Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes November 22, 2019 Meeting

Dome Room of the Rotunda 11AM to 1PM

  1. Start of Meeting/Call to Order — 11:05 am
    Chair Ellen Bassett called the meeting to order and by a count, a quorum was established. She asked
    the Senators to review the minutes. There was no discussion of the minutes from the Oct. 2019 full-
    Senate meeting which were previously sent by email to all Senate members. Moved/Accepted to
    accept minutes.
    The motion passed by acclaim.

  2. Committee Reports: AAC
    The Chair Recognized Aaron Bloomfield, chair of the Academic Affairs Committee. Bloomfield
    introduced a proposed Bachelor of Arts in Media Studies. The proposed program will be
    administered by the Department of Media Studies, which resides in the College of Arts & Sciences.
    Currently, Media Studies is an interdisciplinary major. Bloomfield said the degree evolved into its
    own degree. Bloomfield moved the question. Brian Pusser seconded. The motion passed by acclaim.

    Bloomfield introduced the Curry School of Education Master of Education (M.Ed.) in Education,
    Culture, and Society program. The program aims to provide students with interdisciplinary
    approaches, critical theoretical frameworks, and intellectual tools essential for a full understanding of
    processes systems in K – 16 education. He said it focuses less on pedagogical tool and more how
    education fits into society.

    Bloomfield moved the question. Michael Kennedy seconded.

    Discussion centered around how the school could measure how education fits into society. Mandy
    Turner, Director of Assessment, Accountability, and Accreditation at the Curry School said there is
    a subtle difference involved in the naming of the degree. Potentially, society has more of a place
    boundary where culture is the backgrounds and lived experiences that people bring to the education.
    That is, society is structure in place and culture is the people.

    The motion passed by acclaim.

    Bloomfield introduced the proposed minor in Data Analytics. The Department of Statistics
    currently offers a Minor in Statistical Analysis of Social Behavior. Seven years ago, this minor
    replaced the previously existing Minor in Statistics, which at the time had very few students. The
    reason for the change was at that time interest in quantitative social science was growing at UVA
    and a former dean suggested that there might be more interest among students in a minor with a
    social sciences slant. Bloomfield moved the question.

    There was a question from the floor as to why the proposed minor bypassed the Executive
    Committee and Bloomfield said the Senate rules allowed it for minors and concentrations.

    Brian Wright seconded. The motion passed by acclaim.

  3. Report from Provost’s Office
    The Chair recognized Provost Liz Magill. The Provost spoke about several issues:

    The Board of Visitors Meeting Dec. 5-6: The Board of Visitors moved the tuition-setting meeting
    to the December meeting from the March meeting two years ago. An open meeting was held in
    C’ville and one at UVA-Wise. The BOV estimated a range of plus 3-4% increase for in- and out-ofstate
    tuition. Feedback varied from request to have no increase in tuition, to decreased tuition, or to
    use money to support mental health.

    There will be a student mental health presentation by Joe Allen and a vote on implementation of
    curriculum. Building & Grounds will have the BOV spotlight which gives one committee a longer
    presentation of its projects.

    In August 2019 the BOV came forward with proposals on how to spend funds over a 3-year period.
    Steve Mull, VP for Global Affairs will present the second day. The Provost’s staff is working hard
    and is optimistic about preparation.

    Search Updates: The Provost is on the search Committees for the Health System and McIntire. She
    held a stakeholder meeting at McIntire School as co-leader of the McIntire School Dean search. A
    search is also on for a Vice-President of Health Affairs. President Ryan announced that David
    Wilkes will have a transition team until the new EVP team is announced/or arrived. The transition
    committee is meeting weekly, if not daily to deal with issues and meeting with the Provost to give
    updates and will have a presentation the week after Thanksgiving.

    Ivy Corridor: An architect has been selected for plans for the School of Data Science and the hotel
    to be built along the Ivy Corridor. UVA is also searching for a hotel operator.

    The Chair opened the floor to questions of the Provost.

    Pusser asked about the role of the Provost’s office for students who are athletes on Grounds over
    the role/pay of student athletes. California has fair pay to play act. Should Congress intervene to
    legislate pay to student athletes? Is the Provost’s Office involved and does UVA have a consistent
    strategy going forward because we don’t have control over student athletes?

    The Provost told the group she will ask President Ryan about the pay-to-play issue. Carla Williams
    UVA Director of Athletics treats the Provost’s office as a critical stakeholder in policies related to student athletes and the Provost said students lead their lives as full human beings. There is not a concise answer. UVA is a school of student athletes; not a school with athletes.

    Kevin Lehmann asked why undergrads did not get the same raise to $15 as staff and those who
    work directly for the university. Why do undergrads not count when everyone else gets $15/hour? Is
    there a rationale for not including these students with the others? Students see the emails from
    President Ryan and are wondering ‘what about us?’

    The Provost said she believes there is a part-time/full-time difference. Some are on federal workstudy,
    which is its own thing. She’ll get an answer.

    Lehmann said he doesn’t see why part-time should be different.

    The Provost said she’ll have to come back with a follow up, because she doesn’t have the full answer
    right now. The contract for negotiation was a big deal the Provost added, due to a change in the
    middle of a 17-year contract. This was a huge priority for President Ryan. The Provost promised to
    get answers but felt good that sub-contractors would do this.

    Sylvia Chong: Last year’s A&S guidelines for hiring were changed so diversity is no longer a target
    category of change and wondering if there are plans to address this in another way?

    The Provost said diversity is part of excellence and did not see guideline change as policy change. All
    hires should be contributing to research mission and she clarified that diversity and excellence are
    not different things. Diversity is the heart of excellence. UVA should be thinking about promoting
    diversity in a more systematic way than with single hires. The Provost said a concept of what we
    could be doing with diversity adds a sense of place and of belonging. The Provost favors systematic
    approaches to answering these questions. There’s quite a bit of literature on best practices focusing
    on searching, tracking, visiting, and recruiting to the institution. The Provost has lots of thoughts
    about (hiring) and working toward those questions which are on her list.

  4. Committee Reports
    Policy Committee:
    The Chair gave the Policy Committee report as Senator Peter Norton was not in attendance.

    The Policy Committee’s Resolution in regard to Gift Agreements was presented. The proposed
    resolution emerged from a truncated resolution that arose with regards to the stance of foundations
    wanting to keep donor anonymity. Policy re-wrote the resolution after our last meeting.

    The resolution is attached at the back of the minutes. The Chair moved the question. James Fitz-
    Gerald seconded.

    Peter Brunjes said this version of the resolution formalizes thoughts of the Senate, but he doesn’t
    see a lot of value added to the Gifts process. Senate is falling into trap of confusing resolutions with
    actions getting done. He said he wants the Senate to be more activist.

    Pusser had a question under section 2A. The intent is that conditions of a gift agreement will be
    matter of public record. All the university needs to do is write to foundation accepting the
    conditions and will leave out of the public record.

    The Chair said she understood gift agreements are FOIA-able. They become a matter of public
    record following acceptance by UVA.

    Pusser said the resolution is useful and important for the University.

    Jim Savage said it is important for him personally to speak on the issue. His point was the mere
    donation of money denotes there will be some influence by donors. The University relies on private
    money, this conversation of what should be happening occurs throughout history. It is important we
    articulate our position. This motion (for the resolution) reflects the interest of the faculty and the
    reason to vote for it.

    Lehmann said he supported the motion but wanted to point out there is no current faculty
    representation on this committee and is one of things the resolution calls for.

    The Chair, speaking as the Senate Representative for the School of Architecture, is against the
    motion. She is pleased that the agreements are subject to FOIA. Her reasons for opposing include:
    1. Impact on fundraising: If there are three or more foundation members in a room the meeting
    would be public record and would undermine their work. 2. Efficacy: The Gifts Committee has only
    met twice in the last two years; thus, this doesn’t provide much in the way of effective oversight. 3.
    Governance: She agrees with the intent to affect institutions for the long term. If faculty want more
    role in governance and oversight of philanthropy, however, they need to work with school
    foundations and deans, where the majority of the action is. She wants to see faculty on foundation
    boards and playing roles before escalating up to administration. One major reservation is that Senate
    votes like this are passive action. Other paths for the Senate and Senators could be more meaningful
    than a simple resolution.

    Pusser said he wanted to make sure that faculty do not default to administration and that he’s in
    favor of additional senator representation on the Gifts Committee.

    By hand count:
    In favor: 37; Opposed: 8; Abstention: 1. Motion passes.

    Diversity & Inclusion Committee

    Met most recently with Kevin Macdonald (VP Diversity) and had a conversation. Also suggested
    that JJ Davis, the Chief Operating Officer should be invited to the Faculty Senate.

    Faculty Grievance
    Carol Manning is away and her update to the Chair is that work is confidential and the committee is
    moving forward.

  5. FRRRW Committee
    The Chair recognized the FRRRW Committee Chair Alan Beckenstein who commented that he
    remitted his report online. A copy of which is pasted in the next paragraph:

    The FRRRW Committee is engaged on the following four activities currently:

    1. Liaison with the Benefits Office on their continuing “Makeover” Initiatives;
    2. Development of a proposal on creating a “Professor of the Graduate School” status
      for retired faculty who wish to be research-active;
    3. A study of the child-care facilities available for faculty families; and
    4. Liaison with the General Faculty Council on “Policies and Expectations of
      Continuing Employment” for General Faculty members.

    Other initiatives outlined in earlier committee communications might be initiated in the
    Spring Semester when such topics will be more highly developed by others in the

    Finance Committee
    The Chair recognized Finance Committee Chair Pusser. Pusser said the committee met this week to
    talk about a financing strategic plan and passed a resolution to send it to ExCo to increase
    affordability of textbooks and materials. The resolution is an opt-in program and the committee
    would like the involvement of the COO.

  6. Ad Hoc Committees:
    The Chair moved a resolution concerning the faculty handbook and scope of employment
    concerning faculty who engage in community-facing scholarship. ExCo senator Aniko Bodroghkozy
    made a resolution in Executive Committee for an Ad Hoc Committee which passed ExCo.

    Kathryn Laughon seconded.

    The motion passed unanimously.

    The Chair made a motion calling for an Ad Hoc Library committee:

    The Chair recognized Chair-Elect Joel Hockensmith to set context on the motion. He said the first
    motion in ExCo dealt with open access and was defeated. He found a 2010 document from
    committee and discovered the task force was never supposed to be dissolved. This resolution is an
    attempt to reconstitute it and has a deadline of December 2021 when a major contract will expire
    with Elsevier. The Library needs to start negotiating a new contract by November 2020 so we need
    to set up deadlines about how faculty would like to support or not support the library open access.

    Lehmann asked why the issues of library and publication is in an ad hoc committee instead of his
    Research, Teaching, and Scholarship Committee.

    Hockensmith replied that ExCo was not aware that Lehmann’s committee was discussing it.
    There was discussion about using the RT&S committee chair as a member of the ad hoc committee
    and possibly working between two committees. The amendment to form the ad hoc committee
    resolution was made to charge the ad hoc with formulating and working in conjunction with RTS.
    Lehmann seconded the amended motion.

    Discussion about the size of the committee and if it could move forward and meet an April 1, 2020
    deadline. There discussion about keeping the committee as small as possible, to get work done, and
    have RTS consult.

    In favor of amendment: 15. Opposed to amendment: 21. Abstention: 5

    Amendment is defeated and back to first amendment.

    The Chair moved the committee shall include a member of RTS and will remain small committee
    and a liaison who ensures RTS has representation.

    Hockensmith seconded.

    In favor: 38. Opposed: 0. Abstention: 0. The motion carried.

  7. General Senate Discussion / A.O.B.
    The Chair opened the floor for comments from Senators.

    Walt Heinecke gave kudos to ExCo about moving the gifts resolution along and creating a good
    example of how the Senate can engage in proposing policy and moving up the chain. He asked
    EXCO to have clear and concrete follow up on the resolution. He would like to have a report back
    to the Senate soon about whether administration accepts policy change. Will the Gifts Committee
    have two elected faculty?

    Heinecke had two other comments:

    1. The diversity committee is looking into Native American enrollment at the university. The
    committee feels the Native American enrollment is under-represented and if the university doesn’t
    collect the data on this the committee wants to see what problem actually looks like. There was
    discussion about the Native American Center/Indigenous studies center proposal that has come to
    President Ryan for review.

    2. Parallel shared governance system at UVA: Faculty both in the Senate and outside the Senate
    often play roles in governance via committee appointments but they do not report to the Faculty
    Senate. We should identify faculty that are appointed and find ways to get them to report to the
    Faculty Senate. He recommends that EXCO to move that forward and create unified governance.

    The Chair mentioned there may be some kind of sharing or reporting structure that could be figured

    Move to adjourn by Hockensmith. Second by Rob Patterson.

    All approved.

Adjourned at 12:25 pm