>> I am told we have a quorum, so I'm going to call the meeting to order. May I ask the faculty to rise as you are able for the reading of the Memorial Resolutions? Let me recognize Professor Susan Brantly to present the Memorial Resolution for Professor Emeritus Harald Nęss. >> Professor Harald Nęss was born on the 27th of December, 1925, in Kristiansand, Norway. And he passed away there on February 5th, 2017, after a brief illness. Nęss came to Madison on a Fulbright, but stayed for 32 years. Professor Nęss fully embraced the Wisconsin Idea and immersed himself in studies of Norwegian immigrant to Wisconsin, most notably Nobel Laureate Knut Hamsun. This made him a popular speaker for Scandinavian Heritage groups across Wisconsin. Nęss was a productive scholar who wrote on a wide variety of topics and was greatly respected in his field. For all of his many contributions to Norwegian culture, he was made Knight, First Class of the Royal Norwegian Order of St. Olav in 1986. Harald Nęss was a man of many parts: a musician, a skilled gardener, a master builder, a witty storyteller, a gracious host, a beloved teacher, and an occasional lumberjack and shepherd. He and his wife Anne Marie eventually moved back to Norway in the mid-1990s leaving behind an enduring legacy for the Scandinavian Department and the University of Wisconsin. >> And let me recognize Professor Lynette Karls to present the Memorial Resolution for Professor Emerita Dorothy Pringle. >> Thank you. It is an honor to be here. Dorothy J. Pringle died on October 3rd, 2016, at the age of 97. She graduated from the University of Illinois in 1940 and earned a Doctorate in Nutrition and Biochemistry from UW-Madison in 1956. After joining the University's Food and Nutrition Faculty, she was instrumental in establishing the current Department of Nutritional Sciences in 1968, and modernizing the UW's intercollege degree program in Dietetics. She conducted research on the social and economic influences on nutrition in minority families. And she published important studies of carbohydrate metabolism, diabetes, and obesity. Her exemplary mentoring skills earned her a UW Advisor Award of Merit. Now to her family who is here today with us. Dorothy Pringle was my undergraduate advisor. She was on my graduate committee, and she hired me for my position here at UW-Madison. I have now been employed with UW-Madison for 35 years. I know I speak for many students, many colleagues, and many friends when I say Dorothy changed my life for the better in more ways than I can ever mention. She was my teacher, my advisor, my mentor, employer, a trusted colleague, and my idol. Most importantly, she was a friend, a dear friend, who was always there for me personally and professionally. I will continue in my life to strive to be more like her. I miss her dearly. And finally, I cannot stop without leaving you with a cultural foods lesson from Dr. Pringle. This was shared by her nephew at her funeral, but also shared with many students over the years. When you hear of strange foods eaten by other cultures. So think about the strangest thing you can think of that other cultures might eat. If you were to share this with Dorothy, her response would be, "Oh my goodness! I've even heard of some cultures that eat pigs' butts and call it ham." [Laughter] Thank you very much for the great honor of presenting this tribute. >> And I want to recognize the family of Professor Pringle. Her niece Dorothy Murphy, and her great-nephew Rob Koehler, are here. And thank you both for coming. [ Applause ] >> That is the end of Memorial Resolutions. You may be seated. Today is a special day. I always like the day in which we give the Hilldale Awards. We're honoring four faculty members who have been selected by the Divisional Executive Committees to receive the Hilldale Award in recognition of their distinguished careers in teaching, research, and service. This is an award about everything. While members of the faculty here at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. I want to invite Professor Gene Phillips, chair of the Department of Art History, to present Professor Henry Drewal, recipient of the Hilldale Awards in Arts and Humanities. And I should note that Professor Drewal is not here, but that will be explained. >> Hi, I'm here with my colleague Faisal Abdu'Allah, close associate of Professor Drewal. I know that Henry would love to be here to accept this great honor. But he's off living his research in Morocco where he's apprenticing to a metal worker. Because he's a strong believer in the mind/body togetherness. And in what he calls sensiotics, learning through the senses. So on his behalf, and on the behalf of the entire department, we're very proud to receive this award. Now my colleague Faisal will read some words from Henry. >> Good afternoon. I've been fortunate to be asked [inaudible] to read some words that Henry would like to share with you. I feel blessed to have a life filled with love and passion for what I do. And to be surrounded, supported, and encouraged by a partner, family friends, colleagues, mentors, and mentees. I continue to study and be inspired by the creativity and the imagination of African and African [inaudible] artists in whatever medium they choose to master. My scholarly work is transdisciplinary and multisensorial. I'm committed to reaching beyond the academy to general audiences in order to shape public discourse about the artistic contributions of African peoples globally. As an art historian, working with visual as well as performing arts, I believe that the arts' power to shape our body, brain, mind, and our lives comes from its ability to touch deeply our sensibilities. More than ever before, we need to embrace and learn from difference. The rich cultural and artistic diversity of global human creativity to build bridges, not walls. Only then can we grow as individuals and as communities. As an Ojibwa prayer reminds us, we are all one family. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> I'm going to ask the rest of you who are making presentations to come up here. It'll probably be just a little easier and faster. Professor Susan Paskewitz, chair of the Department of Entomology will present Professor Ken Raffa, recipient of the Hilldale Award in the Biological Sciences. >> Thank you. It is a true pleasure to be here today to introduce to you my dear friend and mentor and colleague Professor Ken Raffa. Professor Raffa is the [inaudible] Professor of Conservation as well as the [inaudible] Distinguished Achievement and Douglas D. Sorenson Professor. Dr. Raffa received his MS degree from the University of Delaware, and his PhD from Washington State University. He was a research scientist briefly at DuPont until 1985 when he joined us here in the Department of Entomology at UW-Madison. Professor Raffa is the preeminent forest entomologist in the world today. He has broad interests the span entomology, ecology, chemistry, and plant sciences. In studying how insects affect forest health, Dr. Raffa has been exceedingly productive. He has over 300 publications with more than 15,000 citations. Twenty-one of his papers have been cited more than 100 times. One of them, nearly 900 times, attesting to the consistently high impact of his work. As a result, he's received many other awards including the Distinguished Alumnus Award from the University of Delaware, the Founders Award and the Fellow of the Entomological Society of America, and the Silverstein-Simeone Award, the highest distinction of the International Society of Chemical Ecology. His most widely recognized contributions have been his ground-breaking studies of the processes underlying bark beetle eruptions. Dr. Raffa sought to understand why beetle outbreaks occurred, and how an insect the size of a grain of rice could bring down a towering pine tree. To answer these questions, he initiated rigorous studies in biochemistry, physiology, behavior, genetics, population dynamics, predator-prey interactions, and insect fungal symbiosis from a perspective of physiological, community, ecosystem, and landscape ecology. With all of this work embedded within an evolutionary framework. Because of his unique and I would say brilliant ability to analyze complex ecosystems across multiple scales his work arrives at a truly systems biology knowledge of an extremely complex system. He's not only an outstanding researcher, but he's also an impressive teacher and mentor. He was my mentor as an assistant professor helping me to get to that tenure hurdle six years after I got here. He has trained in his own laboratory 43 graduate students and post-docs nearly all of whom have all gone on to be leaders in academia, in government, and in industry. His students have won many awards and they routinely publish in high-impact journals. And he remains very invested in and very proud of their success long after graduation. And they are also very proud of his success today which you can see if you go to the Entomology Facebook page and look at all of the nice comments after his picture. Ken's success is due to a combination of factors. His intellectual ability is unparalleled, his vision, his insight, his tenacity, and a very substantial scientific toolbox. He also has established a worldwide network of collaboration that is based on his very high ethical standards, his sense of fair play in dealing with his colleagues and collaborators, and an affable and dare I say it? Charming demeanor. His research has generated a comprehensive synthetic and enduring understanding of the biology, ecology, and evolution of insects and their impacts on forest ecosystems. Ken is an exceptional scholar, a leader and colleague. And it is my great honor to introduce him as this year's Hilldale Recipient in the Biological Sciences. [ Applause ] >> Well, thank you, Susan. As a first-generation college graduate, I can't put into words my appreciation to all of my teachers, colleagues, and family who've helped me at every juncture. University of Wisconsin and my friends in the Entomology Department have provided me with opportunities, experiences, and rewards beyond the wildest dreams of my immigrant grandparents. My students have been an endless source of inspiration. Thanks to their enthusiasm, talent, and joy. When people experience forests, their immediate reaction is one of connection. Forests provide us with shelter, food, medicine, tools, and livelihood. They also provide a spiritual and aesthetic connection that can be readily see in how forests inspire art, folklore, and religion across all cultures. When people think about insects, their first impression is usually of pestilence. Insects feed on trees and sometimes kill them. They can even force us to choose between the utilitarian and aesthetic values of forests which causes human conflict. But insects are also crucial to the vitality of forests. It's absolutely inconceivable that forests could thrive without the essential roles insects play in nutrient cycling, food for wildlife and fish, biodiversity, and pollination. The multiple values we derive from forests and likewise the complex roles insects play as both our competitors and benefactors require an understanding of interactions. These interactions come in many forms. In the elaborate defenses tress have evolved to ward off attack. In the symbiotic associations insects use to overcome these defenses. In the complex chemical signaling and courtship rituals insects use to find mates. In the reciprocal interactions between herbivores and predators. These interactions also operate across multiple scales. From molecular through landscape. Answers we obtain at one level of scale can be quite different from those we obtain at another. For example, small disturbances might prevent larger ones. And effective short-term control measures might release larger outbreaks. Each of these interactions provides an opportunity to understand our complex natural world and our place in it. They also provide opportunities to promote human wellbeing such as developing environmentally benign approached to pest management. And also by imitating how insects became so successful. For example, the same microbial [inaudible] that allow beetles to damage trees and wood products are also providing our best sources of cellulolytic enzymes for [inaudible]. As we look ahead, we face increasingly complex challenges. Outbreaks by native forest insects are now exceeding their historical dimensions, frequencies, and geographic ranges due to changes in climate and land use. Some outbreaks have become so large that they've actually converted major ecosystems from carbon sinks to carbon sources, thus aggravating the problem. Likewise, global trade is increasing the introduction of exotic insects and pathogens which invade new areas and overwhelm trees that lack coevolved defenses. These new regimes pose difficult choices. For example, when exotic insects and pathogens enter wilderness areas, should we intervene by genetically engineering trees for resistance, introducing natural enemies, or even applying pesticides? To do so goes counter to our wilderness philosophy. To not do so allows an exotic organism to completely transform our native ecosystems. The University of Wisconsin provides fertile ground for meeting such challenges. While much of the world may start distinctions between basic versus applied research, that dichotomy never took root here. The Wisconsin Idea strives for connection. While scholarship emerged as a solitary pursuit in many places, UW fostered a culture of no barriers and even devoted its most prime real estate to drinking beer together by the lake. Our emerging natural resource challenges cannot be solved solely by scientific advances. They require future leaders who have integrated understanding of science, economics, history, and philosophy. Fortunately, UW has always produced and will continue to provide such leaders because we embraced a value of a broad liberal arts education. I'm grateful to be part of it. [ Applause ] >> Professor Donald Moynihan, director of the La Follette School of Public Affairs will present Professor David Weimer, recipient of the Hilldale Award in the Social Sciences. Don. >> On behalf of the La Follette School of Public Affairs and also the Department of Political Science, I am honored to introduce David Weimer. Professor Weimer is the Erwin Whitty [assumed spelling] Professor of Political Economy. He studies the craft of public policy and institutional design. While most recently his research has been on medical governance, he's applied his tools of analytics to natural resource policy, education, criminal justice policy, and research methods. David is a, a, a tremendously productive and innovative scholar. He started his career graduating from University College of Berkeley in 1978. He spent a, a time at the University of Rochester before arriving at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2000. He sits jointly between the Department of Political Science and La Follette School of Public Affairs. He is the author or co-author of seven books, two of which are in nine editions and multiple translations and seven other edited volumes. He's published over 100 peer-reviewed journal articles. And I checked today. He's a, a, a got 9000 citations to his name over the course of his career. He teaches classes in statistics, policy, and cost-benefit analysis. In 2004, Professor Weimer was elected to be president of the Association of Public Policy Analysis and Management, one of the highest honors that anyone working in the field of public policy could receive. And since he arrived at UW-Madison, he's received more than four million dollars in external grants. His central field of research is in the application of cost-benefit analysis tools. And he's contributed that a wide area of domains. But just to give the example, held policy, he has looked, for example, how consumers use organizational report cards to make choices about their health consumption. At how healthcare regulation affects the quality and costs of health services. At how organ transplant markets are managed and governed. And so he plies a wide set of tools across a single set of policies to great effect. When I was a student, I studied as a Masters of Public Affairs, I read David's textbook on policy analysis and cost-benefit analysis. I think it's fair to say that anyone who's received a professional degree in public policy or administration in the last 20 years has been influenced by how he has conceptualized policy analysis and cost-benefit analysis. Few people could say that they've influenced generations of public servants around the world in how they do their job. And, and have affected how they think about the right way to do that job. Much of David's work in the classroom involves coaching students to apply those tools to the selection and implementation of good public policies. In his cost-benefit analysis class, he sends teams of students out to work with actual clients and public organizations to figure out if policies make sense or not. Multiple generations of students and public organizations in Wisconsin have benefitted very much from David's applied use of those skills in the classroom context, but also out in the real world. He is not only a great scholar, he is a great teacher and a great citizen, and we think an embodiment of the Wisconsin Idea. We are very proud to count him as a colleague and thrilled by this recognition. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> My thanks to Don Moynihan, David Cannon, my colleagues in political science, La Follette School for nominating me for this award. As well as my thanks to the committee that selected me to receive it. I am honored. One of the reasons I decided to come to UW was its reputation for welcoming interdisciplinary research. I'm not at all surprised that the La Follette School lives up to this reputation. Its mission demands it. However, in view of what I know about the increasingly narrow disciplinary focuses of social science departments at many universities, I have been pleasantly surprised by the Department of Political Science's welcoming of research into problems in the world that cut across disciplinary boundaries. I review research and teaching as two sides of the same coin. For graduate teaching, the unity is obvious. Teaching is as much coaching as telling. It is sometimes less obvious in undergraduate teaching, especially with current pressures toward narrow learning goals and multimedia presentations. Yet I believe integrating research into teaching promotes the problem-solving skills that enable lifelong learning. As we defend the university in these difficult times, I hope we don't lose sight of the duality of research and teaching. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Professor Brad Singer, from the Department of Geoscience, will present Professor John Valley, recipient of the Hilldale Award in the Physical Sciences. Brad. >> Thank you, Chancellor Blank. It's a great pleasure and a great honor for me representing our Department of Geoscience to present to you John Valley for this year's Hilldale Award in Physical Sciences. First before I get started, I'll read some excerpts from the department nomination letter, but I want to thank John, who hired me. He was chair of the department when I was brought to Madison. And it was probably the best move in my career that could have happened. And John was one of my early mentors and made sure that my career was off to a great start here at this great university. So thank you, John. John's the Charles Van Hise Professor of Geoscience, so he's among the most distinguished geochemists of his generation. His career is marked my major advances in understanding how the deep crust originates, the earliest history of the earth, and technological innovations that have revolutionized the field of isotope geochemistry. John's courses at the introductory and advanced undergraduate levels as well as his graduate courses in geochemistry have received consistently high praise from hundreds of students each year since 1983. But perhaps John's most important influence as a teacher and a mentor is his dedication to training and mentoring graduate students and post-docs. John's supervised 15 PhD students and 25 post-docs in the last 33 years. And each of the PhD students has generated a successful career in academia as professors or research scientists at leading institutions. As examples, his former graduate students include a full professor at the California Institute of Technology who is currently a member of the National Academy of Sciences. The Provost of Boston University, and a research scientist, a senior research scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico who is currently the president of the Geological society of America. John's rigorous approach to mentoring these students and post-docs has created a generation of highly capable, broadly trained earth scientists who themselves are now leading our society and nation forward. John's research is best described as prolific, wide-researching, and of exceptional impact. I wasn't going to read this, but I think I will. Google Scholar today: if you go look up John's name indicates more than 22,000 citations. His H index of 76 places him at the very pinnacle of achievement on this campus in terms of impact of his published research. His most influential research has been in three directions: pioneering and influential studies on the origin of rocks called granulates that comprise the lower portion of earth's crust. The development of novel techniques for microanalysis of stable isotope ratios in minerals. And using these isotopes in zircon to explore condition of earth's earliest surface environments. In the 1990s, John came to realize that an analytical technique called secondary ion mass spectrometry or SIMS for short, had great promise to improve the spatial resolution of [inaudible] to isotopic measurements while maintaining precision and accuracy. And he and his students published some of the very first research on stable isotope compositions measured in [inaudible] at the micron scale. These methods employed by John and his team enabled measuring large numbers of zircons that formed very early in earth's history. And in 2001, together with Simon Wilde and graduate student William Peck, John published in Nature the discovery of heavy isotopes of oxygen in a zircon crystal from Western Australia point out that zircon crystal is no bigger than a single grain of sand dug out of rocks from Western Australia. The uranium [inaudible] ages of that zircon gave a date of 4.4 billion years, thereby comprising evidence that by this time, earth's crust had begun to form in the presence of liquid water. This hypothesis of a cool early earth suggests that life may have existed 800 million years earlier than the oldest microfossils that we're aware of. And though this was at odds with long-held views of the early earth covered by an incandescent magma ocean, John's hypothesis has been examined and refined by other groups and now features in many leading introductory earth science textbooks. It's a wonderful example of how technological advances, driven by imaginative and unconventional thinking like that of John propel fundamental and revolutionary discoveries. Since then, John's gone on to build a national facility for ion microprobe studies, a SIMS the WiscSIMS lab, which has had 250 visitors in the last ten years use the research facility in our building. This research has led to many national and international honors including fellowship in several societies. Most recently this year, he was elected to the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He's, his service record is also stellar. He was chair of the department, as I said, when I was hired. He served on the physical science divisional committee, and the research committee, among other professional duties. He's been the past president of the Mineralogical Society of America. And he's editor or co-editor of several journals. In addition to all of these activities and accomplishment that make John richly deserving of the Hilldale Award, there's just one more. John has been deeply committed to this university and the Department of Geoscience for his entire career of more than 33 years. Since 2002, he has spearheaded and edited our annual Alumni magazine, The Outcrop. We mail this out to 3500 alumni every year. And The Outcrop keeps geo badgers around the nation thinking about all the great things happening in Weeks Hall and the department. And it draws attention to the increasing, increasingly critical role played by philanthropy and giving at this great institution. So without ado, I'll give you John Valley. [ Applause ] >> I prepared some short notes. Thank you, Brad, for that, for the nice introduction. And thank you, all. I'm honored and grateful for this award. It's, it's humbling to be included in the pantheon of Hilldale recipients. But this award is not really just to me. I'd like to reflect on the greatness of the university and its traditions that makes such discoveries possible. For 34 years, I've been privileged to work in a community of students, of educators, and scholars that is smart, passionate, and supportive. The Hilldale Award recognizes accomplishments that I share with some 80 former graduate students and post-docs. I've also benefitted and learned from many of 10,000 undergraduates that I've enjoyed teaching over those many years. Those people have gone on, as Brad said. They've -- many of them have gone on to do great things and to become loyal alumni. The Hilldale recognizes faculty in the department of geoscience and in many other departments from anthropology to [inaudible] to physics that I've collaborated with. And to people in the administration of letters and science in the graduate school. There were times when I needed things, and these people believed in me and gave me the support to go to NSF to request equipment that I thought we needed. And these tools have allowed me some of the greatest thrills of my professional life. So as Brad referred to, we've used novel mass spectrometers along with electron microscopes to discover the oldest known pieces of the earth. And we showed that the earth was relatively clement shortly after it formed. That's paleoclimatology in really deep time. This pushed back the possible origin of life and it affects the search for life beyond the earth. NASA likes to say, "Are we alone?" And I think the possible philosophical implications of this are, are quite profound. I, I couldn't possibly name in this short period of time all of the people who deserve my thanks. So instead, I'll just mention one person who I never met but who did much to establish the traditions of this university. His name will be familiar to you as president of the university at the beginning of the last century. Charles Van Hise led U, UW from 1903 to 1918 during 15 years of explosive growth for the university. Greater growth by far than the discouraging cuts that we've seen more recently. He invented the Wisconsin Idea. Van Hise was also a prolific researcher, both before and while he was an administrator. I brought with me just one of eight books that Van Hise wrote. You've probably not seen this before because it weighs 12 pounds and is 1300 pages. It was published in 1904 when he was already president of the university. Van Hise was interested in a great number of things including paleoclimate. And on page 454 of this book, he calculates the tonnage of coal that was burned every year by the world. [Inaudible] was not yet an issue because Henry Ford had only just invented the automobile. He calculates how much CO2 is released. And he calculated that, he predicted that tripling of CO2 in the atmosphere would raise world surface temperatures by eight or nine degrees C. This was over 100 years ago. Well, since then, earth scientists have gone on to greatly refine the estimates of, of past climate change and the predictions of the future. This has tremendous importance for economic development and for security. I think it's, if I can digress, I think it's sad that this great promise, this great progress is so frequently now attacked by email scams, fake news, and even congressional witch hunts. I'll stop here on that. I think we probably all agree. But my point is that the University of Wisconsin and its traditions is far older than one political cycle. And if I can take some solace and encouragement from this, it's that our strength lies in these long-lived traditions. It lies in what we do every day. And it lies in the importance for making the state of Wisconsin, the nation, and indeed, the world, better. So I thank you all for this, this wonderful award. [ Applause ] >> I realize that some people tonight will be watching the final round of March Madness like most of you in [inaudible] shirts. But I must say that I am very proud to be holding a party at my house for our very best faculty, the Hilldale Award winners and their colleagues and their families. So it'll be good to see you all tonight. And this has to be over in time for that party or I'm leaving, so. Thank you all very much. And congratulations again to our award winners. We'll party more tonight. Let me move on -- if -- you folks are welcome to stay, but don't feel you need to. Coming up on the board here, I believe, is going to be the ballot which has gone live today for faculty elections. And I hope that all of you will encourage everyone inside your departments as well as yourself to vote in those elections while, while they're open. How long are they open? Until the 24th of April, I'm told. That's three weeks or something close to that. I have a few very short remarks that I just want to make just as updates on a couple of things that I know you're all tracking. First of all, let me say a word about the federal budget. As you know, there is some high-level budget proposals for the next fiscal year that are not terribly promising for higher education and for research. Proposed cuts to the NIH, the NEA, the NSF, NOA, Pell Grants, among others are very disappointing to see. And we are going to continue to advocate for our institution and for our students, both individually as well as through such organizations as the AAU, ACE, APLU, and our congressional delegation. And those organizations are all gearing up and very actively putting together the arguments here. It is, however, very early in the process. Congress has the final decisions on the budget. And I suspect that many of the things we have read about are not going to happen in the way that they are proposed. But it is very uncertain what will happen and what will not. If you have specific concerns about federal funding or policy areas in your, policy changes in your area, are there very particular parts of the budget that you want to make sure we're tracking, I encourage you to contact Ben Miller who can work with you on the right way to stay in touch. And Ben, do you want to stand up? Ben is in charge of our congressional and state and community relations. And is basically in charge of running our DC office. So be in touch with him if there are any details that you want to make sure we have on our scopes. As right now, we just have these large-level proposals. We don't know what single line items inside the budget are going to look like. But we're keeping a sharp eye on that. Moving from the federal to the state level. Last week the Joint Committee on Finance held public hearings with a variety of agencies including the UW System with President Ray Cross. This week that committee is going to begin a series of hearings across the state to gather input from state residents on budget priorities. And we have been communicating with our alums across the state. And hope that a number of our alums and supporters are going to attend those sessions and voice their support for investment in the University of Wisconsin. We are also taking that message to the state capital on Wednesday, April 12th during UW lobby day. We have well over 100 supporters from across the state signed up to come in -- those UW-Madison supporters. And they're people from all the other colleges and schools across the state coming as well. That same day is the Annual Research in the Rotunda event, an opportunity to showcase for legislators and their staff some of the work that we do here. And particularly the research our undergraduate students are doing. And some of you may have undergrad students who are showing posters at that event. We're also monitoring the progress of an audit that is going to be undertaken by the State Legislative Audit Bureau on Foundation Relations sparked by some of the issues that you probably read about at Oshkosh. And I am not concerned about that. We intend to be fully transparent. We have a very good set of operating procedures with our foundation. And I'm more than happy to be audited on that if that is what the state wishes. On another legislative issue of concern, there was a new bill circulated last week regarding the concealed carry of guns. And the proposal was to remove licensing requirements for concealed carry. From our initial read, and from what we have been told by the sponsors and we've looked through this quite carefully, this has no impact on the ability of higher education institutions to post buildings and to post facilities as no-carry zones and to ban guns from our campus buildings and from sports events or other events such as Camp Randall. So we will see where that one goes. One last bit of campus news, turning away from the state and federal level. We selected a new Business School dean last week, and congratulations and particular thanks to the committee. Terry Warfield was the chair of that committee and Anne P. Massey brings a wealth of experience with her from Indiana University in Bloomington where she was a highly regarded professor and an administrator at -- is it the Keller School? Kelley School, thank you. She was most recently the dean's research professor of information systems at the Kelley School as well as associate vice president in the office of the executive vice president of university academic affairs. She is starting here in early August, and I very much look forward to her joining the team. Dean Franēois Ortalo-Magné is leaving in early June, so we will probably be appointing a short-term interim over the summer. In other state news, two new regents were selected last week. One of them is Mike Jones of Milwaukee who is a UW-Madison alum. And has served on our LNS Board of Visitors that is very well known inside LNS as a good friend and supporter. So I think that's good news. Finally, let me note that our post-tenure review policy, which you all voted on last time, will be discussed and I very much hope accepted by the Board of Regents at their meeting on Thursday and Friday of this week at UW-Platteville. And that is my report. Amy, you have nothing to add? Are there questions or issues or anything else that anyone wants to add to that? If not, I will turn to the minutes of the March sixth meeting which is on page two in your booklet. Are there any additions or changes to those minutes? >> Senator Alan Goldberg, District 71. I would just respectfully like to ask that the minutes record the reason that I made a request to call for abstentions on Faculty Document 2639. >> We will make that change. With that amendment, are there any other changes that people want to propose? With an amendment, do I have to take a vote? No? In that case, I'm going to accept the minutes as amended and suggested here. Let me now recognize Professor Alan Rubel, who will present for informational purposes a proposal to change the name of the School of Library and Information Studies to the Information School or as I understand it is to be called the iSchool. Professor Rubel. >> So the School of Library and Information Studies is proposing to change its name to the University of Wisconsin-Madison Information School or the iSchool. Document 2676, yeah, 2676 outlines the basics of the name change, including all of our reasons. And the process that we went through in order to arrive at that name change. I won't, you know, go over all of that here. But I'll outline three key points and I'm happy to ask, to answer questions with the help of Michelle Besant, our associate director. First, the name change is a move to a field norm. So Information School is norm in the field of universities and programs within the iSchool Consortium which is an international consortium of 77 schools across five continents who do stuff like we do. We are no longer sort of within the norms of the field and want to move our school name to reflect that institutional norm. That field norm is decades in the making. Over the last 30 years, peer programs have changed their names from names that reflect particular types of information institutions such as libraries to information schools. So programs such as those in University of Texas, Arizona, Michigan, Illinois, North Carolina, others have all made a similar change. We are making the change now, hopefully. It's also, the second point I want to emphasize is that this is important because our current name is, or the change is important for our research and our educational missions. The current name does not reflect what we do or what we teach. So our faculty research encompasses a lot of stuff that has, that isn't centrally concerned with libraries. Our faculty do research in organization of information across media types. Information policy and ethics ranging from privacy and intellectual property, information governance, and information labor. Digital youth and digital literacy, scholarly communication, electronic publishing, history of print and digital cultures, community informatics, and social and psychological aspects of information behavior and use. The current name doesn't reflect that breadth. Likewise, we teach a lot of different stuff that isn't centrally concerned with just a single type of information institution. We have five different MA, master's concentration. Data information management and analytics, technology information and people, librarianship, digital archives, and organization of information. We have an undergraduate curriculum. We are a founding member of the digital studies certificate. We offer five or six courses a year within that certificate. We are managing two capstone certificates with partner programs, one in user experience and design. It's a part, a partnership with computer science. One in analytics for decision making in partnership with communication arts and biometry. And our PhD program: our PhD students do lots of work that isn't centrally concerned with a single type of information institution. Rather, they cover lots of research related to lots of different issues surrounding information and information use. The, the name change will help attract students to each of those programs by reflecting better what we actually do. Lastly, I want to emphasize the process that we went through to make this change. We started engaging in this debate after our most recent American Library Association accreditation. We discussed it amongst the faculty our plenary, in a plenary meeting. We voted, faculty and staff voted unanimously to approve the name change. Our executive committee approved it. And we -- before this and during this we engaged in extensive outreach that includes to alumni, distinguished alumni donors, students, other campus units, and employers. And there's been overwhelming support in favor of the name change. Thank you. Oh, I'm happy to answer questions. >> This does not require a vote. It's for information. Or is there any discussion? Questions? Comments? >> Paul Milenkovic, Electrical and Computer Engineering. I believe it's District 36. The Bell Laboratory's mathematical scientist Claude Shannon is credited with developing a research -- a area of scholar inquiry called "information theory." Which is in the purview of engineering departments, possibly computer science, possibly the Wisconsin Institute of Discovery Optimization. Is there any consideration in the name change in your identification that there's no confusion between these two areas of scholarly inquiry? >> Thank you. So I want to be very clear that this name change is to reflect what we do, not a territorial claim that we are the only people that do information-related stuff. Everybody in this university deals with information in the same way that we all deal with education or communications or areas that are covered by other departments, right? So this just says that we cover lots of important information stuff. Not that we own that name or that we are taking over some territory. Did I? Apparently I misunderstood your question. >> The information theory is not information in the sense of disseminating scholarly results or news. It's a theory which actually has roundabout connection to thermodynamics in terms of defining information in terms of a quantity called entropy. And it is an intersection with chemical and physical thermodynamics and Boltzmann's, Ludwig Boltzmann's work. And so it's not like, "Oh, well we're dissemination information on electrical engineering. Chemists are disseminating information." There is a particular discipline known as Information Theory which intersects, as I said, with thermodynamic theory. And that I'm, I'm just expressing that there be disambiguation or no confusion between the two. >> I appreciate that. I -- I agree. I wouldn't want anybody thinking that our -- that that is our, that that's our domain. >> Another comment. >> Thanks. Eric Hoyt from District 49. I'm in Communication Arts, but I just speak to support this name change and as someone that does work in the digital humanities, I find myself competing for grants routinely. Against information schools and just, you know, three examples: Michigan, Berkeley, University of Texas all have information schools. And I've even visited some of those campuses and seen students wearing iSchool sweatshirts. So I guess this is just to speak in support of it and just to echo what Senator Rubel said. That it, it's, you know, completely now a norm in that field. >> Thanks. That's one of the key reasons, and that's partly outlined in Document 2676. We want to be clear to outside funders, outside resources, that we are competing with those peer programs. And so that people in other units can draw on us. And use that kind of language in seeking, in seeing resources. Thanks. >> Chris Wells, District 61. Journalism and Mass Communication. Just to briefly support Eric's point. When it comes to disambiguation, this is the trend that other schools in the country are following. There's a lot of other iSchools. And I don't think they, they don't do a lot with, with Claude [inaudible] research. They're studying largely the organization of information, how its accessed in terms of coming here, I was a little surprised when I couldn't find the iSchool on campus. When I first arrived. I figured that out a year or two later. But that was sort of inconvenient in terms of collaboration. Because in journalism, we do a lot of collaboration with folks like an iSchool. So we support the name change too. >> Thanks, yes. Hopefully it will take much less time than a year or two for people to figure out that we're here. >> Thank you very much. [ Inaudible ] >> Believe it or not, we're at the last item on the agenda which is on the last page of your packet. Though I suspect this will generate a little bit of conversation. Let me recognize Professor Chad Goldberg who will introduce the resolution calling for fair and equitable pay for faculty assistants. >> Thank you. I'm going to wait for Matt to -- yeah. Thank you, Matt. Okay. So faculty assistants are a category of instructional academic staff on our campus who are currently denied equal pay for equal work. >> Chad. I need you to make a motion and get a second on it before I ask you to comment on it. >> Yeah. Sorry. Chad Alan Goldberg, District 71. I move for the adoption of this resolution. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Alright. In that case, please speak to the motion. >> Thank you. So let me continue. Faculty assistants are a category of instructional academic staff on our campus who are currently denied equal pay for equal work. They perform comparable duties to TAs and often more. But the university sets their minimum compensation rate lower. Not only is this situation unfair, it also hinders the ability of department to recruit and retain qualified teaching staff for their service course. In this way, the pay inequity directly affects the academic and educational activities for which we, the faculty, have primary responsibility to advise the Chancellor. Next slide, please, Matt. As Karl Scholz helpfully explained in the memo that he circulated this morning to some members of this body, [inaudible] employees about 80% of the faculty assistants on campus. And those faculty assistants are currently concentrated in ESL and in Chemistry. The work that faculty assistants do is vitally important to academic and educational activities on this campus. As Vice Chancellor Laurent Heller noted in a memo dated March ninth, "Faculty assistants play an important role in delivering a first-rate education to our students in various disciplines. Most notably ESL and Chemistry. Unfortunately, we are unlikely to hear very much from the Chemistry Department today because today's Senate meeting conflicts with the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society. I can tell you, however, that Chemistry was very supportive of a similar resolution passed by the Academic Staff Assembly in March. Furthermore, there are colleagues from ESL who are here today who wish to speak in favor of this resolution. Now Karl states in his memo this morning that, "the growing reliance of faculty assistants in ESL reflects the growth and the number of international students." He says he expects student demand for ESL to grow. And I stress this point to emphasize again that the pay inequity experienced by faculty assistants directly affects the academic and educational activities for which the faculty have primary responsibility. International students are enrolled in many departments across this campus. And ESL prepares them to succeed in their classes. Next slide, please, Matt. Because LNS distinguishes two levels of faculty assistants, experienced and inexperienced, this resolution follows suit. Next slide, please. This resolution merely asks the Faculty Senate to acknowledge the pay inequity experienced by faculty assistants. They perform the same duties as TAs, often more. But their minimum compensation rate is set lower. And it recommends that the university eliminate this inequity by raising the minimum compensation rate of faculty assistants to equal that of teaching assistants. Next slide, please. By our estimates, this would cost the university just $150,000, less than 0.026 percent of the university's annual instructional budget of $571,500,000. Now does Karl Scholz's memo this morning obviate the need for this resolution? There is undeniably good news in this memo. LNS is now committing for the first time to raises in faculty assistant pay next academic year. And this is the first time we've seen in writing that LNS intends to transition existing faculty assistants in ESL to renewable lecturer positions involving higher salaries. These are valuable steps in the right direction. And I commend Karl for them. However, I believe they are not enough. The changes only affect faculty assistants in LNS, leaving one-fifth of faculty assistants out of the equation. They would not benefit from these changes. Even within LNS, the pay raises for faculty assistants still fall short of the minimum compensation rate for TAs. The resolution that is before you today provides Karl with valuable support that I believe he will need to continue to improve faculty assistant compensation in LNS and to address other inequities. And it actually does something more. Karl's memo does not acknowledge the principle of equal pay for equal work while this resolution would put the Faculty Senate on record as supporting that principle. Now, a few words about, I think, other remarks that you're likely to hear today. The opponents of this resolution will say that it is unfair to other academic staff on campus who also experience pay inequities. But recommending fair pay for faculty assistants doesn't preclude the university from addressing other inequities on campus. On the contrary, this resolution should be seen as part of a broader push for equity not just for faculty assistants. Even if they are at the forefront of this issue because the inequity they experience is so transparent. But for all employees on campus. While seemingly focused on the particular grievances of a small group of academic staff, the resolution lends support for a general principle. Again, that equal work should be rewarded with equal pay. And I believe this is a good precedent to set. The opponents of this resolution will say that it is unnecessary because the campus is already undergoing a titling and compensation study. This, this resolution represents valuable input for that study. It puts the Faculty Senate, again, on record as supporting equal pay for equal work. As one important principle that should inform the salary structure on this campus. The titling and compensation study will hopefully provide the basis for a more equitable salary structure, especially if it is open to input from governance groups. But it can only provide an uncertain and long-term solution for faculty assistants that will take years to develop and to implement. Faculty assistants need a short-term remedy for an inequity that they are experiencing right now. And this resolution acknowledges that urgency. Finally, the opponents of this resolution will say that the pay of faculty assistants is set by the invisible hand of the market and that the university cannot afford to pay them any more. I believe there are several problems with this argument. First, faculty assistants are underpaid relative to comparable positions at peer institutions. In a memo to the chair of ASEC dated March ninth, Vice Chancellor Laurent Heller noted that an analysis by the Office of Human Resources found that there could be a gap in current pay levels relative to our Big Ten peers. Now Karl Scholz insists that comparisons to peer institutions are irrelevant because the local labor market sets wages for faculty assistants. Although by his own admission, he has no local labor market data. He insists that current FA rates are not out of alignment because the university can hire faculty assistants. Now this is a weak argument. Being able to fill a job doesn't mean that you can recruit and retain the most talented and the most dedicated people for that job. And finally, while universities surely operate in a market society and must take market forces into consideration, there has historically been an effort on this campus to balance market considerations with equity concerns. What is deeply troubling to me is the suggestion that the market alone should set salaries without any consideration of fairness and equity. And that the university should never pay more than the absolute minimum necessary to fill a job. That's not how you build loyalty and dedication to an organization. Please ask yourself what kind of university you want to work in. Whether you would rather work in a winner-take-all campus. Or a campus where concerns about fairness, justice, and solidarity still play a role in the work that we all do together. We heard during the presentation of the Hilldale Awards today, "We are all one family." Let's start to act like it. >> Are there other comments on the resolution? >> Mark Etsell [assumed spelling], District 11. So after that really admirable explanation, I'm going to give you what I feel like is the NASCAR version of this. And that is that I support this motion really I think because when I, when I thought about this, I looked up something that Pope John Paul II said about ten years ago. And he said, "If you want peace, then work for justice." If you want peace, then work for justice. And I thought, "What is justice?" And I looked it up. And the definition of justice is fair and equitable. So if you want peace, then work for fair and justable, equitable pay. And that's what this resolution is. Now, of course you can make arguments against justice. And you can make arguments against fair and equitable pay. And you can get highly paid administrators saying that we can't afford to pay the poorest and the vulnerable people that are peers of fair wage. You can chip away at the, at the working rights and, and pay of the poorest and vulnerable of us. But in the end, we all lose when we do that. And so I urge you all to stand up for peace and justice in the world and do the right thing here and vote yes for this motion. >> Hello. My name is Tim Dolby. I represent Academic Assembly District 263 which includes about a quarter of the faculty assistants working at this university. On their behalf, I introduced this resolution to the Academic Assembly last month. The resolution passed with an overwhelming majority. I work in the ESL program which supports the ever-increasing number of international students at this university. As a member of the full-time academic staff, I value and appreciate the essential work that our qualified and experienced FAs provide. I'm delighted that our long-serving FAs will be transitioned to a lecturer position and given more respect and more pay. While I thank Dean Scholz for his quick and decisive action, this resolution still has merit. When FAs in other departments have to make a choice between teaching a class or taking a few extra hours at Starbucks, that affects the quality of teaching at this institution. That they are paid less than teaching assistants who themselves are underpaid appears to be a travesty. This group of FAs has reached out to other FAs on campus to the ASM to the TAA and to administrators at the highest level. To see that they've gathered such support for their cause suggests to me that they have the right on their side. There are no doubt other employees who face pay issues. And we look forward to economic justice for all who work for the university. But they're not here speaking to you today. The FAs are. And we need to start somewhere and show our support for instructional who contribute vitally to the functioning of the university and the ability of our students to succeed. The TAA, the ASM, and the ASA has thrown their support behind this resolution. As fellow researchers, instructors, and employees, I call on you to also throw your support behind this resolution. Thank you for your time. [ Applause ] >> My name is Parthy Shactor [assumed spelling]. I am a faculty assistant in the program in English as a Second Language. It's my fifth year right now as a faculty assistant. I was a TA for two years before that while I was in my PhD program. My current rate, now in my fifth year as an FA, is $32,492. That's all 100% appointment. We are not guaranteed 100% appointments. We are guaranteed the lowest appointment we had in the first three years. So for me, I'm guaranteed 67%. I just did my 2016 taxes. I don't know if anyone else did that yet. But what I made from UW in 2016 was $22,612. I've had the opportunity to meet many faculty assistants from outside of ESL. I've spoken with Chemistry FAs, Zoology, Jewish Studies, and German Department FAs. And really all of them are dedicated teachers, people who are teaching because we want to be teaching, because we care deeply about the students here at UW who are your students. And we're, we're really involved in the same goals here in terms of making our students' academic experience as good as it can be. I want to tell you a little bit about what it means to be making $32, 492 or less. I'm not the lowest paid among my FA colleagues. Nor will I be next year even with the, the improvements. What it means is that we have to have second jobs to support our families. I tutor. I also rent out a room in my home. My colleagues wait tables, work at Lands' End, and participate in paid medical studies in order to make ends meet. I won't be teaching at UW this summer because it makes more sense for me to take extra tutoring hours and, and do that when my husband is able to be with our child because the cost of childcare compared to what I make, it doesn't make sense. And I think that that's really a disadvantage to this university for faculty assistants to have to make decisions like that. Where we're thinking about whether we can afford to be teaching here during the summer. So for the good of the university and for the good of our students who are benefitting from the, the passion and the skills that FAs bring, I urge you to support this resolution for equitable pay. [ Applause ] >> Thomas O'Guinn, Division 24, School of Business. I also want to support this resolution and I think it's -- of many of the things we've talked about, something, it's a pretty easy one. Yeah, in the School of Business lately, we've been encouraged. I'm also chair of the Marketing Department. To do, to do more to address the, the well-deserved criticism of letting market forces run everything. And bad behavior due to just making invisible-hand arguments. You just heard, I mean, these are human beings who need to, who need real salaries to buy real groceries to have a real living. Voting for this resolution is the right thing to do. And you know, it's, it's not very often you get to do the right thing to make a statement and go on the record at such an incredibly low cost. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> My name is John [inaudible], and I'm a faculty assistant in the ESL program as well. And I just wanted to kind of preface my support for this resolution, obviously, with a short story of how I ended up being a faculty assistant. Ever since I started my graduate career at UW-Madison in 2008, I was a teaching assistant in the ESL program. Then I became a senior teaching assistant in the ESL program. And last year I was hired as a faculty assistant to teach in the ESL program. With that, I took a $5000 pay-rate cut. Simply because I became a faculty assistant. And the absurdity of the situation is that even though I teach more classes, my take-home pay is actually less than when I was teaching as a senior teaching assistant in the program. We did, you know, we also received the information from Dean Scholz this morning, and I would like to join the previous speakers in commending him for this move in the right direction. But I also think that's simply not enough. And I took a look at some of the numbers that are provided with that memo. And I would like to point out that for example, the new definition for faculty assistant or experience-- faculty assistants who are experienced puts me still in the very same bracket that I'm in right now. Because there's a new definition that says you have to have more than five semesters of experience and as far as I know, the teaching assistant experience doesn't count. So pretty much my eight years of teaching on this campus are not going to count towards anything. I'm going to still be in the $31,000 bracket. And I have many colleagues who are in the same situation. And I would like to point out one other thing that I found out recently. That apparently our women faculty assistants qualify for housing subsidies at YWCA around the [inaudible] with that salary. I think for an individual who's full-time employed professional [inaudible] campus, it's a disgrace. And our, our faculty assistants are still with the new change proposed by Dean Scholz are going to be making less than regular teaching assistants, standard TAs is what we call. And he also brings up the issue of market rates and how markets dictate these rates. And so forth. We already have a way for teaching assistants to be paid the market rates, right? Each department has now the leeway to increase the minimum pay rate for TAs to attract more qualified TAs. We are asking for the bare minimum, the bare minimum that each department has. And for example, in the English Department, there's a special fund for teaching assistant, assistants which pays on top of their minimum. The Chemistry Department has a very similar situation. There's a $7000 increase on top of the minimum. We are asking for equity for parity with the minimum pay that teaching assistants in any department will receive. And so yeah, I think, I think those are kind of the mathematical, the number, the mathematical reasons behind supporting this resolution. And I simply think that equity is worth fighting for, and that's what we're asking for in this particular resolution. And would really appreciate your support. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> My name is Alyssa Franzy [assumed spelling]. I'm also an FA in the ESL program. And like Parthy, I wanted to share something about myself and how my pay affects my daily life. I started in the ESL program as a TA. I had been that for three years. During that time I earned a master's degree directly applicable to ESL teaching. And also a second master's degree in a related field. I am employed at 100% which means that my pay rate is $31,292 for the year. My husband is a student here at UW. In order to meet our daily expenses and afford a really small one-bedroom apartment in Madison, I work a second job. I am the person who waits tables that Parthy was referring to. If I did not do this job, we would not be able to meet our daily expenses. So I'm also asking for your support for this resolution. Thanks. [ Applause ] >> Good afternoon. My name is Amy Wendt, and I'm a member of the University Committee. And I want to start by thanking the faculty assistants who are here and for their contributions to the educational enterprise at the university. And the, the University Committee has had several discussions about this issue. And I just wanted to make a few comments about the considerations to think about in considering this resolution. The University Committee has spoken in, in support of fair and equitable pay for all employee groups at the university including faculty assistants. And we've learned a lot about faculty assistants in the, the last few weeks. But we have also learned that there are other employee groups that are being paid below market rate. Next, faculty assistant isn't an academic staff title. And as was previously stated, a similar resolution has been passed in the Academic Staff Assembly. The, the resolution that's been presented here is, is not as it was described, a resolution in support of fair and equitable pay more generally. But it is actually a very specific directive for a single employee group to the administration, coming from the faculty which does not have purview in this area. The, the issue is on the radar of central administration, and all of our conversations, nobody questions that there's, there's a need to address the, the titling. But this is not the only group and affected. And that, that's the reason that it's being looked at in the context of a titling study to make sure that there's a holistic view that takes into account all of the groups. Lastly, passage of this resolution would be precedent setting. Senate records show no prior case of directives from the faculty regarding specific salary levels for non-faculty groups. Thank you. >> My name is Rowan Goldman, District 13. I appreciate very much the faculty assistants who came to the meeting today. And I think it's wonderful that the university is contemplating a titling study. I think a titling study is a way to go, but there is a motion before us. And I feel very compelled to support that resolution, that motion. Not only is it the ethical thing to do, but as we, as we are not paying people appropriately for their work, we're contributing to the kind of climate that we say we don't support. We must be behind producing a better climate. And I would finally like to mention that in the Dean's letter, he says that most LNS departments make little or no use of faculty assistants. Perhaps there's a reason why that's the case. And I could imagine situations where qualified TAs can't be found. This could be an excellent mechanism if it were appropriately compensated. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> [Two people speak over each other.] >> Oh, sorry. Go ahead, [inaudible]. You want to go? >> Please. >> Yeah. >> [Inaudible name] District 78. So there's a lot that I could say, but there's, there's a long list of speakers, so I'll try to be brief. And I'll just confine my comments to this memo from Dean Scholz in favor of the resolution. I understand there's some confusion about that because it does say here, highlighted, "it thus be inappropriate to link these rates." But all the data that I can see on this memo seems to be strongly in favor of the resolution. And I'd like to point out why that is. So first of all, the memo acknowledges that there is in fact an inequitable discrepancy in, in the pay structure between TAs and FAs. Secondly, it point, it does point out that they do similar work. And also it points out that some of them hold PhDs which TAs of course, by definition, do not. So if we're, you know, looking at the qualifications of all the TAs and we're looking at all the qualifications of the FAs, the FAs have greater qualifications. They're getting paid less. And then, and then this point about the market. I want to speak on this. So this is a good argument. So also what it acknowledges that are I think also what's great about this memo is it says that our TAs are paid less than they should, relative to relative to the market. Relative to peer institutions, and so they should be getting paid more. But that doesn't mean that the FAs shouldn't be getting paid as much as the TAs. Now, if there is, if it is in fact -- let's give him the benefit of the doubt, Dean Scholz, that it is in fact the case that these positions can be successfully filled at the current pay structure, right? That doesn't mean that paying them more would not allow us the, to, would all of a sudden cause us not to be able to fill those positions. In fact, not only would we still be able to fill those positions, but we could then be more discriminating and get better qualified people in those positions. So I don't see any points on here that are arguments -- other than this one statement. But I think that everything in this memo is strongly in support of the resolution. And therefore, I'd like to speak in favor of the resolution and just one last thing. There is generally this argument which Chad, you alluded to earlier, and we've heard a little bit of. That the specificity of this call for equal pay makes it inappropriate for the Faculty Senate to speak on. And to me that sounds very much like an all-lives-matter argument. Like we can't be in favor of the Black Lives Matter movement or we can't be in favor of equal pay for equal work for a specific group because that somehow means that we're not in support of the broader, of, of, of broader equality. And that of course is not morally or logically valid whatsoever. So I'd like to strongly support this resolution. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Chad Alan Goldberg, District 71. I would just like to respond to my colleague Amy Wendt's concerns that she raised a moment ago. I have already pointed out that the pay equity experienced by faculty assistants hinders the ability of departments to recruit and retain qualified teaching staff for their service courses. We've heard similar remarks from others. In this way as I said it directly affects the academic and educational activities for which the faculty are legally responsible. So my point is that responsibility for those activities cannot be neatly separated from compensation issues. Moreover, I want to say that this is not the first time a compensation issue concerning other categories of employees has been brought before the Faculty Senate. In 2010, for example, the Faculty Senate passed a resolution from the Department of Physics regarding furloughs of non-state-funded employees. This resolution called for gift-funded and federally-funded university employees to be exempted from state furloughs to avoid harm to the university's teaching research and service missions. In addition, as some senators may recall, the TAA made a presentation to this Faculty Senate in 2013. A presentation that received boisterous applause as part of the TAAs Pay Us Back campaign to raise TA salaries. Now, some of you may share the concern that passing this resolution sets a bad precedent that if we pass this resolution, other groups of academic staff will ask the Senate to address their concerns. I believe this fear is overdrawn. First of all, academic staff as you know can't bring issues before the Senate. Only faculty senators can do that. Furthermore, this resolution only came to the Senate after a long series of steps, as Time Dolby mentioned. Over the past several months, faculty assistants have conferred with administrators with the Academic Staff Executive Committee, the University Committee, the LNS Committee on Academic and Staffing Issues on March 13th, as you've heard. Faculty assistants took this issue to the Academic Staff Assembly, winning passage of a resolution virtually identical to the one before you. My point here is that other groups seeking resolutions from the Faculty Senate would be expected to go through similar steps. And I believe that's a high hurdle. The last thing I'd like to say is that I don't believe that this resolution makes any directives. We actually don't have the power to direct the university administration to do anything about compensation. All it does is to advise which we do have the power to do. >> Sorry. I tried to choose a short mic. That didn't work. I know how the rules in my Body work, but not here. >> Identify yourself. >> As I'm not a Faculty Senate member, do I need permission to speak? >> No, but we need your name. >> Great, thank you. Andrea Brooks. I'm a PhD student in Electrical and Computer Engineering. I'm also the co-president of the Teaching Assistants' Association. As our name has been mentioned many times, I thought I should share with you the discussion that we had when the FAs brought the same resolution to our Body two months ago. So I'll refer to my notes so I don't mess up what my members said. So there were three things that came up for us that we discussed at length. Among them were from which university funds do the FAs get paid? By what means have you sought support and solution for pay and equity? Many of these topics I think have been addressed already today. Also what role do you serve in the education of undergraduates on this campus? If anything, I think the discussion that ensued from these, from this resolution showed that the FA issue of pay and equity is indeed an issue that must be taken up by governance bodies across campus. To answer the first question, the TAA acknowledges that faculty assistants are paid through the same channels as teaching assistants. It is for this reason that we unanimously supported pay equity for FAs. Membership believes that the mechanisms by which keep all faculty instructor assistants' pay low is the same regardless of our students' status. Which in this case is the only difference between faculty assistants and teaching assistants. And to answer the last question which I think is the most important, is that as teaching assistants, and I assume many of you in this room take a great pride and a vital role in the education of undergraduates on this campus. We believe that the faculty assistants take a similar pride in their role in the education of undergraduates. There is no doubt that any university instructor deserves fair compensation for their work. A vote for or against this resolution is not simply a vote for the raising of salaries of 60 employees. Instead, your vote places value on the education undergraduates at this institution receive. I think the [inaudible] governance body at Wisconsin is exemplary, and I really do applaud the faculty assistants for going through all the shared governance channels and seeking support for their issue. As you've already heard, the TAA stands in strong solidarity with other instructors on this campus. We all work to better the undergraduates' educations here, and we strongly support the urging of this resolution. And joining the teaching assistants in our support. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> [Inaudible name] from the University Committee. I have a question I hope somebody can answer. Do we know that the Academic Staff Executive Committee or Assembly would constract, would construct the passing of this resolution which is a rather specific resolution? Not the general fair play, fair work/fair pay? Do we actually know that the Academic Staff Assembly would construct this as support of the faculty, welcome support? Or is meddling? Just asking. >> Is there anyone who wants to address that question? >> Chad Alan Goldberg, District 78. >> I'm going to let this gentleman speak who was at the Academic Staff. Yeah. >> Hi, so Tim Dolby, Academic Assembly staff member. District 263. I can't speak on behalf of ASAC but I can say that the assembly voted overwhelmingly for this resolution. So I think that meets -- it's different? [ Inaudible ] I don't know if I can speak on behalf of ASAC, but we very much appreciate your support in this matter. Thank you. >> I'm going to note we spent 45minutes of discussion and we'll keep going as long as you want to keep going. But I -- we'll keep calling on people. >> Park Landis, District 48, Chemistry Department. Not all the chemists are at the ACS meeting on San Francisco. I took the red-eye flight back last night in part so I could be here for this. There have been many good reasons that have been given for supporting this. I would just like to add one comment that is particular to the Chemistry Department ongoing activities. We're working hard right now through programs like the REACH program to make a better student experience. And this has involved tremendous integration of faculty associates, TAs, and the faculty themselves. Having unequal for FAs that are doing the same thing as the TAs undermines our efforts. And so we support this. [ Applause ] >> Chad Alan Goldberg, District 71. I'm usually very reluctant to do this. But given the lateness of the hour I move the previous question. >> We have a motion to call the question. That takes a second. Is there a second? And once this is on the table, there is no further discussion. We vote on whether to call the question or not, i.e. are we or are we not going to vote? And it requires a two-thirds vote, okay? Everyone in favor of moving to vote on this resolution, you're not voting on it yet. You're just moving to vote on it, indicate by saying aye. >> [Unison] Aye. >> All those opposed. I'm going to rule that that's a two-thirds vote. So we now move immediately to vote on the resolution. All those in favor of the resolution calling for fair and equitable pay for faculty assistants indicate by saying aye. >> [Unison] Aye. >> All those opposed. The motion passes. [ Applause ] >> That is the last item of business, and I declare the meeting adjourned.