• Home
  • SenEx-University Senate Executive Committee 09/27/2016

SenEx-University Senate Executive Committee 09/27/2016

SenEx
September 27, 2016 - 3:00pm
Provost’s Conference Room
Agenda: 
  1. Announcements
     
  2. Approval of minutes from September 13, 2016
     
  3. Standing Reports
    1.  University Senate President Joe Harrington
    2. Faculty Senate President Pam Keller
    3. Student Senate President Gabby Naylor
    4. Staff Senate President Liz Phillips
  1. Speakers: Jenn Anderson, Policy Office, and Jeff Chasen, Associate Vice Provost of Compliance, to discuss University Policy Program
  1. Unfinished Business
    1. Ad Hoc Cost Saving Committee
  2. New Business
Minutes: 

Approved October 18, 2016

MEMBERS PRESENT: Joe Harrington, Pam Keller, Amalia Monroe-Gulick, Tom Beisecker, Pam Fine, Ruben Flores, Dylan Jones, Brian Moss, Jacob Murray, Gabby Naylor, Liz Phillips

FY17 MEMBERS ABSENT: Charlotte Goodman (excused), Brittney Oleniacz (excused), Suzanne Shontz (excused)

ALSO PRESENT: Maureen Altman and Kathy Reed, University Governance; Jonathan Clark, University Senate; Jeff Chasen, Associate Vice Provost of Compliance; Jenn Anderson, Interim Director of the Policy Office

Joe Harrington called the meeting to order and asked for announcements. He said that the Provost asked him to encourage everyone to attend the monthly TGIT (Thank Goodness It’s Thursday) events at the Alumni Center.  (Dates are available on their website http://www.kualumni.org/tgit/).

MINUTES for September 13, 2016 were approved.

  Report of University Senate President

Noting that the chancellor search will begin soon, Harrington said that he and Pam Keller have made it clear that Governance wants representation.  He announced that the new presidents’ newsletter is on the Governance website and asked SenEx to send the link to anyone they thought would be interested.  The newsletter will also be in KU Today.  The presidents from all three senates will meet on Thursday; Harrington asked SenEx to let them know about any issues that they would like them to be aware of.

REPORT OF FACULTY SENATE PRESIDENT

Pam Keller announced that the Faculty Code was approved by the Chancellor.  She informed SenEx of some of the issues and events of the last KBOR meeting.  She attended a breakfast which was held for members of KBOR and COFSP (the Council of Faculty Senate Presidents).  Regarding budget, KBOR’s focus is on restoring the four-percent cut.  Every school proposed enhancement goals.  KU proposed 1.3 million dollars for the Jayhawk Success Academy, a summer bridge program for low income and first generation students.  Ten million dollars over two years was proposed to expand the medical education program for the School of Medicine.  The schools submitted their draft weapons policies to KBOR; she will report to SenEx when she and Harrington receive KU’s policy.  To attain system-wide uniformity in awarding credit for AP scores, it was decided that default scores for credit would be set at 3.  Faculty in various disciplines can make the required scores higher if all the universities agree; faculty senate presidents are working with their schools to determine if they want higher scores.

REPORT OF STUDENT SENATE PRESIDENT

Gabby Naylor reported that Student Senate is attempting to find clarification regarding some changes--including statute of limitations, defining what a University affiliate is, and mental health--that were made to the Student Code after it was passed last spring.  She reported that Kansas SB 175 has required a change to Rock Chalk Central funding’s rule that organizations must be open to all in order to receive funding.  The bill stipulates that organizations with restricted membership cannot be denied funding if the organization was founded with those restrictions.  The Student Senate Venture is working with Jayhawk Success Academy which Keller mentioned in her report.  They are working on finding a donor in Engineering.  Business has a donor and students will be attending that program June 4-6.  She noted that Endowment has opened up the Equitable Election Fund to donors.  Student Senate will begin working on other issues, including peer mentorship.

REPORT OF sTAFF SENATE PRESIDENT

Liz Phillips reported that after being told that the Staff Professional Development Fund was a priority, half of the two-thousand dollar fund is being cut and that this is the last year it will be funded.  She was uncertain whether the five-hundred dollars the fund receives from Human Resources will continue.  She asked for a student representative and faculty representative at Staff Senate meetings, adding that the same person doesn’t have to attend all meetings but that the senate needs student and faculty representation.

Jeff Chasen, Associate Vice Provost of Compliance, and Jenn Anderson, Interim Director of the Policy Office, regarding the University Policy Program    

Harrington introduced Jenn Anderson and Jeff Chasen who SenEx had invited to explain the policy and clarify the question of policy ownership which was talked about during discussions of the Faculty Code.  Anderson explained that the Policy Office has two roles, serving as a caretaker of the University Policy Library, which is a university-wide repository of policies, and shepherding policy owners through the process of creating and amending their policies.  She emphasized that they are not the policy owners, adding that units are the experts with the right to amend their policy, and the Policy Office was more of a service unit.  She said that the University Policy Program (which SenEx refers to as the “policy on policies”) was created in 2014 with the intention of explaining the process and of limiting the scope of the Policy Office, not to place limitations on policy owners.

Q&A

  • When asked about archival aspects of the Policy Library Anderson explained that when a policy is taken down it is not deleted but retired and that, while past policies or past versions of current policies are not accessible to everyone from the University Policy Library, the Policy Office will make the information available upon request.  SenEx agreed it would be good to be able to see past policies and suggested the possibility of a Policy Library archive or a link to the library’s archives. 
  • Responding to the question of ownership Anderson said that the Policy Office tries to designate only one owner for a policy since it becomes fuzzy with more than one.  However since there are often many shareholders of a policy there are sometimes multiple units listed.  
  • In response to the question of whether the Senate had agreed to the University Program Policy, Anderson explained that when there is a policy change there is a comment period of usually two weeks when shareholders are allowed to give feedback, and assumed that senate leadership had been informed of the policy during the comment period.  However, since she was not in the Policy Office at the time of the policy’s approval she would have to research whether that had been the case.  Chasen and Anderson assured SenEx that Senate leadership would be added to future comment period emails.  Keller noted that that would give Governance a role in policy approval process.
  • Units are not mandated to update or create policy in the University Policy Library nor is a policy any more official by being in the University Policy Library.  It is the responsibility of units to comply with whatever laws govern their areas whether in the library or not.
  • Clark questioned the hierarchy chart in the University Program Policy, noting that it is a top-down policy with no mention of Governance.  Chasen responded that there is also no mention of the chancellor or provost, adding that the policy doesn’t mention people but rather names documents, and that the purpose is to ensure that no one makes a policy that contradicts the policy above them in hierarchy; he assured that the chart is not intended to take away from Governance.  Chasen questioned whether the chart is absolutely necessary since the Policy Office would see any possible contradictions and said he would delete it.
  • The possibility of changing the reference to policy “owner” in the University Policy Program was discussed.  Chasen explained that in the past there had been a concern that there was an appearance that the Policy Office had exceeded its scope so he suspected “owner” was created so it would be clear that the policy belonged to the unit and NOT the Policy Office.  Keller pointed out that “owner” suggests power to change and if the term were amended it would be clear that policy isn’t changed unilaterally.  SenEx agreed with Chasen’s suggestion that “contact” would work better than “owner” so he will make the change.  He also questioned the accuracy of the section which designated the policy owner as responsible for enforcement of the policy and said he would omit the reference.
  • Monroe-Gulick pointed out, and other members agreed, that searching the Policy Library was difficult.  Anderson said that the Policy Office is working with an analytic group to improve the search feature.

SenEx noted that their visit was very helpful and thanked Chasen and Anderson for agreeing to changes to the policy, particularly the language of “owner”.  Chasen thanked SenEx for the invitation and assured them that they are always open to dialog.

ACTION: POLICY OFFICE WILL ADD PRESIDENTS TO COMMENT PERIOD EMAILS IN ORDER TO MAKE GOVERNANCE AWARE OF POLICY CREATION AND CHANGES.

ACTION: POLICY OFFICE WILL CHANGE “OWNER” TO “CONTACT”, DELETE THE HIERARCHY CHART, AND OMIT THE SECTION REFERRING TO RESPONSIBILITY FOR POLICY ENFORCMENT.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Ad Hoc Cost Savings Committee

Motion to create an Ad Hoc Cost Savings Committee as changed.  Monroe-Gulick/Keller.  Passed.

Harrington reported to the committee that he consulted with both the chair of Planning and Resources and Diane Goddard, Vice Provost for Administration and Finance, and they welcomed the creation of the Ad Hoc Cost Savings Committee.  SenEx agreed that the objective of the committee should be, as Keller suggested, to collect cost saving ideas from the faculty, staff and students, and then articulate priorities that might be different from the administration’s, which could provide the Provost with information regarding a possible change in priorities.  The importance of the makeup of the committee was discussed; if the group is too small there might be complaints that there is not enough representation, but if too large there is the danger of nothing getting done.  Since the intention was that the committee work quickly in providing the Provost with ideas, it was decided that the committee be composed of two strategically selected representatives from each constituency who can will be able to construct a credible survey.  The committee will choose its own chair.

Motion to amend the previous motion to add populating the committee with two representatives from each constituency, with the committee choosing its own chair.    Flores/Oleniacz.  Passed.

Liz Phillips requested that Governance send the president of each constituency a description of the committee and the members needed.

ACTION: SEND COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION AND MEMBER NEEDS TO THE STAFF, STUDENT AND FACULTY PRESIDENTS.

NEW BUSINESS

Harrington distributed a copy of the email letter that he and Keller had sent to Regent Zoe Newton requesting faculty, student and staff senate representation on the chancellor search committee.  Beisecker suggested SenEx endorse the letter.

Motion: SenEx endorses the Senate Presidents’ letter to the Regents requesting faculty, student and staff senate representation on the chancellor search committee. Beisecker/Phillips.  Passed.

Meeting adjourned at 4:14

Respectfully submitted,

Maureen Altman

 


One of 34 U.S. public institutions in the prestigious Association of American Universities
44 nationally ranked graduate programs.
—U.S. News & World Report
Top 50 nationwide for size of library collection.
—ALA
23rd nationwide for service to veterans —"Best for Vets," Military Times
KU Today
Governance Meetings