Faculty Senate Meeting
April 17, 2013
Founder’s Room, Lovett Hall
Agenda:
I.
Call to Order, Recognition of Departing
Senators, Introduction of New Senators
II.
Nomination and Election of Speaker, Deputy
Speaker
III.
Announcements
IV.
Working Group Reports
A. Laboratory Safety (Mike Wong)
B. NTT
Faculty (Dave Caprette)
C. Grade
Inflation (Jane Grande-Allen)
D. Research
and Scholarship (Moshe Vardi)
Senators in
attendance: David Alexander,
Randy Batsell, Kate Beckingham, Carl Caldwell, Dave Caprette, Keith Cooper,
Scott Cutler, Danijela Damjanovic, Christian Emden, Rebecca Goetz, Jane
Grande-Allen, Christopher Hight, Betty Joseph, Rachel Kimbro, Anatoly
Kolomeisky, David Leebron, Jonathan Ludwig, Lanny Martin, Fred Oswald, Rob
Raphael, Stan Sazykin, David Scott, Michael Stern, Ruth Lopez Turley, Moshe
Vardi, and James Weston.
Senators
absent: Robert Atherholt,
Gregory Barnett, Mahmoud El-Gamal, Shirine Hamadeh, Illya Hicks, Michael Kohn,
George McLendon, and Helena Michie.
PROCEEDINGS (To listen to an audio tape of this meeting,
email senate@rice.edu.)
I. Call to order,
Recognition of Departing Senators, Introduction of New Senators
Faculty
Senate Speaker Carl Caldwell called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m. He
thanked the senators whose terms were ending for their service: Gregory Barnett, Randy Batsell, Danijela
Damjanovic, Mahmoud El-Gamal, Christian Emden, Rebecca Goetz, Shirine Hamadeh,
Illya Hicks, Lanny Martin, Rob Raphael, Mike Stern, and Moshe Vardi. He also
welcomed the senators whose terms will being Fall 2013:
Engineering
Luay Nakhleh (Computer Science)
Laura Segatori (Chemical and
Biomolecular Engineering)
Humanities
Graham Bader (Art History)
Claire Fanger (Religious Studies)
Julie Fette (French Studies)
Natural Sciences
Gerald "Jerry" Dickens (Earth
Science)
Michael Wolf (Mathematics)
Social Sciences
Jeffrey Fleisher (Anthropology)
Architecture (rotating
one-year term)
Dawn Finley
II. Nomination and
Election of Speaker , Deputy Speaker, Presentation of EC Slate
Jane
Grande-Allen, chair of the Nominations and Elections Committee (NEC), announced
that Carl Caldwell had been nominated by the NEC to serve as speaker. The
nomination was seconded by a senator.
She asked if there were any additional nominations; there were none. A
vote was then held, and Caldwell was unanimously elected as speaker of the
Faculty Senate for 2013-2014.
Caldwell
thanked Grande-Allen for her two years of service as the deputy speaker. He
presented her with a plaque from the Senate, as well as a gift. Grande-Allen
thanked Caldwell for serving as speaker, and then presented him with a plaque
and a gift.
Caldwell
nominated James Weston for deputy speaker, and it was seconded by a senator.
Caldwell asked if there were any additional nominations; there were none. A
vote was then held, and Weston was unanimously elected as deputy speaker for
2013-14. Caldwell noted that Grande-Allen will continue to serve as chair of
the NEC as it completes the task of appointing faculty to serve on University
Committees.
Grande-Allen
presented to the Senate the Executive Committee (EC) slate for 2013-2014,
recommended by the NEC. Per Section 6 of
the Faculty Senate Bylaws, alternate slates may be proposed. The EC will be
elected at the first Senate meeting of the fall semester. In addition to
Speaker Caldwell and Deputy Speaker Weston, the proposed EC slate includes:
Humanities:
Betty Joseph
Social
Sciences:
Fred Oswald
Engineering:
Keith Cooper
Natural
Science:
Anatoly Kolomeisky
Professional Schools: Christopher Hight
NTT
Faculty: Stan Sazykin
III. Announcements
- Fred Oswald will serve as Convener of the Appeals and Grievance Panels
for 2013-14.
- A plenary session of the faculty will be held Friday, May 10, from 11
a.m. – 12:30 p.m. In addition to the speaker's annual report and approval of
degrees by the faculty, President Leebron will present: Emerging Priorities and
Challenges for the Post-Centennial Years: A Discussion. The lunch and
presentation of teaching awards will accordingly start between 12:15-12:30.
- End of Year Senate Party: Thursday, May 2, at 4:00 p.m., Brochstein
Pavilion. Departing, continuing, and new senators are all welcome.
- Formation of new Working Group on the Termination of Graduate Programs,
Chair: Christian Emden. Charge: to determine, in consultation with the administration
and Graduate Council, a procedure and best practices to follow in terminating
graduate programs. Members: Danijela Damjanovic, Duane Windsor, and Arnaud
Chevalier.
- Paula Sanders, Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and Dean of Graduate and
Postdoctoral Studies, announced that the administration is working on a plan to
implement combined master’s and bachelor’s degrees. A few specific programs
will be announced soon for implementation in fall 2014. A full report is
available on the Senate’s wiki space and feedback is appreciated; see Report from Rice Leaders, April 2013.
IV. Working Group
Reports
A.
Working Group on Laboratory Safety
Working Group chair
Mike Wong (CHBE) listed the members of the working group and thanked them for
their efforts:
·
Beth Beason-Abmayr (Biochemistry and Cell Biology)
·
Raj Dasgupta (Earth Science)
·
Tom Killian (Physics and Astronomy)
·
Kevin Kelly (Electrical and Computer Engineering)
·
Qilin Li (Civil and Environmental Engineering)
·
Michael Wong (Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering)
Ex officio members
·
Kevin Kirby (Vice President for Administration)
·
Vicki Colvin (Vice Provost for Research; Chemistry)
Faculty Senate
members
·
Jane Grande-Allen (Deputy Speaker; Bioengineering)
·
Carl Caldwell (Speaker)
He also reviewed
the charge for the working group: To assess the state of research laboratory
safety across campus, to propose a new organizational structure that fosters
and maintains a culture and practice of lab safety, and to issue
recommendations to improve the process for safety training, oversight and
compliance.
Wong then presented to the Senate three examples
of incidents at other institutions which were caused by safety violations. In addition, Wong said since 2001, the
Chemical Safety Board (CSB) has gathered preliminary information on 120
different university laboratory incidents involving chemicals. At Rice, Wong
said that the working group has found that compliance with local, state and federal agency codes and policies
is uneven. He also said that there is a general lack of faculty engagement (although
strong interest) in safety. Regarding oversight, the working group found that there
is no consistent enforcement of safety standards in labs.
Wong presented to the Senate the Rice University
polices regarding research misconduct and safety. In addition, he discussed Rice’s Environmental
Health and Safety Department (EHS), the Office of Sponsored Research, and the
Rice University administration’s organizational chart. Wong said that safety
aspects are scattered around the campus; holistic oversight is needed.
At the end of his presentation, Wong presented
the recommendations of the working group:
- Rice needs to improve its culture of safety
- Rice University Safety Policy needs updating to establish clear roles
and a clear problem resolution process
- EH&S needs to go from a just-in-time
approach to a proactive one
- Safety training needs to be: tailored to
each lab; high-quality; recorded in a database; and available as in-person +
online sessions
- Needed is a centralized repository
containing compliance and training information
- Rice needs a safety professional to lead
this improvement effort
To view the working group’s full presentation
to the Senate, see: WG on Laboratory Safety.
Following Wong’s presentation, there was a
question and answer session.
Question: How much time is spent by the professor training
an undergraduate student to perform research? And why did you not include the
safety training of undergraduates in your recommendations?
Answer: A broad range exists; some
faculty members work one-on-one with the student until he/she is ready. At the
other end of the spectrum exists the faculty members who delegate this task to
a senior graduate student or to a post-doctoral staff member. We consider the
training of undergraduates as a necessary part of safety training overall.
Everyone needs safety training, including, for example, the high school
students who might be in Rice laboratories over the summer, visiting faculty,
etcetera.
Comment: Department chairs are responsible for compliance with all local and
state regulations.
Answer: Right, the practitioner/professor
should not have to know all of the rules; oversight should come from above.
Also, we need not just know the
rules, but practice safety.
Question: What about the use of a clearly delineated checklist?
Answer: We tried to articulate that
safety plans can include a checklist,
but every department has different procedures to follow.
Question: Is
Rice stronger or weaker in safety procedures than the institution shown in your
presentation?
Answer: On paper, the institution’s
system was working, but the level of enforcement was not high. Rice is
operating in a similar manner. We have simply presented our recommendations
today. We need a safety professional, a dedicated person who can now get these
improvements going.
Caldwell thanked Wong and the working group
for their report. He said that, if desired, the next step would be for the
Senate to accept the report’s recommendations for action. Moshe Vardi moved
that the Senate accept the report, seconded by David Alexander, and the Senate
then voted unanimously in favor of acceptance.
B.
Working Group on Non Tenure Track Faculty (NTT)
Dave Caprette, chair, listed the members of
the working group, including their length of service at Rice, the average of
which was over 12 years:
Engineering
Scott Cutler, Professor in the Practice, 12 years (Senate rep. NTT
teaching)
Ann Saterbak, Professor in the Practice, 14 years
Humanities
Jonathan Ludwig, Senior Lecturer, 10 years (Senate rep. NTT teaching)
Jones School
Kim Kimmey, Lecturer, 5 years
Natural Sciences
Beth Beason-Abmayr, Lecturer, 15 years
Dave Caprette, Professor in the Practice, 26 years (Senate rep. NTT
teaching)
Stanislav Sazykin, Senior Faculty Fellow, 13 years (Senate rep. NTT
research)
Shepherd School
Rachel Buchman, Lecturer, 11 years
Jeanne Fischer, Artist Teacher, 21 years
Social Sciences
Beverly Mitchell, Lecturer, 5 years
Caprette also reviewed the group’s charge
with the Senate: “Develop a prioritized
list of the most important issues concerning the future of NTT faculty at Rice,
the rationale behind the ranking of items, and recommendations. Relevant issues may include NTT job titles,
opportunities for promotion, range of responsibilities, employment security,
and/or equitable compensation. Since
these issues may require extensive work and research, and may therefore require
a different kind of committee (e.g. with Human Resources representatives), the
list is preliminary to formation of an expanded working group or committee.” During
Caprette’s presentation, he cited this overall objective for Rice University: Retain a stable core of experienced, highly
regarded, NTT faculty who specialize in either teaching or research.
Caprette listed the recommendations for the
expanded working group:
1.
Define career paths for NTT faculty and
provide for improved employment security and provide for improved employment
security
2.
Review how policies are applied towards NTT
faculty
3.
Collect data on NTT faculty (necessary in
order to achieve items 1 and 2)
The full presentation
can be viewed here: Working Group on NTT Faculty. Following the presentation, a question and answer session was held.
Comment: Your phrase “employment security” is not
appropriate; unless one is tenured, there is no security. Employment depends
upon performance. However, at a minimum, due process must be followed.
Currently the administration can simply let an employment contract lapse and
the NTT faculty member is out.
Caprette: Yes, currently inaction can terminate NTT faculty;
changing to deliberate action would
be an improvement.
Sanders: The provost has directed me to make an administrative working group that
will work collaboratively with the Senate’s working group on NTT policies,
improved career paths, and best practices.
Question: You say that the working group is not asking
for tenure; why not?
Caprette: It would raise a lot of
objections. We seek to be a part of this great institution, one that we make
even greater with our sustained efforts. We are not asking for tenure, but, for
increased career path security, with rolling contracts, for example, or
multi-year contracts.
Caldwell: Tenure is meant to offer
security, or less risk, to faculty in order to enhance research.
Caldwell then asked if
the Senate wished to accept the working group’s report and recommendations.
There was a motion, seconded, to accept the report, followed by unanimous
approval.
C.
Working Group on Grade Inflation
Jane Grande-Allen and Evan Siemann, co-chairs,
named the members of the working group:
Co-Chairs: Jane Grande-Allen
(Engineering)
Evan
Siemann (Natural Sciences)
Members: Ric Stoll (Social Sciences)
Peter Loewen (Shepherd School of Music)
Rebecca Goetz (Humanities)
David Tenney, ex officio
(Registrar)
Chynna Foucek (Student
Association)
Staff Assistant: Sharon Mathews
Grande-Allen reviewed the charge of the
working group: To enumerate possible changes in policies and procedures that
would work against grade inflation, and to evaluate the potential costs and
benefits of such changes. The committee looked in particular at efforts by
other institutions to work against grade inflation, and the effects of such
efforts.
Grande-Allen also stated the progress of the
working group:
•
Produced interim report with proposed
recommendations
•
WG will stay active through the summer and
early fall to collect feedback about these recommendations from faculty,
students, and administration.
•
Based on feedback, we will issue our final
recommendations and report in early Fall 2013.
Grande-Allen and
Siemann then listed four proposed actions, supported by data that they presented in chart form:
- We recommend that each department develop guidelines
for expectations of the frequency of the grade categories and the level of
student performance expected in order to earn a certain grade, depending on the
type of course and associated assignments.
- We recommend that Deans and Department
Chairs, after each semester, receive lists of their courses in which only A’s
or A+ grades were given. The instructors of these courses should be asked to
provide written justification for why these courses should continue to have
letter grades given, and a plan for better distributing those grades, otherwise
the course may be converted to S/F.
- We recommend making an A+ worth 4.0, not
4.33, in calculating the GPA. Most of our peers do not award higher value for
the A+ grade (or do not award A+ grades).
- We recommend that LPAP and residential
college courses be made S/F or removed from the GPA.
Grande-Allen added that
David Tenney (Registrar) has said that the proposed actions are possible. Grande-Allen
also stated that these actions are recommendations, not a plan for making them
work. She added that the Student Association has requested that no action be
taken at this time. Following the
presentation, there was a discussion session.
Question: In
regard to the low number of D’s given, how much of that is due to the late drop
date? If a student is doing poorly, he/she often drops the class; thus no D is
given.
Answer: The working group did not analyze drop dates
at this point, but David Tenney thought that students dropping these classes
might indeed be a factor in the low number of D’s.
Question:
Shouldn’t the required posting of one’s syllabus force professors to
state their grading policy?
Answer: Not necessarily; the required
posting of syllabi does not require one to analyze his/her grading policy,
simply to provide it to the students by the first day of class.
Question: Why
should I have one guideline when another department has a different guideline?
Answer: That is not what is being proposed; papers
vs. problem sets vs. labs all require different types of grading. The discussion must start at the level of the
school, developing guidelines, and perhaps distributing to faculty members all
of the grades that are being awarded in that school.
As the discussion
continued, several senators recommended that Rice move away from using student
evaluations of professors as a part of the faculty promotion process, a system
that could contribute to grade inflation. Grade collars (awarding a maximum
number of A’s) were also discussed. Caldwell noted that the discussion to limit
grade inflation was just beginning, and it could include topics such as student
evaluations, Pass/Fail, and the drop deadlines.
Grande-Allen stated
that the full report from the working group is available to all faculty members
on the Senate’s wiki space: see Working Group on Grade Inflation. Grande-Allen asked for feedback
from the faculty, which she predicted will be received from students, and which
will be used to write the final recommendations. Caldwell thanked Grande-Allen
and Siemann.
D.
Working Group on Research and Scholarship
Moshe Vardi, chair, listed the members of the
working group: Janet Braam, Keith Cooper, Michael Deem, Mahmoud El-Gamal,
Michael Emerson, Richard Grandy, Randy Hulet, Steve Lewis, Seiichi Matsuda,
Vikas Mittal, Jan Odegard, and Fred Oswald.
Vardi also presented the working group’s
charge: The Senate Working Group on Research and Scholarship will assess the
processes and structures currently existing on campus designed to support and
improve Rice's research and scholarship efforts, including strategy, support
structures, assessment, and coordination and planning from the department level
to the upper administration level.
Vardi stated that he had recently made
presentations of the working group’s full report to the faculty and to the
administration. For today’s Senate meeting, he would present an executive
summary of the working group’s report.
Major
Recommendations:
- Full-time VPAA, full-time Graduate Dean
- Systematic rigorous regular review processes
- Strengthen schools
- External analysis of business processes
- Need-based campaign
Vardi explained that Paula Sanders has done
an heroic job as both the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and the Dean of
Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. He said that she agrees that these positions
should be filled by two people, not one. Vardi also said that each of these
positions needs defining.
Vardi elaborated on the working group’s
recommendations:
- Much progress has been achieved, but our peers have also moved ahead.
- We need to pursue vigorously points 1 and 3 of the V2C.
- Over the past ten years we focused on building infrastructure.
- It is time to invest in human and organizational capital -- a possible
roadmap for the next decade.
- We must examine all aspects of the university regularly.
- We must continually raise the bar and push each other to improve.
- We must establish more concrete lines of communication between faculty
and administration to give one another input and feedback.
In summary, Vardi
quoted a Chinese proverb: “If you want 1
year of prosperity, grow grain. If you want 10 years of prosperity, grow trees.
If you want 100 years of prosperity, grow people.”
A discussion session
followed the presentation. Vardi said that he wished to add “graduate
recruiting” to the recommendations. He said that Rice has lost faculty members
who have stated that it will be easier for them to attract graduate students
elsewhere.
Regarding the success
of Rice’s grant proposals, Vardi said that individual faculty members can only
do so much. He said the problem is not that Rice faculty are submitting center
proposals and not winning; it is that they are not submitting.
Regarding the working
group’s recommendation to “strengthen schools,” Vardi was asked by a senator about
his comment that the Rice University Schools of Humanities and Social Sciences
were less strong than the other schools at Rice; on what was that comment
based? Vardi replied that it was primarily an impression of the working group,
but he said that he has noticed over the years that the Rice schools of
Engineering and Natural Sciences rank fairly high, as do the schools of Music,
Business, and Architecture. Vardi said, though, that rankings must be taken
with a “ton of salt” and that the School of Humanities needs to develop its own
matrix for success. The senator said that he generally agreed with that
assessment, and that the problem may be the sort of support that the School of
Humanities has received over the years.
Another senator agreed
with the working group’s assessment that Rice is small and thus cannot do it
all. Vardi stated that no institution can do it all; there must be trade-offs.
Caldwell said that the
working group has been reviewing the entire university for a couple of years.
He said that although the group’s first recommendation is being implemented
because it is clear, the other recommendations do not explain what should
happen and how. Caldwell said that the Executive Committee will need specific
tasks for approval.
Vardi suggested that a
separate working group analyze undergraduate research at Rice, which he said is
currently underutilized. He added that the Working Group on Research and
Scholarship will probably recommend that additional working groups address the
other issues presented today. Caldwell thanked Vardi and the working group for
their efforts.
President Leebron
addressed the Senate following the discussion. He thanked Deputy Speaker
Grande-Allen for her two years of dedicated service. Leebron also said that he had
heard four extraordinary reports at today’s meeting, and he complimented the
Senate overall on its thoughtful, productive work with the administration. He
went on to thank the chairs of the working groups, as well as the members,
saying that the reports provide helpful guidance to the administration and to
the university.
Caldwell reminded the
senators about the end of year party on May 2. The meeting was adjourned at
2:00 p.m.