Cleveland State University

Faculty Senate

MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE FACULTY SENATE
December 3, 2003

I. Eulogies
II. Approval of Agenda
III. Approval of the Minutes of the November 5, 2003 Meeting
IV. University Curriculum Committee
V. Proposed Amendment to Personnel Policies and Bylaws -- Appointment of Chairperson, Section 8.1.5) A) 4) g) (First Reading ) (Report No. 10, 2003-2004)
VI. Resolution on Investment of STRS Funds (Report No. 11, 2003-2004)
VII. Update on the Presidential Commission on Information Technology (Report No. 12, 2003-2004)
VIII. University President's Report
IX. New Business

PRESENT: E. Anderson, D. Ball, Barbato, Bathala, J. Bazyk, W. Bowen, Boyle, Dobda, Doerder, Droney, Ekelman, Ghorashi, B. Green, Gross, Hanniford, Hinds, Hoffman, Hoke, Jeffers, Jeffres, S. Kaufman, Konangi, Kuo, Larson, Lazarus, J. McIntyre, McLoughlin, Misra, Moutafakis, N. Nelson, Nuru-Holm, Ozturk, L. Patterson, Quigney, Rafiroiu, Rom, A. Schwartz, M. Schwartz, M. Smith, Sparks, Spicer, Steinglass, E. Thomas, Thornton, Webster, F.White, J. G. Wilson.

ABSENT/EXCUSED: C. Alexander, Angelova, Atherton, Charity, Flynn, Forte, Hanlon, S. Hill, L. Keller, Lopresti, Mills, J. Nolan, O'Donnell, L. E. Reed, Rosentraub, Sawicki, Scherer, Shah, Spiker, Tewari, Tumeo, Zhou.

ALSO PRESENT: Govea, Meiksins, Steinbacher.

Senate President Vijay Konangi called the meeting to order at approximately 3:10 P.M. He noted that two Eulogies will be delivered to Senate today.

[Go to top of page]

I. Eulogies

A.  Eulogy for Donald E. Schulz (Political Science)

Professor David R. Elkins delivered the Eulogy for the late Professor Donald E. Schulz. His remarks follow.

“On October 15 th , Professor Donald Edward Schulz lost his battle with a rare form of cancer at the age of 61. And, the Department of Political Science, the College of Arts and Sciences, and Cleveland State University lost a dedicated scholar, a fine colleague, and a friend.

“Originally from Richmond , Virginia , Don Schulz attended Wake Forest University graduating in the early 1960s. Don received his Ph.D. in Political Science from Ohio State University in 1977 where he was also a Mershon National Security Fellow. His career led him across this nation to various academic posts including

Northeastern Illinois University , the University of Tampa , the University of Wyoming , and California State – Fullerton . While at Cal State – Fullerton , Don met his wife Deborah.

“From 1991 to 1999, Don Schulz was a Research Professor of National Security Policy at the Strategic Studies Institute of the United States Army War College in Carlisle , Pennsylvania .

“Professor Schulz's area of specialization was in international relations and national security issues, particularly focusing on Latin America . Professor Schulz was a gifted writer and analyst and he published six books, dozens of monographs, articles, and editorials during his career. He attended countless conferences and roundtables, testified before Congress, and briefed top military personnel on United States Security Issues.

“In terms of research, Don's days at the War College were some of his happiest. Don's role there was as a research analyst, and it afforded him the opportunity in terms of time and travel to develop ideas that continue to influence national security strategy in Latin America .

“The loss to his profession leaves, as described by Professor Max Manwaring from the War College , a “big gap.” Professor Manwaring observed that few have Don's depth of knowledge in the area of Latin American security issues based on his extensive travel and experience in the region.

“But, it was more than simply Don's depth of knowledge of security issues. Don expressed through his gift of the pen a level of compassion for the common person that is too frequently overlooked in security studies. While in Honduras , a place that he loved, Don enjoyed spending time with the people, particularly the poor. Don was also a passionate advocate for the people of Haiti . Indeed, Grabriel Marcella tells us that Don was a national folk hero in Haiti advocating publicly and widely, including before congress, that the United States should increase its economic aid to that nation and to its many poor citizens.

“Though Professor Schulz enjoyed the research opportunities afforded him at the War College , it was a research post and Don missed the classroom. Don told me once that one reason he came to Cleveland State University was that he wanted to enjoy a more traditional academic environment, one that involved teaching.

“Professor Schulz was a talented and dedicated classroom teacher. Don approached his class lectures with stacks of legal pads filled with his large scrawling handwriting depicting detailed understanding and analysis of his topics. Don once told me that he did not use overheads, PowerPoint presentations, or even write on the board much. He preferred his students to listen and to learn.

“Since his death, I have received several calls and messages from Don's former students expressing dismay and grief with his passing. One student wrote me to say, “Dr. Schulz was a great professor and I feel fortunate to have been a student of his. His profound knowledge of the policy making and process in Latin American politics as a whole had me in awe many times during his lectures”.

“Don once said that the students that he had while at Cleveland State University were as good as any students he had ever had in a classroom.

“As a man, Don Schulz was quiet and reserved. Don became the Chair of the Political Science Department in the Fall of 1999 and his personal demeanor served the Department well. The Department is blessed with many strong personalities, and Don's personal style had a calming influence on a Departmental faculty that is sometimes presumed to be difficult.

“Professor Schulz's leadership has helped guide the Department in many ways. Don was particularly instrumental in the ongoing development of the Department's International Relations Masters proposal. His dedication to the Department and this University was evident in his commitment to continue these efforts while also battling his cancer.

“While at Cleveland State University , Don confronted a number of personal and professional challenges, including his cancer. Don faced these challenges with courage and dignity. Indeed, those of us that worked beside him over the years were frequently quite in awe of his strength.”

“Don Schulz lived a full, if too brief, a life. It included involvement in athletics and the arts. But for Don, these were in many respects a means to an end; that end was scholarship. His legacy as a scholar and teacher will carry on much of his memory; but for those of us who had the pleasure of working closely with him there is more. We have the memory of his courage and his dignity, of his ethics and principles, and of his quiet strength.”

B. Eulogy for Thomas F. Campbell (History and Urban Studies)

Professor Joyce Mastboom delivered the Eulogy for the late Professor Thomas F. Campbell. Her remarks follow.

“With the passing of Tom Campbell, the Department, the University, and City have lost a tireless, passionate advocate of the empowerment of those on the outside of power. His commitments were as boundless as his heart. He was able to move effortlessly between his chosen area of interest, history, his university, and the wider community. They seemed to form a seamless web.

“Tom Campbell joined the History Department at Cleveland State in 1966, and immediately set about changing it by co-founding what is now the Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs. At the same time, he began making an impact on the City of Cleveland by both writing and teaching its history and by involving himself in its life and politics. For most, studying the history of Cleveland would have been enough; for him it was a springboard to involvement in the life of his chosen home. After his retirement from CSU in 1993, he continued to be deeply involved at all levels, organizing, for instance, the Retired Faculty Association, and playing a vital role in the founding of the Irish American Archives and the African American Archive Auxiliary.

“Tom was born in Eniskillen , Northern Ireland , where he apprenticed as a baker. After coming to the United States , he worked for the American Friends Service in Mexico and Philadelphia , and having achieved high school credit, moved to Cleveland in 1955. He earned his B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. in History and Political Science at Western Reserve University and taught at Case and at Ohio State University , prior to coming to CSU in 1966.

“Only a year after he started, Tom co-founded the Institute of Urban Studies (as the College of Urban Affairs was then called), and he served as its director from 1969 to 1975. During that time, he co-designed the undergraduate curriculum and the graduate program. In addition, during the early 90s Tom served as chair of the History Department.

“During his 27-year career as an historian, Tom taught many students the history of Cleveland and of Ohio . His research focused on the Cleveland area, and he authored and co-authored books and numerous articles. His historical knowledge of Cleveland was legendary. On the occasions when I gave him a ride home from CSU, he would provide a running history of the buildings, institutions, and neighborhoods that we passed. I made it a point to vary my route in order to benefit from his incredible knowledge and his story-telling ability. His past students, too, attested to those abilities. In 1993, the year he retired, Tom received the “Distinguished Faculty Teaching Award”.

“In addition to being a committed teacher, however, Tom Campbell not only researched and wrote local history, but he also created it himself through his active involvement in Cleveland institutions and politics. He served as president of the City Club, was elected to the City Club Hall of Fame, and in 1972, played a key role in changing the rules to admit women. He also wrote its history from 1912 to 1962. He ran for mayor, withdrawing in the Democratic primary in favor of another candidate. Tom coordinated two Cleveland Public Library levy campaigns; he was a member of the Five County Mass Transit Study Group; he chaired AIM-Jobs, a pioneering Manpower Training Program for inner-city adults and youths. He was co-founder and former president of the Cleveland Restoration Society. Tom was a charter member of the African American Archive Auxiliary and a founder of the Irish American Archives. Earlier this year he was awarded the “Walks of Life” Award from the Irish American Archives Society of Northeast Ohio in recognition of his work.

“In these ways, Tom combined his profession as an historian with community involvement. He had a deep concern for human beings: his students, his colleagues, the people of Cleveland . He and his wife Peggy always had people over for dinner, and someone was always staying at their house; newly arrived immigrants, faculty, friends. In the Department, Tom helped new faculty settle in and feel at home. He was happy to use his many contacts and connections on behalf of others. After his retirement, when he no longer had direct contact with students, he funded an annual scholarship for a History and an Urban Studies student.

“Tom was active and in the midst of things right until a few weeks ago. He will be greatly missed by all those who knew him.”

Professor Mastboom noted that she was asked to announce that everybody is invited to the Memorial Service for Professor Campbell to be held on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 at 4:00 P.M. in the Atrium of the College of Urban Affairs .

Senate President Vijay Konangi asked that everyone observe a moment of silence in memory of Professor Donald Schulz and Professor Thomas Campbell.

[Go to top of page]

II. Approval of Agenda
Acceptance of the Agenda for December 3, 2003 was moved, seconded, and approved.

III. Approval of the Minutes of the November 5, 2003 Meeting

Acceptance of the Minutes of the November 5, 2003 meeting was moved and seconded. Professor Beth Ekelman pointed out an error in her comments on page 18, fourth paragraph. The sentence, “She asked if that would now be dismissed?” should read: “She asked if that had been considered.” Also, in the 5 th paragraph, the sentence, “Dr. Govea responded that Dr. Ekelman's situation did not arise.” should read: “Dr. Govea responded that Dr. Ekelman's situation had not been discussed.”

Dr. Jane McIntyre commented that something in the Minutes was attributed to her that she did not say. She asked if she could reserve the right to inform the Senate Secretary at some future time that something she did not say was attributed to her. Senate President Konangi agreed to Dr. McIntyre's request.

The Minutes were approved as corrected.

IV. University Curriculum Committee

A. Proposed Names for Two New Colleges (Report No. 8, 2003-2004)

  • College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences
  • College of Science

Dr. Peter Meiksins, chair of the University Curriculum Committee, referred to two memos that have been included in the meeting packets reporting the names proposed for the two new colleges being formed out of what was formerly the College of Arts and Sciences. What was once known as College A is to be named the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences. The process by which this name change was brought about is described in the first memo sent to the members of Senate. The new name was approved by a ballot submitted to all faculty in the college. The first vote for a name change did not result in a clear majority for any of the three originally proposed names. Hence the remaining two top contenders were entered into a run-off election. After a second vote, again involving all the faculty in College A, 45 to 39 voted in favor of “The College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences,” CLASS. This constituted the majority of those voting. The recommendation was then forwarded to the UCC, and the UCC decided that the process used seemed fine. The UCC is therefore recommending the adoption of this name change by Faculty Senate.

Professor Meiksins went on to say that the same basic process was followed in the naming of what was once known as College B. The faculty proposed to rename themselves “The College of Science,” COS. An election was held in which all members of College B were asked to choose among three names. In this case, the majority emerged after only one ballot in favor of “The College of Science.” The UCC considered this proposal and the process again seemed fine with the Committee.

Professor Meiksins stated that the University Curriculum Committee recommends that these two colleges be named respectively the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, and the College of Science . These names will become effective when the two colleges come into existence on July 1, 2004 .

Professor Jane McIntyre inquired as to the principle that the UCC was operating under. The proposed names presently before the Senate are fairly descriptive, hence they seem innocuous. Thus, if this is what we prefer, let's go with it. But given the next item that is coming up, [i.e. the renaming of the College of Education] if the name is not judged to be fully descriptive, can a college just self-determine to call itself whatever it desires? If College A had decided to be [named] “the College of Science ,” could it have been [named] that?

Professor Meiksins responded that the UCC treated the first and second request for a name change above slightly differently because of the fact that they reflected only a slightly different kind of name. In these cases, there was no expression of opposition that

the UCC knew about. There was also a process that had been followed that involved the effected parties, and there was no indication that anyone was offended. It seemed to the UCC that this was a “no brainer.” Professor Meiksins reserved the right to speak to the issue of the renaming of the College of Education and how the UCC approached it, when the matter comes forward to the Senate shortly. In the latter case, it will be seen that there was a complication involved that the UCC felt it had to take into consideration.

Professor Jane McIntyre noted for the record's clarification that she wanted to state that the UCC was not taking the stand that self-determination was always going to rule, even if that would lead to some really bizarre results.

Professor Meiksins responded that when the process of naming the colleges first arose, the college transition committees, as well as the UCC, inquired as to who, essentially, gets to name colleges. The answer was a little unclear. Ultimately, the Board of Trustees has this responsibility. However, he was told that the Board does this routinely, as long as the names proposed are not odd. As Dr. McIntyre said, if the Colleges of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences decided to call itself “Fred,” that might lead to discussion and controversy. The two cases before the Senate presently are reasonable kinds of names, and everybody discussed them and agreed on them, so there is no reason to go beyond the consensus argument.

There being no further discussion, Senate President Konangi asked for a vote. The proposed names for two new colleges: “The College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences” and “The College of Science” were approved unanimously.

B. Proposed Name Change for the College of Education (Report No. 9, 2003-2004)

Professor Peter Meiksins stated that the second item from the UCC is a proposal to rename the College of Education to “The College of Education and Human Services” CEHS. Attached to the memo of the UCC's recommendation is correspondence from the College of Education that describes the process they went through to rename the college. It involved faculty-wide discussion within the College of Education and a vote according to the College's Bylaws, which state specifically that two-thirds have to vote in favor of the name change in order for it to be effective. They achieved that level of majority. The College's new name, as Professor Jane McIntyre indicated, did seem to the UCC a little bit less straight forward than the renaming of the two colleges within the College of Arts and Sciences. The term “Human Services” covers a variety of disciplines, not all of which are within the College of Education . The UCC actually had heard independent expressions of dissent, particularly from the School of Social Work . Initially the UCC had hoped to be able to give its approval without needing to have an additional meeting. It became clear, however, that this was too complicated a matter to simply discuss electronically. Therefore, the UCC had a formal meeting to talk about the issue. The UCC invited the College of Education to come to the meeting and explain how this name was arrived at, and why it was deemed appropriate to call the College of Education by the new name. Professor Susan Ziegler and Dean Jay McLoughlin attended the meeting and explained to the UCC that this is in fact a fairly common name for colleges that have the characteristics our College of Education has. They gave a number of examples of similar institutions that have similar names, though not all of the programs that might be considered under “human services” are in those colleges. Professor Meiksins added that he asked the School of Social Work to express its opinion on this matter, since he had heard them mention specifically that they had objections to the proposed new name. Initially he asked the chair of the Department of Social Work for comment, who said that the department was not of one mind about this. He then spoke to a number of other faculty, including Professor Mieko Smith. He received three memos from faculty of the School of Social Work objecting to the proposed name for the College of Education. He also received a memo from the chair saying that not everybody in Social Work had an objection. This material was shared with the UCC. Being that there was no unified voice within Social Work, the unit was [not] invited to come to express its position because apparently there wasn't any position. The UCC talked about this with the College of Education and decided that this is not an unconventional name for the program. The College has good reasons for arguing that since many of the things it does, not just Nursing, are described by the term “Human Services,” the proposed name change was a reasonable proposal. In the absence of any strong and organized objection, the UCC felt that there wasn't any basis for Social Work to object to the proposed name. The UCC therefore unanimously recommends this name change to the Faculty Senate. If there are any further objections the UCC hasn't heard at this point, they can be heard here.

Senate Vice President Mieko Smith asked, “What does ‘in the absence of organized objections' mean?”

Dr. Meiksins replied that what it means is that the UCC did not hear any [majority opposing view from the School of Social Work ]. Three individuals wrote memos to the UCC indicating that they felt this was an inappropriate name change, and in all three cases, the reason was that the term “Human Services” covers a range of departments broader than the range of departments represented within the College of Education . Therefore, it seemed an inappropriate name and they proposed a different name, which the College of Education did not like. He imagined that the Sciences program might not like it either because it has the word “Health” in it that might set off a different set of objections. If there had been consensus within the Social Work program that this was a bad name or an inappropriate name, then it would certainly have been appropriate for the UCC to listen to that objection in a meeting. Since some faculty thought this and some faculty thought that, as far as the UCC had been told [there was no consensus of opinion].

Professor Mieko Smith stated that the assumption is that Social Work had a meeting on this particular issue to express its feelings but not all were in unified opposition or unified on this matter. It is a moot issue now, but the assumption that there was a lack of a unified position or united voice against this name change is inaccurate.

Professor Peter Meiksins responded that the difficulty he had as chair of the UCC was to determine whether he needed to invite a representative of Social Work to come to the meeting. If the School of Social Work had expressed a single view, either in the form of a majority vote or in the form of a consensus of some kind, then it would be entirely appropriate to hear that objection in a formal way. However, what he had instead were individual memos from individual faculty. Hence it seemed more appropriate to share those memos with the UCC and have the Committee discuss them. If the Committee then felt it wanted to invite those individuals and extend the discussion further, they could have done that. The UCC felt that the issues were answered adequately by the College of Education , and that the new name did not seem to be a problem. There are a number of institutions around the country in which the program of Social Work is not in the College of Education , and yet their College of Education is called by the proposed new name. The UCC felt that since this is how some colleges do it, it could not see a reason for not doing it here.

Professor Mieko Smith stated that she wanted the record to reflect that the School of Social Work was invited to give individual opinions, not a “unified opinion.”

Dr. Meiksins stated that he could speak to that point. He noted that he personally asked Professor Mieko Smith if it was the case that there was a unanimous view in the School of Social Work to formally state that [view] at the College of Arts and Sciences meeting that was held in the Fall.

Professor Mieko Smith responded that she was not in a position to do that.

Dr. Meiksins also noted that he had also asked Professor Maggie Jackson to do that as well. Dr. Meiksins asked: “What am I supposed to do?”

Professor Jane McIntyre commented that one of her concerns about this proposed name change is the fact that it will be the public name for this college – the name that the outside world will see on this college. Even if it is true that at Central Michigan there is a college that calls itself by this same name and they don't have Social Work in it, nonetheless, to the public at large, the expression “Human Services” has the fairly distinct meaning of referring to the field of Social Work. Many departments that used to be departments of Social Work at the city and state levels are departments of Human Services. Taking into account that this is the name the public will see, we will be publicly misrepresenting what is going on in that college. She would not deny that taken literally, many of the things they [teachers in the College of Education ] do are “human services.” However, “education” has a meaning that isn't just descriptive of servicing things that have to do with humans. It has a publicly accepted meaning, and this [new name] isn't comparable to that. She felt very awkward about voting for a name that she knows will immediately be misunderstood by most of the people in the world who hear it.

Dean Jay McLoughlin responded that he thinks the two newly approved names replacing the College of Arts and Sciences clearly indicate that here at the university we will have a number of disciplines under social sciences that have a home, and that is appropriate. That the College of Education , because of its work in the areas of health, counseling, and nursing, chose to refer to itself and has programs of human services is not necessarily a conflict. In fact, we have a college called “Urban Affairs” in which a lot of disciplines in this university identify with. We did the research of 740 colleges of education in the country. Eighty of those have a different name other than College of Education , and the majority of them refer to themselves as the College of Education and Human Services – not social services – but human services. The composition of those is exactly the composition of ours, without Social Work. For our purposes, in terms of being connected around the country as well as in this community, this is a very consistent name. He also pointed out that arriving at this name has really been a five-year process. We have a strategic plan that is currently in place. We came up with a name that would capture these other disciplines that we have in the College that are not connected with K-12 education. Twenty percent of our graduates in majors are outside of K-12 education, as are 10% of our undergraduates. The faculty in the College of Education has been waiting for some time to make a name change -- to the serendipity that on July 1 came with the School of Nursing . We were really delaying our request for a name change until we got a little closer to having our College of Education as a reality, and, beginning in January, we will be looking for an architect for that purpose. This development of the name change has been long standing. We have done our research and the term “Human Services” is very consistent with our set of values, as well as with our mission statement that encompasses a variety of social concerns. We feel comfortable that we are related to the disciplines in the University, and yet we identify with the research emphases, and the activities, and the majors within our own College.

There being no further discussion, Senate President Konangi called for a vote. The Senate approved the proposed name change of the College of Education to the College of Education and Human Services with one nay vote, and two abstentions.

V. Proposed Amendment to Personnel Policies and Bylaws -- Appointment of Chairperson, Section 8.1.5) A) 4) g) (First Reading ) (Report No. 10, 2003-2004)
Senate President Vijay Konangi noted that this amendment represents a change to our current Bylaws that requires two readings. Today's discussion will be the first reading and we will have the second reading at the next Senate meeting. If there is any need for an amendment or more than one amendment, we can have discussion about the amendment(s) but we will not be voting. Voting on amendments will take place in the second reading, but notice can be given of amendments and what members would like to see in an amendment.

Professor Rodger Govea, chair of the University Faculty Affairs Committee, noted that members should have in their meeting packets a memorandum from UFAC dated November 26, 2003 and attached to that the proposed new “Green Book” language regarding departmental chair searches. Essentially, this matter came to the UFAC from the Provost's Office. The particular problem cited is in the case where a chair search is held and the department cannot reach any consensus. There is no “Green Book” provision for further action on or resolution of such a situation. In essence, if a department cannot reach consensus on a chair search candidate, one is faced with the prospect of an endless iteration of said searches and the inability of reaching consensus thereupon. Ultimately, there is no end. The Provost asked UFAC to take up this issue suggesting that the Provost be given the right to designate a department chair whenever such a search process failed. This was determined by UFAC to be overly violative of faculty prerogatives. The Provost then revised the language, giving him the right to designate a chair, but only after the department completed two separate searches – that is with two failed searches the department would then be assumed to be unable to reach consensus. It was a suggestion aimed at securing an objective standard for invoking a kind of an emergency procedure. This was unacceptable to the Academic Steering Committee, which found it to be still overly violative of faculty prerogatives. This final version of the amendment prescribes when such an emergency exists, and defines its resolution. The amendment reads: “A chair search fails twice in the department; the Provost makes the case to the University Faculty Affairs Committee; the University Faculty Affairs Committee concurs with the Provost's recommendation whereupon the Provost then may select the chairperson from among the finalists recommended by the search advisory committee, essentially from all of the chair candidates who have been interviewed by the faculty and only under those conditions under 8.1.5 A) 4) g) 4). Only under those conditions shall there be deemed to be such an emergency and the Provost then may take action upon the recommendation from the Dean as to which of the candidates should be selected. “There will be a second reading at the next Senate meeting on February 4, 2004 where there will be full consideration. For now, discussion is in order.

Senate President Konangi stated that the purpose of the discussion is so that the University Faculty Affairs Committee can receive some advice and opinions.

Professor Santosh Misra inquired as to when the emergency occurs. Is it after the search? Dr. Rodger Govea responded it would be an emergency after two searches, in which case the Provost would have the option. The Provost may decide from among the searches that there really is no acceptable candidate. Professor Misra then asked, “If the Provost is going to be falling back on the list of final candidates, those finalists are coming from the second search? Dr. Govea responded, “No, they are from both searches collectively.” A finalist from the final search advisory committee means that someone has been brought in and that would be then through the two searches. Professor Misra stated that these two searches could have occurred over two years. Professor Govea responded that Professor Misra was correct in that there may be six candidates or seven.

Professor John Bazyk indicated that it is not clear from g) 4) that the failed search is due to lack of faculty consensus. It is conceivable and it does happen that sometimes there is a failed search because there are no acceptable candidates. He suggested that that language ought to be added for clarity. Professor Govea stated that the idea is that there is still a burden of proof on the Provost to demonstrate that there is in fact a problem; that is, the Provost must bring it to the UFAC. UFAC must then approve it. UFAC has to say “yes” there is a problem and the department cannot reach consensus. That then reserves the faculty prerogative in terms of saying we are now in an emergency situation.

Senate President Konangi stated that there will be a second reading to the UFAC proposal and the Senate will vote on the proposal at the next Senate meeting in February.

Senate President Konangi went on to note that the next item is a Resolution concerning the discussion that is going on in the Ohio legislature. This was brought up at the last Steering Committee meeting and the Steering Committee felt that we needed to have a Resolution in Senate opposing some of the items that are being considered in the Ohio legislature. Professor Rodger Govea and Professor Jim Wilson were kind enough to draft the resolution.

VI. Resolution on Investment of STRS Funds (Report No. 11, 2003-2004)
Professor Rodger Govea noted that there was a typographical error in the original Resolution included in the meeting packet. At the second WHEREAS, (3) requiring an amount of “invested” should be “investment” exclusively in Ohio companies.” The Resolution involves the State Teachers Retirement System and the problems that have been taken up by the legislature. The legislature has proposed some legislation and we are very disturbed about the provisions in H.B. 227. S.B. 133 is a very small bill that recommends a very small change in the composition of the STRS Board. That change would mandate a second retired person sitting on the Board, and four instead of five active teachers on the Board. This Resolution does not address that particular change but rather it is a response to the much more serious provisions in H.B. 227.

Professor Jim Wilson stated that basically when he and Professor Govea met with the retired faculty and discussed this matter from their point of view they both identified with the position taken by the retired faculty. There was a general consensus that there were very serious problems attached to H.B. 227. One is that under this bill the Treasurer will replace the Attorney General, who thought that he should resign because there might be a conflict of interest. So the Treasurer would come in instead, and will be in as a legal voting member of the Board, who would actually have ultimate supervisory power. There would be bizarre control of over $30 billion. The retired faculty members thought that this was problematic in and of itself, particularly since the Treasurer is an elected official who would then have this huge amount of money under his/her supervision. This, they felt, was a very bad idea. Secondly, there are provisions in the bill that seem to require that all of the money be handled through Ohio brokers only, which also seems to be problematic. As a matter of economic theory, we believe that this should be an open market. It interferes with our investment opportunities and it creates a closed market, and it very well may be unconstitutional because it discriminates against out-of-state brokers. Thirdly, provisions in the bill also suggest that they want to start directing investments towards Ohio and this, again, is problematic because it interferes with our investment opportunities. Professor Wilson commented that quite frankly he doesn't want to see his money limited to Ohio . He is not sure that this is the world's greatest growth area. Aside from that, we want to be able to participate fully in the open market. Also, of course, it is an invitation for corruption. Consequently, it was felt that these last two provisions were serious and in violation, possibly, of our property rights under the U.S. Constitution because they really are impairing our investment expectations and consequently it is known in the trade as “the taking”. It may also be interfering with our contract rights as well, for that matter. Here these are questions of metaphor. What struck Professor Wilson is that since the Ohio legislature is in continuing supervision over us and is in a continuing process of renegotiations of exactly what our rights are, the contract immediately then captures fully the notion of property because they are fooling around with “our” property. It seemed to Professor Wilson that that really is the operating chair, both as a matter of constitutional law and as a matter of public policy. Consequently, we want to send forth this resolution. Personally, Professor Wilson did not have any problems with the Senate bill, but the last thing we want to do right now is to get into a war with the retirees over the fact that they want a little bit more representation on the Board. It seemed, therefore, that we would want to have a joint front on this issue to suggest that these are really dangerous and perhaps unconstitutional actions. The proposed resolution before the Faculty Senate states our concern over this matter,

There being no discussion, Senate President Konangi asked for a vote on the proposed resolution. The Senate approved the proposed resolution unanimously.

Senate President Konangi reported that President Michael Schwartz is fully in support of this resolution. He is writing to the Ohio Senate President about this very same issue. Mr. Brian Johnston is also going to arrange for a press release later this afternoon or tomorrow. Ms. Kaye Grospitch is going to help us make sure that copies of the Senate Resolution are sent to the proper members in the Ohio legislature.

VII. Update on the Presidential Commission on Information Technology (Report No. 12, 2003-2004)
Senate President Konangi noted that we have an update from Vice President Mike Droney. In the Spring of 2002, when the question of updating PeopleSoft first came up, we had a fairly interesting discussion on the Senate floor. Senate members wanted periodic updates from Vice President Droney on how the implementation of People Soft was progressing. His report today is part of his efforts to make sure that Senate is fully informed of the implementation of PeopleSoft.

Vice President Mike Droney reported that basically the Presidential Commission on Information Technology was established around 20 months ago. It has six faculty members, six people from IT, people from the colleges, as well and four executives of the administrative staff. The Committee has two roles – the first is to guide and communicate with the university community with respect to decisions that relate to the PeopleSoft 8 project; the second is to analyze, develop, and guide the University's long-term direction in information technology.

Vice President Droney provided a quick update on PeopleSoft and touched on a few other items. He pointed to the slide projection of a flow chart that was established some time ago, representing fourteen different categories of events that have to take place in the full implementation of the PeopleSoft project. The chart he was using in his presentation had been updated as of the end of October 2003. The good news is that we are right on target. There is absolutely nothing preventing us from accomplishing this goal, overall. The targeted project requires bringing in new software – for those who understand systems conversions, this is required of data conversion from the old system to a new one, and it complicates the task significantly. It also requires new hardware and a whole new production environment. This equipment is now purchased, installed, and it is totally operational. All of the testing on the hardware is being done today. It required a new network, which he was proud to say represents the passing of many significant milestones. A further important milestone is also now very near to being complete. We have brought in the entire campus (53 closets); the equipment for this has been totally tested out in all of those closets and in the data center. This part of the operation is going quite well, he noted.

Vice President Droney also pointed to a couple of other categories. Testing, he observed, is going great. IT has been testing systems for months. There was one major problem in the Finance area. PeopleSoft basically handles the majority of our HR, payroll activities, the majority of our student systems (services and activities), and our financial systems. We had major problems in the financial area, but they have been worked out and the staff is catching up to the entire project. That aspect of the operation won't be delayed at all.

Vice President Droney reported that they are also very concerned about security. We will see two new things about PeopleSoft. One is that the new system is all browser-based. No one will need to have any software installed on their PC to use it. You will be able to get at PeopleSoft through an internet browser. The second big change is that our students, as well as everyone else, will see a much easier, friendlier, web interface. This is because it has been written totally in-house. What we today call “web access” is going to be totally replaced with a product IT calls “Campus Net.” He guaranteed that everyone will like it because it is not as labor intensive as the previous web site.

Mr. Droney again noted that security was a big issue now that we are opening up this new system on the web. IT has gone out of its way to put security into this system. IT has even gone the extra step of hiring an outside firm that actually verified our security precautions by trying to attack our systems to get into them, but were not able to. We are just absolutely thrilled about that. That is a major milestone for CSU.

Mr. Droney commented that according to the chart, the fourteen projects or categories represent over 2200 different tasks on the project plan. We have 75% of those tasks done as of today. That is reflected as well by the completion of seven of the ten milestones that have already been passed. We can think of this project as about three-quarters complete. There are over 100 CSU employees now involved in some capacity in this project – many of them are full-time, and a lot of them are part-time. The big item on this project was to contain costs. The total allocated budget was roughly $6.5 million. As of today, we have committed up to $5.6 million. We expect to come in with this project, if there are no surprises in the last quarter of the operation, at $5.8 million. That is within 11% of under run. Mr. Droney believed that will be the case. The very critical timing occurs once we test the system. We have already taken two payrolls and run them through a complete parallel test, and we have run every payroll through one complete cycle in the systems. It has come out excellent. The bottom line here is that we have a lot more testing to do in the other areas (student and finance, and HR). Mr. Droney assured everyone that we are not going to have another mistake. We are targeted for conversion in March 2004. On the Friday before Spring break, at about noon , they will take the entire PeopleSoft system away from everyone. They will be working 24 hours straight every day converting the data. It will take roughly three days to get the data converted in order to load up the new systems. In addition, at that time, they will spend a day verifying and confirming that everything was done right and accurately, and cross-balanced. We have done several of these data conversions already and will continue to do so. In addition, they are trying to figure out ways to make them more efficient and faster, so that the system is not brought down any longer than it needs to be. In fact, they are planning to have the system back up on Wednesday, December 17, 2003 . Looking at the academic calendar year, this is the best timing, with the least amount of impact on everyone.

Mr. Droney added that there are two phases to this conversion. There is an HR and student conversion, which he had referred to on his chart. There is also a finance conversion, but that one will be attempted in April of 2004. It is a lot smaller, but it is still important. Again, it involves taking the systems away from everyone. During the conversion period our web site will still be up, but the transactions that require PeopleSoft won't work on it. It will give a message to let everybody know that we are updating our systems.

Vice President Droney commented on other areas the Commission has been working on with IT. One they are really excited about is doing more for our students. There are two areas that have been targeted. In University Center , we have students renting laptops and that has worked phenomenally well. It has grown and caught on much more than anticipated. In addition, another lounge was put in which was designed to be more casual and open. There is a big screen TV in there. It is one of those places where you are allowed to bring coffee and work on PCs. There is now a waiting line to get on those PCs. If people haven't seen it, he suggested that they go over there and experience it.

Mr. Droney reported that the last item the President's Commission on Information Technology asked IT to address was a PC replacement program. He pointed to the various academic years on the chart projection. Looking at CSU's total consumption of PCs, one finds that 1,295 PCs were purchased in academic year 2003. These statistics can be compared to prior years. The good news is that this was a program put in place to

actually standardize our PCs. The program was not an IS&T program. There was a lot of support for this from the President's Commission, and from the different colleges. What in fact was agreed upon was a standard. The result of that was a considerable reduction on the average cost of PCs. The majority of the PCs we purchased were in this category of lower cost (pointing to the projected image). The average PC went from $1800 to $1200, which was a 33% decrease. On the notebook price, we also went down 46%, from 29% to 16%. There was also a 40% increase in the number of PCs we were able to bring in. That was a real issue because we had many departments that had five and six-year old PCs that were grossly outdated, and real maintenance nightmares. A lot of that has been cleaned up. Overall, 83% of the PCs purchased were Gateways. The same discount that CSU gets with Gateway, we have our agreement with them this year, is passed along to all our students, faculty, and staff. Information on this is available on the IT web site at csuohio.edu/ist. This web site was reformatted so that now it is a lot cleaner and easier to get this kind of information. People can go to the mobile campus laptop loaner and feel free to get some hard copy on the same thing. They can also call Mr. Droney at extension 2155.

Professor William Bowen asked Mr. Droney if IT could create a security system to keep people out, so that nobody can hack into it. As systems evolve and get better and better, there will be more and more people who can hack into them. He asked if there is a continual security update plan.

Mr. Droney responded, “Yes, there is.” We actually now have two full-time people on the IS&T staff who do nothing but dedicate their time to data-related security issues. We are constantly upgrading. We put much more money into that area than we ever wanted to with various products and virus software. The plan will continue to be that this is a priority within our group and the plan will not change. Two years ago we had one half-time person working on security and a lot less money was being dedicated to security.

Professor Andrew Gross inquired if IS&T can do anything centrally to decrease the volume of spam on email or would that have to be a personal decision on individual PC installation.

Mr. Droney replied that he has to deal with this issue quite a bit. He often tries to encourage people to put “spam blockers” on their desktops because he can't guarantee to anyone that if he puts a filter at the server level, it won't filter out a valuable email someone might want to be receiving. That is the problem. He feels obligated to get consensus on this matter, but he will not get that consensus because too many people do not want him to filter at the server level. What IS&T can do, if you call extension 5050, is guide you and help you, and even send someone out to show you how to put it in at your PC level, and that is what some have opted to do. However, he didn't know for how much longer IS&T will be able to do that. It has become very annoying to the extent that a lot of people have requested an email address change, and they have started over with fresh ones. The problem is that once you have your email address changed, you have to tell everyone you want to know the new address.

Responding to Professor Leo Jeffres' inquiry on whether the University will go public with its internet network, now that CASE and other institutions have done so --they have been praised in the press for so doing -- Mr. Droney stated that CSU has opted not to open up to the public. He observed that if we want to open to the public, we sacrifice a lot of security, and we are in a time when hackers are more prevalent. We also pay for the band widths we use to our internet provider. As a university, we buy them in incremental steps. Soon we will be reaching another incremental step and if we exceed it, the next incremental cost to the university will be close to $20,000 per year. Is it worth $20,000 per year for CSU to open the network up and risk more security issues? The people who have brought this positive public press to their institutions have not experienced the problems we have had on campus with hackers or with people accessing the network. The problem is not so much that people are malicious. The real problem is that people connect to your network with laptops that they don't even know have viruses on them. These viruses have gotten much more intelligent. They are worm-type viruses and, in fact, when they are connected to your network, that worm goes through your network and infects it without you even knowing about it. Until we can get all of these viruses under better control, we cannot go public. Because of our hard-nosed attitude about access into our network he noted, we have not been down on our site on account of viruses through all of these times of hardship.

Professor Jeffres inquired if CASE has had any problems. Mr. Droney responded that CASE has not had problems with its wireless network going public. They were hit bad with some hacking, but it wasn't because of the wireless. At least, they couldn't attribute it to wireless. It is very expensive to totally secure your wireless network and keep it open to the public. It is certainly out of our price range. Consequently, we have opted to try this configuration for right now, and we are still getting good press on it.

Professor Sanda Kaufman asked to hear about how our replacement program works. Mr. Droney said that the program right now is one where if a department needs a new PC, it first has to go through several channels. There is actually an inventory for standard PCs. Instead of the department having to cut a PO and wait for the PC to be delivered, etc., it can now send IS&T an authorization through the cost center manager in its area (the person who manages the budget), along with an account number. Within two days you should receive a new PC. We even have an inventory if you get a lemon, and we do get two to three PCs that are lemons. It happens no matter what brand you purchase.

Professor John Bazyk asked if the PC replacement program includes peripherals such as printers. Mr. Droney said that it does not include things like that yet, but they are getting a lot of requests for such things, and they are seriously looking at printers, fax machines, copiers, and all office peripherals. They also started looking at cell phones but there is not enough usage on campus to justify them, even though that sounds peculiar. If CSU would pay for it, he can justify it. Moreover, he may be able to come up with a program where everybody could benefit on a personal nature. Though CSU has opted not to put its resources in the area of peripherals at this time, still we have started to look at things like printers, even if we are not there yet.

Professor John Bazyk strongly encouraged exploring this new direction. In his own case, he has a wonderful computer but his printer is old and doesn't work correctly. Mr. Droney added that supplies for printers are extremely expensive, hence we would want bulk purchases.

Senate President Konangi commented that by the time we have the next update from Mike Droney, the PeopleSoft project will be completed.

VIII. University President's Report

President Michael Schwartz announced that with regard to the Faculty Senate's Resolution on STRS, he has sent a letter today to the Honorable Doug White, President of the Ohio Senate, asking him to stand fast on this issue on our behalf, and letting him know that the Faculty Senate's resolution is on the way.

President Schwartz was happy to report that because of some very diligent and deeply appreciated efforts by the teams on both sides of the various tables, we have reached tentative agreements with the AAUP, SEIU and the CWA, and we have begun negotiations with the FOP this morning. The agreements that we have are at different stages of presentation and ratification by the several unions. He was hopeful that he might be able to bring some of them to the Board of Trustees meeting on December 12, 2003 . He was also very pleased to be able to thank everybody who made this round of negotiations amicable, mutually respectful in every way, and he is grateful for all of that.

President Schwartz commented that Vice President Droney had just reported on PeopleSoft progress and he mentioned the laptop loan program, but he didn't tell you that we made 3500 loans in the first 13 weeks of the Fall term. There have been as many as 118 loans in one day and we got them all back -- all but one. We are also making a lot of progress in terms of registration. To date the Spring registration activity breaks down as follows: 59% of the Spring registration has been on the Web; 14% on the telephone; 27% in-person. Thus far, 73% of it has been electronic. Provost Kuo credits this electronic registration for an impressive performance in registering 60% of last year's census total of student credit hours by November 30 th . As of that date, the West Center was approaching 1200 student credit hours. It is now at 1344. We had a little more than 1300 credit hours for the Fall term at the West Center . If you put all of that together, we are right on top of our goal of 3,000 credit hours for the academic year, and this is without even taking into consideration enrollment for Summer. It looks as though we were right on this count and that the West Center is working very well. The credit for the enrollments we are seeing out there has to go to the management team that has been working on West Center enrollment; they have been very effective. The Provost has been overseeing the West Center , and it has gone extremely well.

President Michael Schwartz also reported that we are at various stages of the interview process in ongoing searches for the Dean of the College of Science, Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, for Director of Black Studies, Director of the Honors Program, and Director of Assessment. All of those searches will close very soon. They are all internal searches. He reported that he has interviewed many of the candidates and has been impressed by the quality and the ability of the emerging leadership coming right from our faculty and staff groups.

President Schwartz noted that campus enhancements are proceeding nicely, as is the long drawn-out process that will eventually result in the purchase of the Baker's Union building. We should have that acquisition by April 2004. In another matter, a request for proposals has been issued for the transformation of Fenn Tower into student housing. He expects that we will hear from any number of firms who will want to do this because we are also asking them to both manage and become developers of all of our student housing.

President Schwartz commented that there is also some good news from Columbus . Reports indicate that the monthly tax revenues have been moving and exceeding the State's expectations. However, if Ken Blackwell's initiatives to repeal the one cent additional sales tax gets on the ballot, we could have some serious trouble. The fact of the matter is that the repeal may be taken up by the State Legislature in January, which could repeal it by itself, taking the initiative away from Mr. Blackwell. If they act to repeal the increase without putting it to a vote, that would give us a little extra grief because the State budget presently is balanced on that one penny. Everybody needs to know that while the pace of the tax revenues are exceeding our expectations, this other thing is working and it has everybody in public higher education and elsewhere in the State very much on edge.

President Schwartz also reminded Senate members about some of his comments last time concerning the need for a more rigorous training for high school students in Ohio . Presently, the legislature is considering a bill to mandate that all high school students take college preparatory courses by 2007. This bill may include language that says that they may opt out of this only in consultation with a parent or guardian and a school counselor. If this measure were to pass, it would be a kind of revolution in high school education in the State.

President Schwartz also reported that as of November 26, 2003 , freshman applications for Fall 2004 were up 72% over the same period last year. We seem to be doing a pretty good job attracting attention here and getting people thinking that this is the right place to come to school.

President Schwartz noted that these items were what he wanted to bring to everybody's attention. He also stated that he knew there was yet one other item on the Senate Agenda. He wished to comment in anticipation of that item. President Schwartz reflected that Dr. Barbara Green is going to be retiring and that she has been a member of what was originally Faculty Council of this institution and now the Faculty Senate since 1969. This, of course, can be taken a number of ways. Certainly it is perhaps a clear indicator of the triumph of the habit of good judgment, but it is a remarkable record of service to this institution over the length of a most distinguished career. Universities cannot easily afford to lose that service much less the kind of institutional memory that is represented. Therefore, on behalf of the administration, President Schwartz thanked Dr. Barbara Green very much for all of her efforts to keep this university afloat.

IX. New Business

Resolution of the Faculty Senate Honoring Dr. Barbara B. Green (Report No. 13, 2003-2004)

Dr. Jane McIntyre commented that President Schwartz has slightly stolen her thunder. She noted that Faculty Senate would like to propose a Resolution to honor Dr. Barbara B. Green. It will not surprise anybody here to discover that Dr. Barbara Green's Ph.D. dissertation title was, “ University of Autonomy and Soviet Totalitarian Control.” What better preparation for a lifetime of service in Faculty governance. Faculty governance depends on people showing up to do the work and since1969, Barbara Green has been showing up to do the work of Senate, of our standing committees, and in general, of the University. In light of that, we have a beautiful Resolution to present to Dr. Green. Dr. Jane McIntyre then moved adoption of the proposed resolution:

WHEREAS, Professor Barbara B. Green has served on Faculty Senate, or its predecessor Faculty Council, for the majority of the 35 years she has been on the faculty of Cleveland State University; and

WHEREAS, Professor Green has also served as Chair of every major standing committee of the Faculty Senate or Faculty Council, including the University Admissions and Standards Committee, the University Curriculum Committee, and the University Faculty Affairs Committee; and

WHEREAS, Professor Green was also elected by her colleagues on Faculty Senate to serve as its Vice-President, and as the Faculty Representative to the Board of Trustees; andWHEREAS, IN ALL OF THESE ROLES Professor Green has been a strong voice for the faculty in the governance of the university, dedicated to upholding the primacy of the faculty in determining university policies concerning curriculum, academic standards and faculty personnel policies;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That this Faculty Senate expresses its gratitude and appreciation to Professor Barbara B. Green for her unstinting service to the faculty of Cleveland State University and wishes her well in the future.

Professor David Ball seconded the motion, and Senate approved it unanimously.

Senate President Konangi stated that the Senate wished Dr. Barbara Green well in her retirement and hope she comes back to share her wisdom with all of us.

Senate President Konangi asked Dr. Barbara Green if she would like to say a few words.

Professor Barbara Green said that for once in her life she can't get any words out, except to say that she is very touched and moved by this, and she really would like to thank everyone. She added that we now have an opportunity to work cooperatively between the faculty and the administration for common goals that we have all wanted to work for, and this is a wonderful juncture for us all and we all ought to take advantage of it. She hopes to be hearing more and more great things about this university.

Senate President Konangi announced that there will be an informal reception for Dr. Barbara Green this evening at the Star Restaurant on Euclid Avenue , next to the Keith building. He asked everyone to please join us at 5:00 P.M.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 P.M.

Nicholas J. Moutafakis
Faculty Senate President

/vel

 

[Top of Page]