Regular Meeting of the General Faculty for 2010-11

1. Regular Meeting of the General Faculty for 2010-11

2. Agenda • I. Approval of the Minutes. • Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the General Faculty for 2009-2010, January 25, 2010 (D 8135-8137). • II. Annual Report of the General Faculty, 2009-10 (D 8287-8324). • III. Discussion of the Annual Report. • IV. Questions to the President. • V. Unfinished Business—None.

3. VI. Reports of the General Faculty, Colleges and Schools, and Committees. • A. Committee to Nominate a Candidate for Secretary of the General Faculty—Dean Neikirk. • VII. New Business. • A. Election of the Secretary of the General Faculty. • VIII. Remaining Questions to the President. • IX. Adjournment.

4. Annual Meeting with Faculty • Agenda • 1. Brief description of faculty governance in the School of Undergraduate Studies • 2. Dean's report on the State of the School • 3. Questions from the floor for the Dean Monday, February 14, 2011

5. 2010-11 Faculty CouncilRegular Meeting

6. Agenda • I. Report of the Secretary. • II. Approval of the Minutes. • Minutes of the regular meeting of January 24, 2011—delayed until the March meeting. III. Communication with the President. • Comments. • Questions.

7. Report of the Chair: ad hoc committee on “Faculty Excellence” • Nominations for membership • FC members currently submitting nominations • nominees can be members of the FC or the University at large • final selection of members will be made by the FCEC • Initial charge: • to explain to the public what faculty productivity and accountability mean, how they are currently assured, and whether the University is determining this productivity in the best and most appropriate ways • to suggest ways to facilitate faculty efforts to further improve the productivity of both the faculty and the university • to suggest ways to further improve data-collection and other methods for assessing the productivity of the faculty and the university

8. Report of the Chair: survey to promote discussion of budget and faculty involvement in budget planning and setting of budget priorities • Survey is closed • 440 responses [2,570 e-mails sent] • consulted by dean on budget planning and prioritization: ~80% NO • discussion at college / school faculty meetings: ~60% NO • discussion at departmental level: ~50% YES • involvement in budget planning and prioritization : ~80% NONE to LITTLE • should faculty be more involved: 77% YES • 185 comments • fairly typical observation has been roughly: faculty are informed of budget concerns and decisions, but we are not consulted about what the budget should prioritize

9. State budget as of 2/14/2011 • House: $21.1 billion in All Funds and $13.6 in General Revenue Funds and General Revenue– Dedicated Funds. Included in this amount is a reduction of $411.9 million in formula funding • Senate: $21.6 billion in All Funds and $14.1 in General Revenue Funds and General Revenue– Dedicated Funds. Included in this amount is a reduction of $238.8 million in formula funding • other cuts in retirement contributions and health care premium sharing in both House and Senate bills • UT Austin House bill 1 and Senate bill 1

10. Governor's budget • from p. 2 of the 2012-13 Governor’s Budget (Feb. 8 2011) [http://bit.ly/gZdMSg ] • Higher Education starting point appears to be HB 1 • Further reductions in Higher Education • Eliminate Tuition Waivers $ 118,000,000 • Increase Faculty Productivity $ 383,000,000 • Reduce Special Items Funding $ 816,700,000 • Total Reductions in Higher Education Base $1,317,700,000 • Additions in Higher Education Base Amount • Increase/Combine TEXAS Grant & Tuition Equalization Grant Funding $ 360,300,000 • System Discretionary Funding (Equal to 10% of each System’s Instruction & Operations Formula) $ 479,200,000 • Restore Formula Funding for General Academic, Health Related, & Two-year Institutions $ 478,200,000 • Total Additions in Higher Education Base $1,317,700,000 • Total Net Change to Higher Education Base $0

11. Governor's State of the State address • proposed four-year tuition freeze • develop bachelor’s degrees that cost no more than $10,000, including textbooks • leverage web-based instruction, innovative teaching techniques and aggressive efficiency measures to reach that goal • For comparison, from the “for-profit” higher ed world: • for-profit colleges: $25,000 per year • for-profit: 22 % six year graduation rate • private non-profits: $16,600 per year • private non-profits: 65 % • state universities: $8,588 per year • public universities: 55 % • from “Subprime Opportunity: the Unfulfilled Promise of For-Profit Colleges and Universities” [Education Trust report] • information from http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/report%3A-only-22%25-of-students-at-for-profit-schools-get-bachelor%27s-degree-within-6-years

12. Report of the Chair Elect. • Unfinished Business—None. • Reports of the General Faculty, Colleges, Schools, and Committees—None.

13. New Business. • Resolution Reaffirming the Ban of Firearms on Campus (D 8561). • The Faculty Council at The University of Texas at Austin believes carrying firearms on the University campus by anyone other than law enforcement officers is detrimental to the safety of the students, faculty, and staff.

14. B. Revision of the Handbook of Operating Procedures, Chapter I, Section V. Clarifying the Voting Rights of Faculty in Colleges, Schools and Departments (D 8563). • Section V. COLLEGES, SCHOOLS, AND DEPARTMENTS • Departments and Non-Departmentalized Schools/Colleges. • 1. A faculty member shall have voting status in a departmentor non-departmentalized school/collegeon departmental/non-departmentalized school/college matters if: • He or she holds a full-time appointment in that department and holds the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, or any non-tenure-track title. The assignment of a faculty member to [an administrative post,] released time for research, career development, an endowed chair or such other activities as may be approved by the president shall not jeopardize the voting status of the individual under this provision. Or • {No changes to 1.b or 2 except those made in D 8512-8513} Cont.

15. 3.Faculty members serving as administrators do not, for that reason alone, lose their voting rights in their departments or schools.  Nevertheless, impartiality dictates that those serving in decision-making roles regarding personnel (such as Deans, the Provost, and members of the President's Promotion and Tenure Committee) shall not participate in decisions or investigations at the departmental or school/college level that they are authorized to review subsequently.  Similarly, faculty members who serve on personnel review committees, such as Grievance, CCAFR, and school/college Promotion and Tenure Committees, shall either recuse themselves from reviewing matters on which they have already participated or refrain from participation in decisions or investigations at the departmental or school/college level that they are authorized to review subsequently.  In matters such as curriculum review, participation at both the departmental/school and review levels is appropriate. RATIONALE FOR CHANGE This modification of voting rights is intended to clarify what is already a frequent practice used across campus. It is proposed as a way of addressing possible conflict of interest: neither administrators nor faculty should be a in a position to review or determine personnel decisions on which they have already participated.

16. IX. Announcements and Comments. • A. Online Nominations for membership on the Council, February 21 - March 11. • B. The Joint Meeting with the Texas A&M Faculty Senate is March 7 at the UT Alumni Center. RSVP deadline, March 1. • The next Faculty Council meeting will be held on March 21 in MAI 212 at 2:15. • X. Questions to the Chair. • XI. Adjournment.

17. The End