Opening Business
Attendance: S. Anglin, N. Baker, P. Blackmon, K. Huckabee, K. Mussett, N. Pyeatt, E. Seymour, W. White, M. Agee, J. Barr, M. Comanescu, S. Dillen, W. Engelbret, K. Farnan, L. Garvin, H. Huang, M. Nemanic, A. Plucinski, C. Bowman, S. Corle, A. Cramer, C. Freie, L. Haefner, L. Jacobson, L. Lilienthal, A. Marvasti, K. Munly, K. Pearson, D. Peterman, S. Shear, K. Adu, I. Basak, P. Basak, D. Brinkel, V. Brunsden, L. Emili, J. Gil, J. Kaminiski, T. Krainer, X. Li, C. Oliver, J. Rosson, M. Weiner, Y. Zhu, E. Happeny, J. Carnicella, J. Lockard, L. Lysiak, AR. Eckenrode, R. Moran, J. O’Harrow, S. Routch, R. Trumpbour, G. Burton (SGA senator), C. Martin (SGA senator), B. Black, E. Levri, P. Moran, C. Mahan, R. Singer, D. Zimmerman
Absent Excused: W. Dorabiala, H. Hayford, P. Wesley, P. Hopsicker, D. Kerch, N. Rowland, J. Ryoo, L. Bechtel-Wherry
Absent Unexcused: S. Findley, K. Latterell, S. Shen, P. Das, D. Page, W. Prudencio,
Visitors: G. Baird, B. Baird
Thomas called the meeting to order; Minutes approved
Announcements from the Chair
Faculty Senate representation on ALC reinstated. Thomas indicated thanks to Darin and Lori for allowing this.
Revised FT Promotion Review Committee guidelines approved by ADAA and Chancellor.
No Special Committee for P&T Best Practices due to lack of nominees. Thomas reported not having enough nominees to make this possible
Reports of the Standing Committees
Academic Affairs (Mike Weiner)
Mike reported on the work being done related to the Faculty forum being organized for the visit by Provost Jones on January 31, 2018 (see attached joint report from both the Academic Affairs & Campus Climate and Diversity Committees). He indicated that they worked to create a document with 6 key questions for Provost Jones to focus on, and that they hope to have created a process that allows the efficient movement through the questions. Thomas reported that if this document is approved by the senate, it will be sent to Provost Jones.
Thomas called for vote on Town Hall proposal as brought forward by the committee. Senate voted to approve as is.
In addition, Mike reported looking into student requests and issues related to expectations held by the University related to the construction of course syllabi.
Campus Climate and Diversity (Lisa Emili)
Lisa reported that the committee will be meeting with student representatives about budgetary concerns soon, and will report on the results at a future senate meeting.
Anne reported that the Diversity Committee is planning to meet with student diversity organizations to see how they can help with the student organizations’ agenda.
Faculty Affairs (Mihai Comanescu)
No report
Curricular Affairs (Beth Seymour)
Beth reported on three course proposals ENVST 425, AFAM/INART 141, and CRIMJ 457. For details on these courses see https://sites.psu.edu/altoonasenate/proposals/
Motion to approve ENVST 425: Beth reported that the committee felt the strength of proposal was that it clearly outlines how the course will support/strengthen existing program.
Course proposal approved
Motion to approve AFAM/INART 141: Beth reported that the African-American Read-In is a longstanding project at Penn State Altoona, and the proposal received strong support from outside reviewers as well as from within committee. Questions about cross-listing this course with English and whether this is a PSA course were addressed.
Course proposal approved
Motion to approve CRIMJ 457: Beth reported that the course proposal represents growth and strength of the CJ program at Penn State Altoona and highlights the expertise of the CJ faculty here.
Course proposal approved
Reports of the University Faculty Senators (Beth Seymour)
Senate Council Meeting November 14, 2017 (Nicholas Rowland, see appendix).
Beth reported that Nicholas’ report offers input until next senate meeting
Call for New Business
No new business
Remarks from the Chancellor and ADAA
Darin Zimmerman reported on the external search for new Associate Dean for Research to be launched. He reported having a search committee composed of nine members chaired by P. Moran and R. Strzelec; he expects the Search Committee will be charged, and a job advertisement will go out next week.
Darin reported that we have three candidates coming in Dec 5, 14, 15 for noon presentation for the ongoing search of a new Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Mike Weiner inquired about the pool of applicants. Darin indicated receiving a diverse array of applications and feeling confident about the strength of candidates being invited to the campus for an interview.
Thomas wondered about the make-up of the search committee for Associate Dean for Research. Darin indicated that Lori made personal invitations to faculty and others to be on the committee, and that two members are Faculty senators, and that each academic division is represented on the search committee.
Comments for the Good of the College Adjournment (1:10 pm)
Appendix
- Joint report from both the Academic Affairs & Campus Climate and Diversity Committees on organizing a Faculty Town Hall at the occasion of Provost Jones’ scheduled visit in January 2018.
- Report from Senate Council (Nicholas Rowland)
APPENDIX A (1)
Proposal for a Town Hall at Penn State Altoona with Provost Nicholas Jones
Brief Description: This 50-minute town hall will provide a forum to discuss the challenges and opportunities associated with a Penn State Commonwealth campus like Penn State Altoona.
Proposed Session Agenda:
The Town Hall will begin with a brief introduction by the moderator (Senate Chair Thomas Krainer). Selected members from the senate will present six questions (outlined below), allowing for approximately 3 – 5 minutes of response from the Provost. If there is time at the end, other questions or follow-up questions will be allowed from the audience (at the discretion of the moderator).
The Questions for Provost Jones: The questions for Provost Jones were solicited from the entire faculty and were compiled and structured by the joint senate committees: Campus Climate and Diversity, and Academic Affairs. The questions fall into three categories: (a) resources for academic support, (b) budgetary concerns, and (c) the campus model. Each question is broken down into a background statement, a general question, and then a concrete question that the faculty at Penn State Altoona would like the Provost to address.
(a) Resources for Academic Support
- Background: There is an expectation for all faculty across the university to produce high quality research. For those of us at geographically dispersed campuses, we are faced with additional challenges that do not exist at University Park.
- In general, what University Park resources are available to support faculty and undergraduate research at the Commonwealth campuses, and are there plans for increased inclusion of accomplished campus faculty with University Park Colleges and Departments in the spirit of one University geographically dispersed?
- More specifically, could there be dedicated University funding to support a collaborative undergraduate research program where students that start research at Penn State Altoona (2+2 program) continue to receive funding for their research with campus faculty while finishing their academic careers at University Park.
(b) Budgetary Concerns
- Background: Budget cuts are severely affecting our ability to provide a quality academic experience, recruit students and maintain an engaged faculty.
- Please briefly explain the current budget model, how long the model has been in place and is the model consistent in setting baseline budgets for all Penn State units.
- More specifically, faculty are very concerned about the disparity in faculty salaries between male and female faculty, between Penn State Altoona and other 4 year Colleges at Penn State (at all ranks), and want to know what is being done to adjust these disparities?
- Background: Publicly available admissions data (e.g. SAT scores) show that the incoming first-year students at Penn State Altoona are much less prepared academically than at University Park. However, much more staff and TA support are available at University Park to ensure student success. Retention and academic success is of paramount importance to our faculty. Many of our students are first-generation students, often lacking in social and financial capital and are under-prepared academically.
- In general, what financial support and personnel resources are available from University Park to address the mental health needs of these students, to provide tutoring and mentoring services, as well as remedial course work?
- More specifically, Penn State Altoona’s Health and Wellness Center has been lauded University-wide. So much so that we have heard that it is currently being used as a model for other campuses, with money budgeted to bring other centers up to the quality of ours. Will Penn State Altoona be eligible for these funds as well, to replenish our academic budget?
(c) Campus Model
- Background: There is concern that tenure-line positions will not be replaced and the trend of a higher ratio of fixed-term to tenure-line faculty will continue.
- What are the long-term plans regarding the process for returning (petition to the Office of the Vice-President of Commonwealth campuses) tenure-line faculty positions lost as part of the voluntary early retirement program?
- More specifically, some faculty are concerned with the continued trend in the increased ratio of fixed-term to tenure-line faculty. Do you share this concern?
- Background: Each Commonwealth campus is unique in terms of its infrastructure and resources, faculty/staff composition, student population and community.
(i) In general, how can consistency and uniformity of policies be implemented, while at the same time insuring that campuses do not lose their autonomy and the characteristics that make them unique?
(ii) More specifically, what is being done to ensure consistency with the new policy related to promotion of non-tenure line faculty.
- Background: The overall plan for the Penn State Commonwealth campuses does not seem clear. Various ideas have been suggested over the years, ranging from independently operating 4-year colleges with autonomy to build a unique blend of degrees and academic offerings on the one end, to centrally managed and tightly regulated 2+2 feeder campuses on the other.
- What is the overall plan for the academic programs of the Commonwealth campuses?
- More specifically, will the long-term model be that each campus has freedom to create and sustain majors and minors at their discretion or will majors be eliminated to focus academic programs in specialized areas i.e. the ‘destination campus’ idea?
Session Organizers:
Dr. Lisa Emili, Associate Professor, Physical Geography and Environmental Studies
Chair of the Campus Climate and Diversity Committee,
221 Hawthorn Building, (814) 949-5627, lae18@psu.edu
Dr. Mike Weiner, Associate Professor, Mathematics
Chair of the Academic Affairs Committee,
115 Hawthorn Building, (814) 949-5558, mdw8@psu.edu
APPENDIX A (2): Questions for Provost Jones
CAMPUS MODEL:
A topic of concern among many faculty and staff at commonwealth campuses deals with the perceived efforts of University Park to institute conformity and orthodoxy to an extent that branch campuses lose some of the autonomy that makes them individually unique. Each campus deals with local socio-economic landscapes and logistical situations very much unlike those in State College. How can campuses adhere to policies often written by those who lack a “boots on the ground” perspective while also maintaining the characteristics that defined or formed said campuses?
This question is not directly about Penn State Altoona but it impacts faculty at Penn State Altoona. I would like to know what measures will be put into place to assure that implementation of the new policy relating to promotion and titles of non-tenured faculty are implemented fairly and equitably and keeping with the intent and spirit of the policy by units within the university. There seems to be the potential for very different standards to be in place from one unit compared to another. For some faculty, the change in policy could actually be a detriment rather than a benefit, depending on the implementation policy. Related to this topic, how will pay increases for promotion be made equitable among units and colleges?
After the initial round of retirements, my understanding is local units had to cover the 1-year buy out and “return” these faculty lines to central administration. Next, central administration (I assume Maddie Haynes’ office) is petitioned by the commonwealth units to justify returning the line or re-assigning that faculty or staff line to another unit/discipline, etc. First of all, is this the correct understanding of the situation? If so, will this be standard practice moving forward? In other words, will we have to get approval for all new hires even for existing faculty lines?
Although I feel we are making small positive steps in improving job security and advancement for fixed term faculty (mainly via University Senate Efforts), I am concerned with the continued trend in the increased ratio of fixed term to tenure track faculty. Does he share this concern? What benefits does he see to having tenure track faculty included as core faculty in academic programs? Does he feel that programs can/should be run with only fixed term faculty?
The overall plan for the Penn State branch campuses does not seem clear. Various ideas have been suggested over the years, ranging from one extreme to the other. On the one hand, some feel that the branch campuses should be allowed to create or sustain whatever majors they wish, irrespective of whether they have many students. On the other hand, it has been suggested that under-enrolled majors be winnowed and that each campus specialize in certain areas (the “destination campus” idea from the old Core Council). Which of these is closer to the current thinking for the Penn State system? In light of the many changes occurring in education (economics, demography, and technology), it seems that PSU has limited time to undergo a reformation. And yet it seems frozen in indecision.
SALARY:
Why are our faculty salaries so low when compared to the other PSU campuses that offer 4-year programs?
A few years ago, in response to concerns raised about salaries at Penn State Altoona being dead last among ALL campuses, the Provost’s Office did a rigorous analysis of faculty at the professor’s rank, and, from that, concluded that all salaries at Altoona were OK. Penn State Altoona remains last still, among all campuses. Many faculty believe that if an identical analysis of the same exact variables were undertaken for all other faculty ranks, the data would have revealed disparities that would have been impossible to justify. If we are truly committed to “data-driven” decision making, when that analysis was undertaken, why did the Provost’s office exclude other ranks from a more rigorous analysis?
Why do women openly get paid less than men on this campus and what is the University doing to rectify this?
Why do faculty get paid less at PS Altoona than at other campuses and what is the University doing to rectify this?
BUDGETS/FUNDING/RESOURCES:
Publicly available admissions data (e.g. SAT scores) show that the incoming first-year students at Penn State Altoona are much less prepared academically than at University Park. However, much more staff and TA support are available at University Park to ensure student success. While Penn State Altoona has experienced and dedicated faculty, much more monetary and personnel resources are required to ensure that our academically far less prepared students can be brought into the position to be successful at Penn State. We have by far not been seeing enough and sustained financial support from the central administration, which is not fair to our students!
The issue of under-preparedness with incoming students is a huge issue that should be addressed at the university level. There is some disparity between students’ high school records and entrance tests and students’ ability to perform in the classroom–in particular in the areas of math and writing. It is hard on students as they come to us with inflated notions of their own ability in terms of subject matter but also inflated ideas about how to get high grades. Students are discouraged, as are professors. Our school systems are increasingly not preparing students adequately for college, and yet the university has not increased programs to assimilate them to a more rigorous academic environment. There has to be some way to better prepare and serve so many under-prepared students beyond the structures and programs already in place. Or to buoy the programs that exist with additional resources.
I am most concerned about funding for the campus. We have borne too much of the burden for recent budget cuts when our campus was already underfunded.
What impact the Pennsylvania State budget will have on academics.
We need funds to support our current academic programs specifically, space and resources to support students and faculty. Budget cuts are severely affecting our ability to provide a quality academic experience and recruit students. Burn out of faculty and staff is dragging us down. Something as silly as the common schedules has greatly affected our ability to use our limited classroom and laboratory space. We do not need 15 minutes between classes, it is wasted time and limits the number of sections per day that we can offer. Please think about the consequences on all campus when making decisions. We need more classrooms and labs!!!!! It is extremely difficult to get a room for review. Open labs are limited because of scheduling overload. Students have trouble puzzling together a schedule be we have fewer class periods per day. We no longer have money for academic speakers or field trips. Please bring our salaries up to comparative levels.
My chief concern is retention and academic success of students at Penn State Altoona, particularly in majors in science and engineering. Some students starting at Altoona are coming in with poor preparation from high school; they are admitted into Colleges such as Science and Engineering with poor math SAT score, and start and struggle in remedial math class. It is frustrating to students that on one hand have been told that they are admitted into a College but on the other hand are obligated to take and pay for math classes that do not count for credit in that College. These students frequently do not do well academically and end up leaving the College they were admitted to, and in some cases the University. If we continue to accept these underprepared students, we cannot punish them for being underprepared, we must provide sufficient resources to help these students make academic progress. This includes tutoring as well as mentoring. We have many first generation students at Altoona and they have limited understanding of academic life and/or expectations. Also we need to be honest with these underprepared students that the four-year degree will most likely take 5 years.
Officially, how long has the new budget model been in place with regards to determining budgets for the Commonwealth Campuses? Can you briefly explain the budget model? Is this budget model consistent for setting baseline budgets for ALL PSU units (including those at University Park)? Why or why not?
We need more tenure track faculty lines at this campus. Having the support of adjuncts is great, and they do a very, very good job. However, the faculty here has a large number of service and a continuous stable presence for the students is not available.
In addition to the current request for proposals for strategic planning implementation ($50,000-$250,000), will there be dedicated funds for each Commonwealth campus to pursue smaller projects related to strategic planning implementation?
There is an expectation for all faculty across the university to produce high quality research. For those of us at geographically dispersed campuses, we are faced with additional challenges that do not exist at University Park. Without access to graduate students, and a realistic expectation of winning a large NIS, NIH, IES (etc.) grant, our ability to fund and carry out research is dramatically impacted. How could the University support our research across campus in terms of human resources and funding to allow us to do our best work?
Also, some grant applications were not funded simply on the basis of no bachelor degree offered in the department (division) which is common in Altoona, is there any way to help.
With the growing trend that both faculty and administrators acknowledge of the needs of specifically our campus’ students being more and more significant, particularly when it comes to mental/emotional health and the need for remedial courses, when will the resources Altoona receives accurately reflect this?
Every now and then, the Materials Characterization Lab (MCL) and the NanoFab at the Millennium Science Complex decommission instrumentations and replace them with new ones. These decommission instrumentations are normally in good working conditions. Some of our faculty have suggested the decommission instrumentations be passed on to the commonwealth campuses, but to no avail. They are always sold to the highest external bidder. Could the Provost’s Office put the necessary structures (funding) in place so that such decommissioned instrumentations are offered to us?
DIVERSITY, OUTSOURCING, AND ETHICS:
What are the breadth of possibilities of focus and action possible for diversity-related initiatives, as well as priorities from the provost’s point of view?
I think we should ask him about the survey on the core values of PS and the logic/reason staff and administrators were classified as staff. Also, who exactly made this decision. This is particularly relevant as abuses in positions of power have much higher potential for greater impact.
Although the notion of academic freedom has a long implicit history, the idea was first clearly formulated in response to the encroachments of the totalitarian state on science and academia in general for the furtherance of its own goals. (Wiki). Over the past five years, Penn State has attempted to “engage” employees, in increasingly detailed ways, in order to create what Penn State defines to be an ideal employee in an ideal culture. Are there any concerns that top administration officials have about this trend and is there an explanation for the divergence from what Penn State used to be?
Penn State has undergone a transformation that resulted in the out sourcing of many IT and data services. By most measures, these data brokers and organizations are unregulated and unaccountable to the U.S. government and to the American people. Penn State as an organization may benefit financially, but there is great risk to the personal information of many employees and students. Do you feel this migration is premature (until appropriate checks and balances can be implemented) and what does this communicate about the value of Penn State stakeholders?
The Human Resource Business Transformation (HRBT) process has been clearly communicated in the last two years. This is a hot paradigm shift in the business world with promises of great financial incentives. Unfortunately, it does represent a significant shift from an employee focus, to a strategic business focus. As one PricewaterhouseCoopers HRBT publication puts it:
“Transformations aren’t about getting to know your neighbor—they’re about taking an active role in execution of business strategy.”
How much has Penn State been influenced by the cut-throat business investment culture and to what extent is Penn State willing to give up financial incentives to achieve an employee and student friendly learning environment that is dedicated to getting to know our neighbor?
SHARED GOVERNANCE:
Is the PSU administration committed to assuring shared governance including consultation with faculty senate on any human resource and/or administrative/academic policy changes that affect faculty? How will he ensure that this happens?
LIONPATH:
LionPath remains an incredibly inefficient tool that wastes countless staff and faculty hours. Notwithstanding the recent cosmetic enhancements which do nothing to improve usability, how and when does Penn State plan to give me a tool that will allow me to be a more productive employee?
QUESTIONS FOR HR: (WITH ANSWERS)
Why can’t part-time faculty sign a waiver regarding health insurance (if they are covered by a spouse, for example) – and any other benefits for that matter, to be able to teach at least another class and earn a little bit more money that way?
Hello Mike, (From HR Services Team)
No, they can’t sign a waiver. If they work an average of 30 hours per week, they are offered the ACA coverage. It is up to them if would like to take it or not. I hope this helps answer your question.
Have a Happy Thanksgiving!
What benefits do faculty, students, and staff get from corporate monopolies at Penn State such as Pepsi and Starbucks. It appears that we get high(er) prices than we can get at local vendors such as Sheetz and McDonalds. It seems like the University can ignore these when it wants since you can buy non-Starbucks coffee at Au Bon Pain in the Kern Building at UP. Also, how often are these agreements renegotiated?
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your note. Institutional-wide contracts are negotiated with different terms, or contract lengths. One contract could be for 3 years, another for 5 years, and so forth. I’m not in the best role to address additional questions you may have, so I’ve copied Kurt Kissinger kak47@psu.edu (814) 865-6574, who serves as Associate Vice President for Finance and Business. Your comments below are fairly broad and in order to be able to address the spirit of your inquiry it would be helpful for Kurt if you could give a little more context around the question that was posed at the Altoona faculty senate meeting. Thanks,
Susan J. Wiedemer
Assistant Treasurer
QUESTION FOR CHANCELLOR BECHTEL-WHERRY (ANSWERS PENDING)
Some part-time faculty and instructors feel like they are bystanders to the PSA community. How can we encourage those who would be interested in participating in committees, social events, planning meetings, and so on? How can we give them voice and make them feel like a part of the PSA family?
What are the plans for growth? Buildings? Infrastructures? Impact on the community?
We are a land grand campus, yet our participation with the Altoona community is limited. What are we doing? I do not know of all of the projects, it would be nice to list them somewhere.
APPENDIX B
Summary of some points of interest from Senate Council meeting and the University Faculty Senate meetings on November 14, 2017 (Nicholas Rowland)
Nick Jones (Executive Vice President and Provost): An in-depth report regarding Greek life at Penn State will soon be completed. The idea is document the benefits of Greek life and identify ways to diminish deleterious behaviors to student life.
Kathy Beischke (Vice Provost of Faculty Affairs): All but two units have submitted their approach to implementing AC-21 (formerly HR-21, the policy about the promotion, titles, and ranks for fixed-term faculty).
Rob Pangborn (Vice President and Dean for Undergraduate Education): Applications overall are down slightly (-2%). Transfer student applications are up (around 10%). International applications are down slightly (-3%).