THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE
UNIVERSITY
T H E S E N A T E R E C O R D
Volume 36-----APRIL 22,
2003-----Number 7
The Senate Record is the official publication of the
University Faculty Senate of The Pennsylvania State University, as provided for
in Article I, Section 9 of the Standing Rules of the Senate and
contained in the Constitution, Bylaws,
and Standing Rules of the University Faculty Senate, The Pennsylvania State
University 2002-03.
The publication is issued by the Senate Office, 101
Kern Graduate Building, University Park, PA
16802 (Telephone 814-863-0221). The
Record is distributed to all Libraries across the Penn State system, and is
posted on the Web at http://www.psu.edu/ufs under publications. Copies are made available to faculty and
other University personnel on request.
Except for items specified in the applicable Standing
Rules, decisions on the responsibility for inclusion of matters in the
publication are those of the Chair of the University Faculty Senate.
When existing communication channels seem
inappropriate, Senators are encouraged to submit brief letters relevant to the
Senate's function as a legislative, advisory and forensic body to the Chair for
possible inclusion in The Senate Record.
Reports that have appeared in the Agenda of the
meeting are not included in The Record unless they have been changed
substantially during the meeting or are considered to be of major
importance. Remarks and discussion are
abbreviated in most instances. A
complete transcript and tape of the meeting is on file. Individuals with questions may contact Dr.
Susan C. Youtz, Executive Secretary, University Faculty Senate.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Final Agenda for
April 22, 2003
A. Summary of Agenda
Actions
B. Minutes and
Summaries of Remarks
II. Enumeration of Documents
A.
Documents
Distributed Prior to
April 22, 2003
Senate Calendar for
2003-2004
Results of Senate Elections
for 2003-2004
Senators Not Returning For
2003-2004
Attendance
FINAL AGENDA FOR APRIL 22,
2003
A. MINUTES
OF THE PRECEDING MEETING -
Minutes
of the March 25, 2003 Meeting in The Senate Record 36:6
[www.psu.edu/ufs/recordx.html]
B.
COMMUNICATIONS
TO THE SENATE - Senate Curriculum Report (Blue Sheets) of
of
April 8, 2003
[www.psu.edu/ufs/bluex.html]
C.
REPORT
OF SENATE COUNCIL - Meeting of April 8, 2003
D. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR -
E. COMMENTS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY -
F.
FORENSIC
BUSINESS -
G.
UNFINISHED
BUSINESS -
H.
LEGISLATIVE
REPORTS -
I.
ADVISORY/CONSULTATIVE
REPORTS -
Faculty Affairs
Undergraduate Education
Defining Grading Standards
J.
INFORMATIONAL
REPORTS -
Curricular Affairs
Faculty Affairs
Time in Rank of Associate Professors
Research
Update on Graduate Education
Senate Council
Report on Spring 2003 College Visits
University Planning
Status of Construction
Parking Rate Structure
Report of Senate Elections
Senate Council
Senate Committee on Committees and Rules
University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee
Standing Joint Committee on Tenure
Faculty Rights and Responsibilities
Faculty Advisory Committee to the President
Senate Secretary for 2003-2004
Senate Chair-Elect for 2003-2004
Comments by Outgoing Chair Moore
Installation of Officers
Comments by Incoming Chair Bise
K. NEW LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS -
L. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE UNIVERSITY -
M. ADJOURNMENT -
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ACTIONS
The Senate held one forensic session, voted on two legislative reports, voted on two advisory/consultative reports, and heard six informational reports.
Senate Self Study Committee – “A Concept for Restructuring and for Improving the Operation and Procedures of the University Faculty Senate.” The Senate Self-Study committee presents several preliminary recommendations that will be debated. Considerations include the size of the Senate, length and number of meetings, organization of committees and new approaches for receiving reports. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 15-25 and Agenda Appendix “B.”)
Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid – “Change to Policy 34-68 (Auditing a Course).” This legislative report recommends the change of the Penn State definition of “full-time” to exclude audit credits. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 25-26 and Agenda Appendix “C.”)
Intercollegiate Athletics – “Revision of Senate Policy 67-00, Athletic Competition, Section 2, Eligibility of Athletes.” In this legislative report this policy change reaffirms an existing practice that does not permit provisional, non-degree regular, and non-degree conditional students to practice or compete. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 26-27 and Agenda Appendix “D.”)
Faculty Affairs – “Revision to Policy AD53, Privacy Statement.” In this advisory/consultative report the proposed policy revision clarifies that means of monitoring activities of employees and students with such technologies as video and sound may abridge privacy expectations and may not be used except when necessary to protect the security of the University and its employees and students. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 27-31 and Agenda Appendix “E.”)
Undergraduate Education – “Defining Grading Standards.” In this advisory/consultative report the Senate voted on three recommendations designed to halt the steady increase in GPAs over the past fifteen years. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 31-36 and Agenda Appendix “F.”)
Curricular Affairs – “Status of General Education Implementation: Certification/Recertification of New, Changed, and Existing Courses.” This informational report provides an up-date on the status of General Education implementation and course recertification, as legislated by the Senate in 1997. The use of ANGEL for collaborative reviews will be presented. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 36 and Agenda Appendix “G.”)
Faculty Affairs – “Time in Rank of Associate Professors.” This informational report provides information on the time that associate professors are spending in rank, beginning with appointment or promotion to that position. Analysis by gender, minority status and location is given. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 36 and Agenda Appendix “H.”)
Research – “Update on Graduate Education.” This informational report examines trends in graduate enrollment, diversity efforts, technology initiatives, and funding programs. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 36 and Agenda Appendix “I.”)
Senate Council – “Report on Spring 2003 College Visits.” The Senate Officers visit University Park colleges and other units each spring. This informational report summarizes those visits. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 36 and Agenda Appendix “J.”)
University Planning – “Status of Construction.” This annual informational report focuses on construction projects at campus locations. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 36 and Agenda Appendix “K.”)
University Planning – “Parking Rate Structure.” In this informational report, Parking Office representatives will present changes in the rate structure for parking at University Park as well as changes in the location of parking facilities. (See Senate Record, Page(s) 36 and Agenda Appendix “L.”)
The University Faculty Senate met on Tuesday, April 22, 2003, at 1:30 p.m. in Room 112 Kern Graduate Building with John W. Moore, Chair, presiding. One hundred and ninety-six Senators signed the roster.
Chair Moore: It is time to begin.
Moving to the minutes of the preceding meeting, The Senate Record, providing a full transcription of the proceedings of the March 25, 2003, meeting has been sent to all University Libraries. In addition, it has been posted on the Faculty Senate web page. Are there any corrections or additions to this document? All those in favor of accepting the minutes, please signify by saying, "aye."
Senators: Aye.
Chair Moore: Opposed? The minutes are accepted. Thank you.
COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SENATE
You have received the Senate Curriculum Report for April 8, 2003. This document is posted on the University Faculty Senate's web page.
REPORT OF SENATE COUNCIL
Also, you should have received the Report of Senate Council for the meeting of April 8, 2003, which appears as an attachment to the Agenda for today’s meeting.
ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR
Chair Moore: At the end of each academic year, a number of Senators complete their term of office, and it is my sad duty to read the list of our valued Senators who will not be returning for next year.
ABINGTON COLLEGE
Stephen Stace
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL
SCIENCES
Leif Jensen
Dennis Scanlon
ALTOONA COLLEGE
Valerie Stratton
COLLEGE OF ARTS AND
ARCHITECTURE
Annette McGregor
BERKS-LEHIGH VALLEY
COLLEGE
LEHIGH VALLEY CAMPUS
Kathleen Lodwick
SMEAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Hemant Bhargava
Robert Crum
Peter Everett
COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATIONS
Thomas Berner
COLLEGE OF EARTH AND
MINERAL SCIENCES
Robert Crane
William Frank
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Roger Geiger
Brandon Hunt
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Kultegin Aydin
Cheng Dong
Norman Harris
Ali Hurson
Elise Miller-Hooks
PENN STATE HARRISBURG
CAPITAL COLLEGE
Richard Ammon
Irwin Richman
COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Nancy Williams
COLLEGE OF THE LIBERAL
ARTS
Aida Beaupied
Julia Hewitt
Christopher Johnstone
John Kramer
Sandra Savignon
COLLEGE OF MEDICINE
Robert Bonneau
Laurence Demers
Fred Fedok
PENN STATE SCHUYLKILL
CAPITAL COLLEGE
Billie Jo Jones
EBERLY COLLEGE OF SCIENCE
James Anderson
Arkady Tempelman
FAYETTE CAMPUS
Sandra Smith
DICKINSON SCHOOL OF LAW
Katherine Pearson
GREAT VALLEY
Roy Clariana
MILITARY SCIENCES
Paul Neiheisel
IMMEDIATE PAST-CHAIR
John Nichols
EX OFFICIO SENATOR
Daniel Larson
APPOINTED SENATOR
Thomas Poole
Karen Sandler
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
Jeremy Adlon
Lauren Applegate
Laura Beck
David Breslin
Meshawn Carter
Jeffrey Corbets
Eric Cowden
Amy Locke
Michael Ritter
Dawn Rupp
Kristen Seabright
Summer Spangler
Macklin Stanley
GRADUATE STUDENTS
Christopher Baker
Gwenn McCollum
We appreciate all that you have contributed to the Senate, and we will miss each one of you. Let’s show our thanks to these Senators for all their good work.
Senators: Applause.
Chair Moore: Last year, we began the practice of acknowledging by way of a certificate signed by the President of the University and the Chair of the Senate those departing Senators who have held positions of leadership or who have served twelve years or more. This year we are pleased to present certificates of appreciation today to Laurence Demers and Valerie Stratton. Will Larry and Valerie please come forward?
Laurence M. Demers is a Distinguished Professor of Pathology and Medicine at the College of Medicine. Professor Demers has served four (4) four-year terms as a Senator from Hershey. During this time he has served primarily on the Senate Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics and the Committee on Intra-University Relations. Congratulations, Larry, for your years of service and commitment to the Faculty Senate!
Senators: Applause.
Chair Moore: Valerie N. Stratton is an Associate Professor of Psychology at Penn State Altoona College. She has served on the Senate for eight years. During that time she has been vice-chair of Faculty Affairs, been elected to Faculty Rights and Responsibilities and served as both vice chair and chair of the Senate Committee on Committees and Rules. At the present time, Valerie is chair of the Task Force to Review the First-Year Seminar Requirement, a position that will surely keep her connected with the Senate. Congratulations, Valerie, and thank you for your splendid leadership over the past eight years!
Senators: Applause.
Chair Moore: I want to remind you that you are all invited to attend a reception immediately following the Senate meeting in room 102 Kern Building.
On April 4, 2003, Laura Pauley, Chair of the Undergraduate Education Committee, and I charged a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education to undertake a long-overdue review of the Bachelor of Arts Requirements. The committee consists of senators, faculty, and students from Abington, Altoona, Behrend, Berks/Lehigh Valley, Capital, and Commonwealth College in addition to representatives from Arts & Architecture, Communications, and Liberal Arts. Jack Selzer, Liberal Arts, chairs the committee.
The Senate Officers visited the College of Agricultural Sciences on March 31, 2003; this visit concluded visits to 20 Penn State locations during this academic year. The officers will be meeting with Provost Erickson in early May to discuss the principal topics that emerged during those visits.
The seventh and last issue of the Senate Newsletter for 2002-2003 has been distributed.
The Senate Office has a new Administrative Assistant. Patty Poorman, will you please stand and remain standing. Patty Poorman recently joined the Senate Office as the Administrative Assistant. Patty worked for eleven years in the Commonwealth College office. During that time, she worked for the Associate Dean for Faculty and Research; the Associate Dean for Students and Academic Support; and the Associate Dean for Academic Programs. As a result, Patty brings many experiences and skills to the Senate Office. Patty will be working with the Senate Officers, Committee Chairs, and Executive Secretary. Please welcome Patty to the Senate Office.
Senators: Applause.
Chair Moore: The online Senate Election process, new this year, went very well. I wish to thank the Commonwealth College Royer Center and Senator Peter Georgopulos for their technological support in the design and implementation of the online ballot. Typically, 59-62 percent of Senators vote in an election. This year, 67 percent voted. Our thanks go to Susan Youtz for initiating this project and for seeing it through to the end. Thanks also go to the members of the Senate staff who worked hard to make it a success.
Let me also mention that usually 60 percent of Senators send back their Committee Preference Forms. The online system that we used this year yielded an 80 percent response. Once again congratulations and thanks to our technologically gifted staff.
Each year, the Faculty Senate’s Committee on Student Life recognizes outstanding undergraduate students who are graduating with highest distinction and who plan to enroll in graduate study. This year, there are five recipients of the John W. White Graduate Fellowship. Each student will receive a $1500 award. The John White Fellowship is one of the oldest continuing fellowships at Penn State. The award was established in 1902 by James Gilbert White to honor his father, Reverend John W. White of Milroy, Pennsylvania. The award recipients will be recognized at an awards banquet on April 28, 2003, at the Nittany Lion Inn.
Serving on this year’s review committee were Bill Ellis, chair of the Senate Committee on Student Life and a Hazleton Senator, Jennifer Tingo, Student Life committee member and vice president of the USG’s Academic Assembly, who I believe will be attending medical school in the fall, and Senate Executive Secretary Susan Youtz.
The 2003 Fellowship recipients are:
Nicole Dirling will graduate this spring from Penn State Erie with a B.A. in Political Science and a minor in International Studies. Nicole was a member of the Behrend College Honor’s Program and a research assistant with today’s honoree John Gamble. Nicole will be attending the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. She is interested in practicing family law.
Rebecca Lynn Page will graduate as a Schreyer Scholar with a B.S. in Communication Sciences and Disorders and a minor in Natural Sciences. She will continue her studies here at Penn State in her department’s masters program; Rebecca eventually plans to earn a doctorate in Communication Sciences and Disorders.
Ninad Pendharkar will graduate from Abington College with a B.S. in Science (Life Science Option) and a minor in Business Administration. Ninad has been accepted at several medical schools including Penn State, Iowa, and Pittsburgh; he will be making his decision soon and is interested in pediatrics and family medicine.
Laura Sander will graduate with a B.S. degree in pre-medicine and a minor in Mandarin Chinese. Laura will attend medical school at the University of Pennsylvania. Laura is interested in primary care and working with underserved populations.
Wendy Zimmerman will graduate from the Commonwealth College/Penn State Delaware County Campus with a B.A. degree in Speech Communication. She has been accepted at West Chester University’s Communications masters program. Wendy is a returning adult student with more than 20 years of experience in owning and operating a cooking school and catering business in southeastern Pennsylvania.
Congratulations to all these awardees!
Senators: Applause.
Chair Moore: I am pleased to announce that President Spanier has approved the Library Fines Policy that the Senate approved at its memorable February meeting.
A list of the topics discussed at the last meeting of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President may be found on page two of the minutes of the last meeting of Senate Council.
May I now ask John Gamble, Professor of Political Science and International Law at Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, to join me at the podium?
At the recent Faculty/Staff Awards Recognition luncheon held on March 24, 2003, John King Gamble, Professor of Political Science and International Law at Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, received the W. Lamarr Kopp International Achievement Award for Faculty. The award recognizes the recipient’s display of excellence in international education through research, teaching, and service. Professor Gamble well deserves this award for he is an internationally recognized expert in the law of the sea, dispute settlement, multilateral treaties, the teaching of international law, and the effects of new information technology on international law and international treaties. He is the author, co-author, or editor of twelve books and more than fifty articles and eighty conference papers on these topics.
Law of the Sea deals with the use of ocean space and involves the need for international cooperation and agreement in regard to such topics as fisheries, pollution, the flow of merchant ships, marine insurance, offshore petroleum, and the special rules governing islands, semi-enclosed seas, superports, and artificial islands. From 1973-1976, he was Executive Director of the Law of the Sea Institute at the University of Rhode Island. There, he organized international meetings involving diplomats, businessmen, scholars, lawyers, bankers, and government agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Geological Survey, and similar agencies from many nations. A proud advocate for the teaching of international law at universities and at law schools, he has served as a Visiting Scholar at Yale Law School and as a Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Victoria and in the Department of Political Science at the University of New Brunswick in Canada. His articles have appeared in such distinguished legal journals as the American Journal of International Law, the Michigan Journal of International Law, and the German Yearbook of International Law. He has lectured in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Australia, India, Germany, the Netherlands, England, and Portugal.
In his classes at Behrend College, he has opened the minds of his students to the world beyond the United States. To do this, he has developed a computer simulation game using country clusters so that each student views the world through the lens of one selected country. This approach makes them see that the worldview of China, for instance, is fundamentally different from that of the United States, and that Canada, however close, is just not the United States. In his Schreyer Honors Seminar on Treaties, each student dissects and reports on a multilateral treaty. This task requires understanding the provisions of the treaty as well as the complex matrix of country relations to the treaty. Some students in this course become involved in the Comprehensive Statistical Database of Multilateral Treaties. This project permits analysis of basic statistical information for all 6,050 multilateral treaties entering into force from 1648-1995. One can easily understand why his students move readily into posts in government, law, and international business.
As an expert in so many aspects of international law and comparative politics and as a professor dedicated to opening the eyes of his students to the many cultures that inhabit this globe, Professor Gamble well deserves the honors that he has received. Today, Professor Gamble, your colleagues in the University Faculty Senate, a body in which you served so ably from 1990-1994, take pleasure in applauding your achievements and your success. Congratulations!
Senators: Applause.
John K. Gamble: Since I sat where you are sitting, I know exactly what you are thinking. You are thinking, God I hope he is brief, and I will be. And you also probably have a suspicion that I am going to advocate for at least nine more internationally oriented credits for every Penn State undergraduate.
I spend perhaps three-quarters of my professional life on international things. It is not realistic to expect that many of you will devote that amount of your time. But it is important to understand that internationalization is essential and difficult. It is essential because it affects both how our students are able to do their jobs and how they are able to be good citizens. But it is difficult because it must compete with myriad other things for space in an overcrowded curriculum and because it ipso facto is multi-disciplinary.
Let me conclude with three very brief examples. The top of official Penn State letterhead does not have the words United States, or university, or Pennsylvania. I wonder how that looks to a bright high school student from Zambia.
I ask that we remember all of our graduates, with due respect to Cheryl Achterberg, I am less concerned about Schreyer Scholars than about, for example, a wood products graduate from Connellsville who is completing her curriculum now, has worked full-time for the last five years, and will graduate with a 2.85 grade point; I am afraid she might leave us without much understanding of the 190 other countries in the world.
As this group knows better than any other in Penn State, faculty can be pit bullish in the way we protect the curriculum. There is a wealth of internationalization in our blue catalog, but it is not just what is there. It is what students actually take, and we must make space for internationalization but we need to do so effectively and efficiently and understand that some of the best courses probably do not fit neatly in any one discipline. Thank you for listening.
Senators: Applause.
COMMENTS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY
FORENSIC BUSINESS
Chair Moore: Agenda Item F, Forensic Business. Today we have our first forensic session of the year, and it appears on today’s Agenda as Appendix “B.” It comes from the Senate Self Study Committee, and it is titled, A Concept for Restructuring and for Improving the Operation and Procedures of the University Faculty Senate. Senate Council has set aside thirty minutes for this forensic discussion. The purpose of this discussion is to provide all Senators with the opportunity to comment on the committee’s report so that the committee will be able to revise the report during the summer. If you have opinions but do not get the chance to express them today, send them at a later date to George Franz at gwf1@psu.edu. The more the committee hears from you, the better will be their final report.
Murry Nelson has requested permission to speak today. We will proceed by discussing first proposal number four, Size of Senate and Length of Office. George Franz, Chair of the Senate Self Study Committee, will lead the forensic discussion.
SENATE SELF STUDY COMMITTEE
A Concept for Restructuring and for Improving the Operation and Procedures of the University Faculty Senate
George W. Franz, Chair, Senate Self Study Committee
George W. Franz, Delaware County Campus: I have very little to say. The point of this forensic session is to hear from you so that the committee can go back this summer and come in with a report in the fall. I just want to explain two items that may be confusing in the report. In Appendix A some dotted boxes appeared that are not supposed to be there, so around the Executive Committee and the Graduate Council, Undergraduate Council, Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid and all the subcommittees of Faculty Affairs they are all supposed to be solid blocks. Something happened in the transmission that changed that. The only dotted line on that Organizational Chart should be the dotted line that goes from the Faculty Senate to the Graduate Council and that structure simply reflects the Graduate Council side--the current relationship and current structure. In Appendix B there was some question that some people are confused about the difference between the chart at the bottom and the numbers for Commonwealth College. What we have done is show two different ways of calculating multiple location organizations and the only one where there is any impact because of changes in representation based on rounding occurs in The Commonwealth College. It does not occur at Berks-Lehigh Valley or at Capital. So with that, the floor is open for discussion, and we are discussing item four, the size of the Senate and the length of the term.
Leonard J. Berkowitz, York Campus: With your permission I will address all of the major topics at once rather than jump up and down five times. I speak from the perspective of someone who has served as chair of the University Faculty Senate, an elected member of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President, and chair of three different Senate committees. I also speak on behalf of five other recent Senate chairs some of whom could not be here today. We have some serious reservations about a number of the proposals that have come from the Senate Self Study Committee. Perhaps our most serious concern is the proposal to include the Executive Secretary of the Senate in the new version of the Faculty Advisory Committee called the Executive Committee. The Executive Secretary of the Senate is a staff position, not an elected representative of the faculty. That person is selected by the Provost and serves at the pleasure of the Provost, and to make that position a permanent member of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President we find highly inappropriate.
A second concern is the proposed change in Senate Council. There may be some merit in considering changes to Senate Council. In some years it has seemed to be as dysfunctional as it has been useful, but we still have two concerns with the specific proposal. First, asking chairs of committees to serve on these councils is adding already to heavy loads especially for faculty who are not based at University Park. Second, having two of these chairs also serve as council chairs and as members of the new version of Faculty Advisory Committee is really adding to heavy service loads. Third, we worry that the drastic reduction in Senate size where we move from one in twenty to one for every thirty-five faculty will make it nearly impossible for the Senate to do its work in committees, and it will reduce our ability to make sure that important constituencies are represented on important committees. In this case, we are not concerned about people representing their constituencies in the power sense but in the sense of making sure that all perspectives are heard in committee discussions. It is a very bad thing if legislation and policy are shaped without careful attention to all aspects at the university that might be affected. It is even worse if those policies get implemented. I am afraid that both will happen under the proposed changes.
Finally, we have some concern about the legislative limit to the length of the Senate meeting to one and a half hours. Perhaps that is a good goal, but to make it legislation as is proposed by the Senate Self Study Committee would limit and in fact eliminate the flexibility of the chair to extend a meeting if we find the discussion merits continuation of the meeting. Much of our time is already taken up with non-Senate business. I timed today, which was not atypical; we began the Senate business after 50 minutes, so that would leave us 40 minutes for the entire business of the Senate if we were to accept the proposals here.
George W. Franz: Can I ask a follow-up question? If you think this cut in size from one to twenty to one to thirty-five is extreme, what would you suggest as the size for the representation.
Leonard J. Berkowitz: A small change might be reasonable. I think the Senate Self Study Committee identified the idea correctly: we need to make sure that representation on committees is done properly. As a start perhaps the cut to one for every twenty-five might be a nice, prudent, conservative way to reduce the size of the Senate, which has grown because the size of the faculty has grown, without jeopardizing things too much.
Murry R. Nelson, Non-Senator, College of Education: Thank you, I speak as a guest and former chair of the Senate, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak from Chairman Moore. I want to echo what Leonard just said; we have talked and I wanted to make sure that it was seen that his representation of five past chairs was indeed accurate. We know that Leonard has a tendency to stretch the truth, but in this case it is not the case.
I wanted to just speak then to two things that he said because I do not have anything to add on the others. The last one that George had just asked about, I think one to twenty-five is a more realistic attempt by this body to make something that would be workable and not run the risk of having committees that are very small. We already have some committees that are small and, having worked with trying to staff committees at the beginning of the year when we anticipate these people will actually show up for meetings, it is very difficult to fill some of the committees.
The second is the issue regarding the reformation of the Senate Council. I think this would be, as Leonard said, onerous for a small number of people rather than a great number of people. I think that, particularly for people, as Leonard said, from distance locations that come here, having to come more than once or having to represent a larger and different constituency at different meetings, I think, is very difficult, and I think one of the things that I have heard when we would go to different campuses is the lack of support at times for people who serve on the Senate. We have often said that it is important that Senate duty be recognized as more than just another committee. I think that I could support to some degree this change if there were an agreement by CEOs at each of the campuses that there would be a commensurate reduction in the load of a Senator who was in this kind of position. I think it is asking too much and at the same time it asks a Senator to essentially cut off his or her opportunities for the kind of teaching and research that they would like to do because of the tremendous amount of service that they would be required to do. I think it is always good to be doing this kind of self study, I t