes. Senator Silverman reminded senators that these are recommended “best practices” for each campus to consider and implement, if they agree and are financially able. Provost Davis noted that the AID seems to be creating two accountability structures, the NCAA and the COIA. Senator D. Davis responded that this isn’t another reporting or rule-making entity: rather it is introducing transparency to the athletics process. The FAR will do the reporting and can choose to disagree. President Likins stated that he would be happy to ask the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee to conduct the proposed self-study using the AID. Senators inquired whether other universities are conducting self-studies. Senator Silverman responded that Bob Eno of the University of Indiana who chairs the COIA steering committee intends to share our motion with member schools. Senators asked whether this amounts to creating a special class of students, since similar accommodations are not made for students in the performing arts, but Chair Hancock responded that student performers are participating in an activity that is graded and for which credits are earned. D. Woodard also reminded senators that the University must follow NCAA rules. Motion passed unanimously. Senator Silverman will report the Senate’s vote to the COIA, and in turn will then report the entire COIA’s vote to the Senate. He expects the COIA will next turn to the issues of ICA finances that President Likins alluded to in his earlier remarks.
8. APPROVAL
OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEM FORWARDED AS A SECONDED MOTION FROM THE STUDENT AFFAIRS
POLICY COMMITTEE (attachment)
This item, approval of the Graduate Student Grievance Policy [Motion
2004/05-31], was removed from Consent Agenda. Associate Graduate Dean Horgan
explained that this policy was approved by the Graduate Council and Provost
Management Group over a year ago, and has been implemented as an interim policy
since June 2004. Senators expressed concern that the complete policy was
omitted from the packets and therefore they cannot know what the changes are.
SAPC will return this item with the complete policy to the Faculty Senate in
March. Motion not acted upon.
9. DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE ACTION: PROPOSAL FOR AMENDING UNIVERSITY RETIREMENT PLANS
(attachment)
Secretary Mitchell explained that
the document in Senators’ packets today was written by Dr. Doug Johnson who is a
former chair of ASU’s Academic Senate and has worked with ASU’s
administration on issues of faculty compensation and retirement. Dr. Johnson is
seeking support from the academic senates of all three campuses for a proposed
amendment to allow faculty to have an option to defer selecting a retirement
plan within thirty days of beginning employment until a tenure decision has been
reached or a period of up to five year for administrative and professional
employees. The Arizona State Retirement System (ASRS) is a very competitive
retirement plan, but constitutes a huge risk for tenure-eligible faculty and
really isn’t affordable if tenure doesn’t work out. The ASRS also provides
$150-250/month for health insurance for individuals/families. Dr. Johnson asked
the Arizona Faculties Council (AFC) in January to consider negotiating to amend
ABOR’s policy on optional retirement plans which is a first step toward taking
it to the legislature. The Provosts of all three institutions were in attendance
and expressed no opposition if the proposal is revenue-neutral. ASU passed its
resolution to support this proposal in December 2004. Secretary Mitchell offered
as a possible motion the following language: “Allow employees the option of
deferring retirement plan selection until tenure decision information is known
(or a period of up to five years for administrative and professional employees).
Employee retirement contributions would accumulate in a managed account similar
to those now used for pre-vesting employer contributions until a retirement plan
selection. Eligible employees would be allowed a one time election to switch
plans with the possibility of a non-taxable rollover retirement funds. Amend ORP
(Optional Retirement Plan) to provide a health insurance subsidy for
pre-Medicare eligible retirees, comparable to ASRS. Universities through ABOR
could contract for ORP participation in the health insurance benefit program of
ASRS, or contract with a private vendor. Currently ASRS provides a health
insurance subsidy of $150/month for individuals, and $250/month for families.”
Senator Silverman moved [Motion 2004/05-32] the Faculty Senate
endorse this proposed language. Motion was seconded. Senators’ questions
included, “What about continuing eligible personnel?” Secretary Mitchell
accepted that as a friendly amendment and said he would pass that information on
to the AFC chair. If the faculty member does receive tenure and chooses to move
into the ASRS, when is s/he vested? C. Nicholson of Human Resources offered that
there is nothing to vest if the person just joined. The ASRS is determined by
points, with 80 points as the fully vested total. It would need to be decided
whether newly joining employee would receive five years’ points upon joining the
ASRS. What are the arguments against this proposal? Could this create a
situation in which the ASRS is temporarily under-funded and would that be a
reason for the legislature to decline? This proposal seems to imply that the new
employee is also new to the state, and that is not necessarily true. Whose
responsibility it is to invest and manage that money for the five years? This
could be a downside, since it wouldn’t be like a TIAA-CREF account. Anticipating
such issues, Secretary Mitchell offered more generic language as a potential
motion: “The University of Arizona Faculty Senate supports the Arizona Faculties
Council’s efforts to work with the Arizona Board of Regents in amending ABOR’s
policies to provide increased flexibility for faculty members in their choice of
retirement options.” Senator Silverman withdrew his motion [Motion
2004/05-32]. Senator Jones moved [Motion 2004/05-33] to approve the
resolution offered by Secretary Mitchell. Motion carried with one abstention.
Secretary Mitchell said that the AFC will take this resolution and a series of
very complex negotiations will ensue between the AFC and ABOR. Senator Pitt
noted for the record that in addition to TIAA-CREF, any fund in Vanguard,
Fidelity and VALIC are all allowable retirement investment funds for ORP.
10. SECOND READING AND POSSIBLE ACTION: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY (attachment)
Senator and Research Policy Committee Chair M. Cusanovich brought back Research Policy Committee’s seconded motion [Motion 2003/04-47] to approve the Research Integrity Policy from the April 2004 Faculty Senate meeting. This motion, he said, was not acted upon because senators and others on the faculty offered input, which the RPC has now incorporated, excluding certain objections to ABOR policy which RPC cannot change. Chair Cusanovich provided “Notes” about the Intellectual Property Policy, which explains the areas that RPC worked on with the University Attorneys and the Office of Technology Transfer (OTT) to achieve this version. The ABOR policy is unclear about who owns what, in a legal sense, so this policy provides faculty a clear option to get ownership, if they so desire. Employee Use of Software is a process more than a policy, but the details and procedures are now clearly described. The process for dispute resolution has not changed, but the language has been clarified. The RPC agrees that some portion of Intellectual Property Net Income should go to support the OTT, but the two groups could not agree upon an amount. The amount will not have a great impact right now, but could in years hence. The OTT and RPC agree about this issue in principle, so to avoid further delays in approving this policy now, Chair Cusanovich negotiated an agreement with Patrick Jones, Director of OTT, to work with the Intellectual Property Committee to determine the percentage an amendment will be brought back to the Faculty Senate later. Also, since formulas and numbers can change relative to time and events, the Committee removed specific numbers from the policy. Senators noted that Section D, 7 appears to be duplicated within the body of the document on page 9. Senator Cusanovich made note of `the error. If this policy is passed, it will replace the interim policy. In exhibit A, does the fund for promotion of research come from the OTT or the VPR’s office? Exhibit A is Board policy. The 15% goes to support OTT. The fund for translational research comes out of a different pot. Motion carried.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:00 PM.
Robert P. Mitchell, Secretary
Appendix*
1. Revised draft: Pre-employment Screening Policy dated 1/10/05
2. Consent Agenda item forwarded from the Student Affairs Policy Committee.
3. Memorandum to Senators dated February 3, 2005 from Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics Committee
4. Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics: Principles, Rules, and Best Practices-Executive Summary
5. Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics: Principles, Rules, and Best Practices-Revised Draft List of Specific Proposals
6. Presentation to AFC urging support for Amending University Retirement Plans (1/28/05)
7. Notes about the Intellectual Property Policy for Faculty Senate meeting February 14, 2005
8. The University of Arizona Interim Intellectual Property Policy (Revised by Research Policy Committee, February 2005)
9. Publicity flyer for unseenamerica national exhibit on display in the Union Gallery from February 10 to March 10.
*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.
Motion 2004/05-29 Seconded motion from the Academic Personnel Policy Committee to approve the Employee Screening Policy, with amended sections as requested by Human Resources just prior to today’s meeting. Motion carried.
Motion 2004/05-30 Seconded motion from the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics sub-committee to approve of the resolution: “The Faculty Senate of the University of Arizona approves of the COIA goal of improving academic integrity of the intercollegiate athletic program and the welfare of student athletes and, thus, endorses, in general, the proposal titled “Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics: Principles, Rules, and Best Practices,” and recommends that the President ask the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee to use the document for the purpose of conducting a self-study on this campus of the matters set out in the document and that the results of the study be reported to the President and to the Faculty Senate.” Motion carried.
Motion 2004/05-31 Seconded motion from the Student Affairs Policy Committee to approve the interim Graduate Student Grievance Policy. Motion not acted upon.
Motion 2004/05-32 Motion to endorse the following resolution: “Allow employees the option of deferring retirement plan selection until tenure decision information is known (or a period of up to five years for administrative and professional employees). Employee retirement contributions would accumulate in a managed account similar to those now used for pre-vesting employer contributions until a retirement plan selection. Eligible employees would be allowed a one time election to switch plans with the possibility of a non-taxable rollover retirement funds. Amend ORP (Optional Retirement Plan) to provide a health insurance subsidy for pre-Medicare eligible retirees, comparable to ASRS. Universities through ABOR could contract for ORP participation in the health insurance benefit program of ASRS, or contract with a private vendor. Currently ASRS provides a health insurance subsidy of $150/month for individuals, and $250/month for families.” Motion withdrawn.
Motion 2004/05-33 Motion to endorse the following resolution: “The University of Arizona Faculty Senate supports the Arizona Faculties Council’s efforts to work with the Arizona Board of Regents in amending ABOR’s policies to provide increased flexibility for faculty members in their choice of retirement options.” Motion carried.
Motion 2003/04-47 Seconded motion from the Research Policy Committee to approve the revised Intellectual Property Policy. Motion carried.
FACULTY CENTER
1400 E. Mabel
PO BOX 210473
The University of Arizona Faculty Center
facsen@u.arizona.edu
last updated
04/13/05