a. Administrative Council: Concerns over faculty/staff morale (especially re: gym fees); building construction and bond issues also discussed.

b. Academic Council: Reorganization of academic units was discussed.

c. Meeting with Pres. Limbert: Evans will meet with Limbert the week of Sept. 27.

d. PIE Council: Report on Barbara Jones’ recommendations re: planning/evaluation.

e. Undergraduate Curriculum Council: No senators currently sit on UCC.

f. UFSA: Meeting at Delta State cancelled by Hurricane Ivan; next meeting Oct. 21.

g. Blueprint: Stephen Taylor (MUW Webmaster) will attend future meeting; wants Blueprint to highlight different faculty members across campus.

a. Dr. Gingerich: Proposing an Academic Master Plan to be approved/guided by faculty. AMP will account for the institution’s history, employ SWOT analysis, etc. to discern where MUW is now and how it will develop into the future. AMP will be fully consistent with W-2009. Desires 7-9 members (faculty, student services, financial aid, academic council) for AMP committee. Ultimately wants formal Faculty Senate approval of plan. Discussion: Velek–The administration seems to currently plan by reacting to circumstances (e.g., tornado); Gingerich–The AMP will be proactive and create a future vision. Aracena–Many faculty feel uninformed about important student and faculty statistics (e.g., enrollment by major); Gingerich–AMP will enable better use of such information. Holden–Will AMP be a one year- or five year-plan? Gingerich–I prefer one year benchmarks./// To abide by the IHL plan to reduce programs to 124 hours by 2007, all units are encouraged to look at electives and other "easy" cuts, then the University will consider (if necessary) adjusting the core curriculum. Naturally, those programs with strict accreditation requirements (e.g., Nursing, Education) may obtain a waiver. This IHL decision is an expected part of the political cycle–the state is looking for ways to save money spent by government agencies and families./// Fifteen units reporting to the Provost/VPAA is very high compared to other schools of this size. Proposing a committee to study the possibility of reorganizing academic divisions using the school/college model (MUW is the only state university with divisions)–wants to reduce the reports to 6 or 7. Discussion: Various–What might a reorganized MUW look like? Gingerich–Some divisions will remain intact (e.g., Nursing, Education/Human Sciences), while others may be merged (e.g., several into a College of Arts & Sciences). Hatton and Roberts–What about Business & Communication? Gingerich–Business will likely stand on its own, while Communications might be moved to a College of A&S. Various–How will funding and decision making be affected? Gingerich–Departments within colleges will control their own funding, and decisions at that level will be made by coordinators, who will report to a dean. Deans will be administrators, though they will be expected to teach a class or two every semester. Coordinators may get some release time and additional salary. It will be the study committee’s job to draw up these standards.

b. Policy review: Unanimous approval was given to the following policies: 1303–Promotion of Faculty; 1304–Awarding of Tenure to Faculty; 1312–Post-Tenure Review.

c. Nominations for Traffic and Parking Committee: Ellen Jackson and Van Roberts were nominated and approved by acclamation.

d. Issues of concern: Many faculty are upset over the new gym fee and see it hurting morale, health/well being and even student retention. Administrative Council is looking into it. Discussion: Velek–By taking away free rec facilities as a perk, MUW is eroding its ability to attract and retain good faculty. Gingerich–Keep in mind state funding to MUW has dropped by $1.8 million since the 1990s. Evans–I see this as part of a much larger issue of a lack of communication from the administration to the faculty. Attachment: Memo from Deborah Bailey (ED/HS)./// The Suzuki Music Program used Poindexter for many years, but now with renovations to that building, it has moved to Cromwell. Discussion: Oppenheimer–Suzuki is a real selling point for MUW; it gives us good PR. Biddy–The decision to move it to Cromwell was done without any consultation of faculty. It and other programs/camps are scheduled without consideration of our own work (practicing, theater set building, etc.), and some of the groups believe they have full control of the facility just because they have permission to use it. Roberts–I was working until 12:30am in Cromwell one night and found a group using the theater had left the front doors wide open. Campus Security gives us a hard time for others’ carelessness. Dickey–The Suzuki students were given permission to practice music in my photography lab. I had no control over this decision. Gingerich–The University should look into the fees for and monitoring of outside groups who use our facilities./// Aracena, Velek and others believe international students are well not cared for at MUW. The University needs a coordinator of international students to advise them and help address their needs, but money for such a position is lacking. Courtney Taylor recruits international students, but they need academic/campus life guidance once they are here. For example, Aracena reported more than one instance of international students being told that they could study medicine at MUW, so they came under false pretenses./// Faculty salaries are an ongoing concern, especially in light of MUW’s low pay averages and the inequity problem even within divisions. Discussion: Anderson–Our suggested revisions to PS 1313 last spring did not go far in the administration. Pres. Limbert understandably illustrated how money is tight but simply added that equity is unavoidable. Without at least trying to address this problem, I believe the University is doing wrong to dedicated faculty. I am happy to hear Dr. Gingerich wants to study this issue more closely. Gingerich–I do want to conduct a statistical analysis of faculty pay in relation to market considerations. This should be internal, separate from comparisons with other institutions. Anderson–"Market considerations" were another problem we had. I understand Nursing, Accounting, Speech Pathology and other majors can readily draw up market value comparisons, but what is the value of a political scientist? There should be a transparent university-wide standard of some sort. Otherwise, "market considerations" becomes a formal way of saying "We’ll offer whatever it takes to hire/retain this individual at this time." Aracena–The biggest problem is MUW’s low pay. According to AAUP data, my salary for 2003-2004 was below 99.9% of all other associate professors. I’m not even on the chart, really. Gingerich–Improvement will be challenging, because the state pays by the student. Our excellent student/faculty ratio actually works against us in this regard. Raising enrollment will help./// Members of the Fine and Performing Arts division are concerned about important decisions about the FPA division being made by the administration with no faculty input. Bailey noted that this was the case regarding terms governing recent FPA faculty searches, elimination of a music program and the elimination of his faculty line. It was added that despite Sue Coates’s resignation as division head, FPA has not been permitted to search for a new head, because there are two other head searches already underway.

a. Fund A: A reminder that amounts have changed: $350 limit for attendance at a conference; $500 limit for presenting at a conference or attending as an officer of the association.

b. Appointments to committees: Shawn Dickey volunteered to serve on the academic reorganization committee; Tom Velek volunteered to serve on the AMP committee.

c. Next meetings: Oct. 29; Nov. 19; Dec. 10.