Topics Map > Office of the Secretary of the Faculty > Faculty Senate > University Committee
University Committee Meeting Minutes 2017-02-20
University Committee Meeting Minutes
Minutes approved 03/06/2017
UC members present: Bowers, Broman, Litovsky (arrived 1:06), Wanner (departed 4:32), Wendt (chair)
UC member absent: Amasino
Others present: S. Smith, O. Arain, J. Richard, M. Felber, J. O’Meara, H. Daniels, C. Springer, M. Mayrl
Chair Amy Wendt called the meeting to order at 1:01 p.m. and directed attention to the GFEC minutes following up on the changes approved as a result of the ad hoc committee on the future of the dissertation. Discussion ensued. The UC responded to a request for clarification on its guidance on the “clock” for track transfers. Bowers moved adoption of the following revised policy:
When an associate/full clinical professor transfers to the associate/full rank on the tenure track, the “clock” to be considered by the divisional committee shall be calculated in a manner similar to that of probationary tenure track faculty with clinical duties. (However, the “clock” for such transfer cases shall be counted retroactively from the track transfer request, not from time of hire as with probationary tenure track faculty.) The relevant dean’s office and/or department chair shall indicate what percentage of time the associate/full clinical professor devoted to clinical duties during their appointment. As with tenure track clock extensions and initial appointments, clinical responsibilities that approximate 20% or more of a faculty member’s workload justify a one-year clock extension, and clinical duties that approach 40% justify a two-year extension. For appointments with greater clinical duties, additional time may be negotiated, but in no case shall the divisional committee consider more than ten years of scholarly activity. These extensions are added to the presumed initial base of 6 years, counting backwards from the time of the track transfer request
paralleling the initial clock of tenure track faculty.
The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Broman informed the UC that the BOR has invited ASU president Michael Crow to speak in March, which led to ample discussion. Omer Arain asked for advice on ways for Muslim students to explore creation of a dedicated cultural space. Significant support from the UC, which encouraged continuing with efforts to obtain broad support on campus and welcomed a proposal for the Senate (and other bodies) to consider. The minutes of the meeting of February 13, 2017, [University Committee Meeting Minutes 2017-02-13 ] were approved. Jack O’Meara informed the UC that PROFS is looking closely at self-insurance issue in budget and has had conversations with non-UW lobbyists who work on these issues. Much remains to be resolved, including longevity of savings and where they come from. The UC reviewed the draft Senate agenda for March and approved moving forward with incorporating the University Health Care Committee into FPP and adding some context to the renaming of the Social Studies division.
Office of Compliance director Cathy Trueba provided background on the office, which is a hybrid of coordinating various campus compliance efforts and some compliance responsibilities of its own. The office houses a fulltime Title IX coordinator, the complaint investigator formerly located in OED, a fulltime HIPAA person, the public records custodian formerly in external relations, and the ADA representative. The latter is Trueba herself, to whom the other four also report. The less-than-a-year-old unit is still defining itself, but Trueba reports that the job and office are about relationships, coordinating, and making sure technical aspects are in place to address challenges, allocate resources, and communicate with campus. In coming months, Trueba will work to ensure that the matrix of compliance requirements on campus is still correct and build a partners network of the approximately two dozen major compliance areas. Reporting and training have been identified as main area of focus for near future, including BOR-mandated sexual assault training, onboarding, records retention, and more. Ample discussion about training timing and resource requirements. Wendt and Smith raised the possibility of a shared-governance group to work with the OOC, in the context of restructuring of both that office and other Chapter 6 committees. Trueba, UC, and SOF will continue to work on this in coming months.
Provost Sarah Mangelsdorf continued the compliance discussion for a bit and then discussed PTR, in particular steps after the Senate vote. The provost is looking forward to the teaching awards ceremony in March. The UC explained a current ad hoc de novo review (CFRR) committee. Mangelsdorf strongly supports changing the name of the Social Studies division to Social Sciences. Brief discussion of the appointment of Mike Lehman as interim CIO.
Vice Chancellor for University Relations Charlie Hoslet briefed the UC on campus advocacy plans, which is broken out into the following areas: (a) legislative briefings: the chancellor is meeting with legislators in two rounds, one as introduction to issues and goals and the second more targeted at requested budget changes; state relations director Crystal Potts is a constant presence at the capitol; briefing sheets compiled for each district on UW impact; legislative tours on campus; VCRGE Mailick meeting with science and technology committee members, who will be invited to campus to learn about research enterprise; (b) media: op-ed by chancellor in state papers on budget and Badger Promise; cable TV ads (including one with Governor Thompson, which Hoslet showed), social media, radio, print ads (including a Forbes regional cover), and digital ads all with message about reinvesting in UW; monthly Wisconsin Ideas Newsletter [link to sample] for “influencers” (legislators and other elected officials, alumni advocates, business leaders, etc.) with stories on activities and impacts across state, regionalized, very high click-through rate; (c) third party advocacy: working with Chambers of Commerce, regional economic partnerships, agriculture coalition, and various other advocacy groups that are already active to inform them about our issues; alumni engagement; UW Lobby Day (April 12). Obviously, a lot of the above is focused on the budget, but this is all part of a larger message campaign that started a couple years ago targeting the whole state to show impact of UW-Madison.
Chancellor Rebecca Blank followed up on the VCUR presentation with updates on her meetings, including a breakfast with the Dane County delegation. Brief updates from Blank on upcoming leadership breakfast and WSB search. Discussion about ASM reparations resolution, post-tenure review, inclusiveness and accessibility, Native American signage, changes to the People program based on external program evaluation to make it more effective and focused, and the Badger Promise proposal.
Vice Provost for Teaching and Learning Steve Cramer discussed a handout on Educational Innovation, a program that was originally slated to end this year, but which has received continuation funding. The document explains lessons learned, feedback received, breakdown of past expenditures, and goals for the next 4-year period. These goals are not much different from before, and focus on personalized learning experiences at scale using technology, customized learning environments, and recognizing that technology cannot solve everything. Efforts will be made to expand access for traditional and new student audiences. Lessons learned include the need to engage departments in order to coordinate cross-campus initiatives. Cramer distributed a second handout about REACH, an EI project that has grown substantially, focusing on changing passive lecture into more dynamic experience. Ample discussion ensued on positive vs negative innovation, long-term benefits, course evaluations and other assessment, and inclusive excellence.
Ruth Litovsky moved to convene in closed session pursuant to Wis. Stats. 19.85(1)(c) and (f) to discuss personnel matters. The motion was seconded and passed at 3:24 p.m. The UC discussed a pending grievance with the associated dean; a follow-up meeting with legal services will be scheduled. On a second grievance, the UC reviewed the findings of an external review committee, found its conclusions reasonable and compelling, and agreed to deny the grievance. Secretary Smith will draft a letter with conclusions for approval at a future UC meeting. With regards to a third grievance, the UC determined that additional information on grant management practices is required and instructed the SOF to contact the unit and RSP for information on standards and patterns. The UC reviewed Athletic Board applications and selected six for interviews. The UC considered and unanimously approved a clinical-initial tenure clock extension. The UC asked the SOF to communicate to the requesting department that they will need to clearly communicate to the divisional committee at the time of tenure consideration the reasons for a minimal teaching load in this appointment. The UC selected members for an ad hoc de novo (CFRR) committee. Litovsky moved to reconvene in open session to adjourn. The motion was seconded and was approved at 4:45 p.m., at which point Wendt immediately adjourned the meeting.