[Approved October 18, 2007]

Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate

October 4, 2007

St. Mary’s 113 B; 12:00 PM

Present: D. Biers (presiding), T. Eggemeier, A. Fist, P. Johnson, L. Laubach, J.O’Gorman, R. Penno, F. Pestelelo, A. Seielstaad, T. Stevens, R. Wells

J. Farrelly (Faculty Board)

Roll Call:

Eleven members of the Committee were present.

Prayer:

The meeting opened with a reading, offered by Lloyd Laubach, from Textbook of Work Physiology by Per-Olaf Astrand and Kaare Rodahl.

Approval of Minutes:

September 27, 2007 approved.

Announcements:

There were no announcements.

Old Business:

Standing Committee Reports

• R. Penno reported for the Academic Policies Committee. The Committee did not meet this week

• R. Wells reported for the Faculty Affairs Committee. The Committee report will be considered under new business.

• A. Fist reported for Student Academic Policies Committee. The committee is trying to establish a meeting time.

New Business:

• The Faculty Affairs Committee reported on progress on Post-Tenure Review. They submitted a draft document of the first portion of the document for consideration by ECAS. The question for ECAS is whether to submit this portion of the document to the Board of Trustees for review at its meeting in October. It was decided that the next draft of the document would be submitted to the Provost for review. He will decide on taking the document to the Board. If the document is not taken, there will be a verbal progress report. P. Johnson indicated that she has class during the Board meeting time and asked that R. Wells attend that session in her place. The next version of the draft will be available by the end of 10/05/07.
• The Executive Committee discussed what should be included in a process and procedures document for the Academic Senate. P. Johnson has agreed to coordinate the work of developing this. The Executive Committee agreed that it is important that these procedures encourage transparency and the free flow of information. Structures should ensure deliberation and participation by the entire community. The following items were suggested for inclusion:
• Responsibilities of the Officers of the Academic Senate
• President
• Vice-President
• Secretary
• Issue and Document Process
• Submission process
• Numbering and labeling
• Assigning to standing committees
• Consultation between Academic Senate Committees as documents are developed,
• When does information need to be communicated with the Executive Committee? What role does the Executive Committee play once a document has been assigned to a standing committee?
• Should Sense of Senate documents be defined? What is the protocol for these?
• Functioning of Standing Committees and Voting Procedures
• What constitutes a quorum?
• Can voting take place electronically?
• What are the requirements for distribution of information so that timely communication to all members is assured.
• What are the criteria for calling a closed session? What procedures are followed if one is called?
• Minutes and Quickplace
• What is the purpose of minutes? What should minutes include and/or omit?
• What are the expectations of timely posting of minutes?
• Who posts and distributes the minutes
• Who has access to unapproved and approved minutes of the various committees?
• Who maintains the materials in the Quickplace site?
• Deliberation and Communication Processes
• To what extent is the Academic Senate guided by Roberts Rules of Order?
• Under what circumstances is a committee vote required?
• Communication to the University Community
• Can faculty voting take place electronically?
• What are the processes for communicating Academic Senate decisions with the faculty?
• Appointment of ad hoc committees and working groups
• Under what authority are these appointed? Can standing committees appoint these or is the approval of ECAS required?

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 1:15 PM.

Respectfully Submitted,

Patricia A. Johnson, Secretary