College of Arts & Sciences: Amanda Allison, Jim Armacost, Raymond Doe, Jennifer Fowler, B. Garrick Harden, Pat Heintzelman, Matt Hoch, Sharon Joffe, Tina Kibbe, Ian Lian, Cheng-Hsien Lin, Jane Liu, J.P. Nelson, Joe Nordgren, Melissa Riley, Cengiz Sen, Jennifer Thedford, Sujing Wang
College of Business: Tim McCoy, Vivek Natarajan, James Slaydon, Kelly Weeks, Jerry Zhang
College of Education and Human Development: Daryl Ann Borel, Eunjin Kwon, Kathryn Washington
College of Engineering: John Gossage, Clayton Jeffryes
College of Fine Arts & Communication: Alan Brincks, Andre Favors, Xenia Fedorchenko, Lilian Felipe, Brielle Frost, Chelsea Lyles, Stephan Malick, Paul Eric McCluskey, Millicent Musyoka
Library: Penny Clark
College of Arts & Sciences: Chandru P. Chandrasekaran, Mark Mengerink
College of Education and Human Development: Shelly Allen, Kelly A Brown
College of Engineering: Chun-Wei Yao
Library: Poornima Gunasekaran
Absent:
College of Arts & Sciences: Mark Broome, Jennifer Huff, Wen Liu
College of Business: Ashraf El-Houbi
College of Education and Human Development: Doug Boatwright, Khal Hamza
College of Engineering: Maryam Hamidi, Mien Jao, Gleb Tcheslavski
3:30 p.m.
Taylor’s Minute - Athletics is improving at Lamar. Athletes are having a good experience, and not having to travel as much in Southland Conference as in the previous conference.
Strategic Plan – This year is our centennial. I have spoken to a lot of people about Lamar over the last two years. This institution was founded to help Southeast Texas, and Lamar has done that.
Lamar is producing leaders for the U.S. There are CEOs, artists, and other notable individuals who came from Lamar.
We should continue success for the next 100 years. It should be a priority to make students career-ready. They need to be lifelong learners to adapt to changing conditions after being good initial employees.
Pre-med: Seemingly all M.D.s in the area started at Lamar; two very influential attorneys leading an international organization are from Lamar.
We should continue doing what we are good at, and be nationally known for those things.
In academic programs, we should focus on things we can be nationally known for. A strategic plan is sometimes about what you say no to; it is important to focus on your strengths.
Pat Heintzelman asked the President if he would reconsider his decision not to include instructors in the equity/compression raise.
President Taylor said he would look into it, and he is now aware that some full-time employees were not included in this year’s equity raise.
Kelly Weeks thanked President Taylor for the equity adjustment, and asked if President Taylor was aware of the new grievance policy. Kelly stated that President Taylor’s signature was on the document, and expressed concern because a committee was working on grievance policy, and it seemed that committee did not have input on this matter.
President Taylor asserted that in his mind the document in question was a procedure, not a policy. He elaborated that sometimes people will file at multiple places, and the point is to be aware a grievance is filed and find an appropriate investigator. We need someone to look into and determine who should be the investigator. Once we get the grievance to the right person, process takes over.
Cheng-Hsien Lin and President Taylor discussed the situation and concluded the document in question will be posted online to get comments.
Cheng-Hsien Lin thanked President Taylor for the equity adjustment.
President Taylor asserted we are in a good situation relative to other states, and he would not want to be at another university.
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that he tried to keep people on previous committees, and said that senators should make requests if they want to change committees. He said he tried to get equal numbers on committees and representation from each college on each committee. Some senators requested online and on-campus meetings.
Cheng-Hsien Lin also said some people were worried about other people recording online meetings. Some only want to allow online faculty to attend online meetings. That is not practical due to officers being occupied with a lot of tasks (officers would need to run the meeting in-person and online and keep
track of whether people use their designated mode of attendance). President Taylor has promised to be at the Faculty Senate General Meeting in-person every month. It is hard to postpone meetings too. People do not have time for a second meeting for additional issues. We are likely to revisit procedures in November or December.
Cheng-Hsien Lin said he attended a lot of meetings with Provost Brown this summer. He also advised members to look at their email for requests to participate in elections. The issue with Financial Aid was solved; understaffing caused students to have delayed access to financial aid/books. A possible change to policy on faculty service pertains to online faculty. The Faculty Handbook has a section on workload. Parts of the handbook about workload need to be addressed; this matter was discussed at a previous meeting with Associate Provost Gene Theodori. The Faculty Affairs Committee should have discussions to make major recommendations.
The committee asked that instructors be included in salary equity adjustments. Management (Provost Dann Brown and Chief Financial Officer Mark Robinson) said instructors will be included in equity this year. There is a plan to review data from this year’s salary equity adjustment. There were concerns about time at Lamar and time in rank. Procedure statements on merit raises are not uniform; Provost Brown is concerned about that. The committee wants to look at how department budgets are determined. They are talking about budget transparency, and CFO Mark Robinson seems willing to open the books.
James Slaydon argued that averaging within the College of Business does not make sense because they have one department; fields not on same market level.
Jennifer responded by saying that the committee asked business be separated because there used to be five departments in that college.
Daryl Ann Borel stated that Nursing experiences the same issue about differences within their School.
Xenia Fedorchenko asked whether data on all faculty were examined for equity.
Jennifer Fowler stated that Provost Dann Brown assured the committee he will send out a letter on the methodology for this equity adjustment.
James Slaydon shared that one faculty member got a raise, signed the contract, the paperwork was approved, and the university is now trying to take back some of the equity and get the faculty member to sign a new contract.
The committee has continued to work on the grievance policy. They will have a detailed discussion at the first committee meeting. The Piper Award application process is open. It is open on competition space, and self-nomination is allowed. Nominees will be submitted to a state competition. Pertaining to the makeup of university committees and councils, only a few positions on committees are available at this
time. The official process of selecting members of university committees is carried out in the spring. If there is only one nomination for a committee, there will not be an election because there is no need for one.
James Slaydon asked whether the new grievance procedure/policy posted is consistent with the document from the committee. He further clarified he wanted to know the degree of similarity between the documents.
Sujing Wang stated that the current one is the process of how to accept the grievance submission, and does not include much detail about how to review them.
Kelly Weeks said detail is in the document, and it is titled a policy.
Sujing Wang said that not much detail on how to investigate cases is included in the newly-posted document.
Kelly Weeks said detail is in the document, and it is titled a policy and the content within is policy related, not procedural issues.
Sujing Wang stated we are required to follow TSUS rules, and the university is open to faculty feedback.
James Slaydon implored his colleagues to look at the exceptions to the grievance policy when they read it. He further asserted that Human Resources said a faculty member with a reduced salary cannot file a grievance.
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that according to the previous day’s conversation, the administration would like the procedure to apply to faculty and staff. Termination of employment is specified in system policy.
The committee will meet on September 20 at 3:30 p.m. They will look into three-year contract verbiage for instructor contracts.
Welcome back returning members, welcome new members. The committee will meet in two weeks. The committee will discuss competition space and trying to give people a month to submit Faculty Development Leave applications before the deadline.
Millie Musyoka gave a presentation covering the qualitative results of the most recent Faculty Campus Climate Survey. Faculty seemed very concerned about Faculty Evaluations most of all, but workload issues were also a very big concern. Faculty expressed concerns about guidelines for Deans and Chairs as well.
Cheng-Hsien Lin expressed that survey participation increased this year over the previous year.
The committee met August 30 and discussed which handbook was legitimate. They figured that out, and had previously been working from multiple copies. The committee looked at the changing grievance
policy, and equity as it relates to workload (expectations for teaching, research and publications). The committee also examined double-stacking of 4000-level and 5000-level courses. The committee had another larger meeting with Associate Provost Gene Theodori with other stakeholders. The impression from that meeting is the administration is willing to work with the Faculty Senate. Associate Provost Theodori agreed to incorporation of AAUP Standards in the handbook.
James Slaydon reminded his colleagues that promotion and tenure policies need to be revised at this point. He said every department will make rules for that department. He urged his colleagues to make sure to participate in writing the guidelines.
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that departments should have committees to work on promotion and tenure policies, and that standards should be supported by the faculty.
B. Garrick Harden urged the Faculty Senate to respond to SB 18, stating that the law lists vague terms like “insubordination” and those terms need to be defined.
James Slaydon asserted that the Board of Regents passed a relevant policy.
The committee focused on some big issues over the summer. The committee will meet September 18. J.P. Nelson said he will look over the new version of TSUS Rules and Regulations (revised August 2023) before the next committee meeting.
B. Garrick Harden made a motion to approve the minutes of the May Faculty Senate General Meeting. Vivek Natarajan seconded the motion.
The Faculty Senate unanimously approved the motion (votes: 42 in-person, 3 online).
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that some senators are assigned to university committees to represent the Faculty Senate. If you are appointed to do that, please share relevant information. He also informed the senators that a Faculty Senate Open House is scheduled for October 18 at noon, and it will be held in the Faculty Senate Office.
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that several senators requested J.P. Nelson to allow an open forum to allow faculty to address the Senate.
Adam Nemmers (Associate Professor, Department of English and Modern Languages) was the first faculty member to participate in the open forum. He asserted we should make research something that is less contingent and make it more part of the contract. He also elaborated on a need to think about how we define full-time employment.
Gretchen Johnson (Associate Professor, Department of English and Modern Languages) was the second faculty member to participate in the open forum. She stated that Higher Ed.com considers a four-course
load to be a very high teaching load and consistent with low or no research expectations. She also asserted we should think about how we conceive of workload.
Cheng-Hsien Lin stated that because of SB 18, we need promotion and tenure policies together by December 15.
Kelly Weeks addressed the visitors, saying that we follow the Open Meetings Act, so visitors are welcome unless it is a closed session.
Kelly Weeks introduced three motions. He passed out paper copies of the motions.
Kelly Weeks stated that President Taylor did not know about the instructor pay issue raised earlier in the meeting that Pat Heintzelman had brought to everyone’s attention. Kelly Weeks expressed that this development was related to the main issue on campus that has persisted for a long time. He asserted we have a shared governance and transparency problem. He further argued that hundreds in online class sections is terrible and is not consistent with peer institutions and some even worse institutions.
Cheng-Hsien Lin expressed concerns about work load and faculty being able to grade final papers in a timely fashion.
Xenia Fedorchenko raised a concern about Tuesday-Thursday class scheduling; the day after finals is commencement and the grades are due Monday.
James Slaydon stated that Associate Provost Gene Theodori is looking into the mass email policy and what we are allowed to do.
Cheng-Hsien Lin shared that he had just received a text message from President Taylor about instructor equity.
James Slaydon made a motion to adjourn, and Vivek Natarajan seconded the motion.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.