Professor Amy Pittenger
Chair, Senate and Faculty Consultative Committees
The Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC) has had a busy and dramatic fall semester, beginning with welcoming our seventeenth president, Joan T.A. Gabel, and closing out with the selection of our next executive vice president and provost, Rachel Croson.
At our annual kick-off retreat in August, the FCC selected three priorities to focus on for this academic year: governance representation and academic freedom protections for contract/term faculty and P&A employees with faculty-like duties; exploration of systemwide sanction guidelines for faculty misconduct; and conceptualization of a combined mental health advocacy/disabilities services training program that will be required for all faculty. We are happy that Vice Provost Rebecca Ropers, Executive Vice President and Provost Karen Hanson, and President Gabel were all able to participate in portions of the retreat.
This past summer, leadership from the Minnesota Student Association (MSA), student representatives to the Board of Regents, Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost, and the FCC met to begin conceptualizing the first of many events to continue the conversation regarding the University's institutional history and working towards creating a welcoming and equitable community. This planning led to the community-wide discussion on November 14, 2019, titled Our University History: Understand, Acknowledge, Engage. An impressive number of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students, along with faculty, staff, community members, members of the Board of Regents, and administrators from across the Twin Cities campus attended and participated in facilitated small group discussions. A report compiling the feedback from the small group discussions is forthcoming; we look forward to using that data to inform us as we help to formulate strategies to make our University a more inclusive community.
It has been a busy fall, and next semester looks to be just as eventful. In addition to working on the priorities we set in August, the FCC will continue to engage in the efforts on redesigning the liberal education requirements and developing training on disability accommodation; further establish our relationships with the members of the Board of Regents and President Gabel; and begin our partnership with our new provost, Dr. Croson.
Thank you for your engagement this semester—your input on the many leadership searches, fora, senate meetings, and other systemwide events are why the University of Minnesota is such an amazing place to learn and work. I'd also like to recognize all the students, staff, and faculty involved in governance who volunteer their time and efforts to make the University of Minnesota’s governance model so robust. I also want to thank President Gabel, Provost Hanson, and University administration for open and engaged consultation and commitment to shared governance as a value and a process.
Wishing everyone a happy and healthy 2020!
The Big Issues
New Director of the Office for Conflict Resolution
Since joining the Office for Conflict Resolution (OCR) at the beginning of the academic year, Tamar Gronvall, OCR's new director, has prioritized relationship building with University shared governance. Gronvall has visited a number of senate committees to introduce herself, educate members on the resources that OCR offers to employees, and seek feedback on the Administrative Policy: Conflict Resolution for Faculty, P&A, Civil Service, and Student Employees. Gronvall has also partnered with governance to lead educational seminars for employees.
Teaching and training is a central component of OCR's services, complementing its informal and formal conflict resolution assistance. In remarks to senate committees, Gronvall has emphasized that the OCR was established to support the University’s mission of engagement and excellence, and to support the goal of equity and diversity in the campus community.
In addition to consulting with shared governance during comprehensive policy reviews, the OCR partners with senate consultative committees to nominate faculty, P&A, and civil service employees to serve as advisors, panelists, and hearing officers for formal conflict resolution petitions. The consultative committees also nominate individuals for appointment to the Conflict Resolution Advisory Committee, which advises the vice president for equity and diversity regarding the selection of OCR staff, the performance of the office, and policy revisions.
The OCR is a systemwide office, and Gronvall looks forward to visiting other system campuses to talk directly to employees about the services that OCR offers to the entire University community. To find out more about informal or formal resolution services, or to learn about workshops and resources offered by the OCR, please visit their website.
Discussions on Faculty Misconduct
This fall, the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee (AF&T) delved more deeply into the topic of faculty conduct as it relates to the promotion and tenure processes, which the committee began discussing in February 2019. The committee examined a number of recent situations at the University, which, they felt, warranted a careful look at the topic of misconduct, especially sexual misconduct. Committee members grappled with the area where academic freedom, academic integrity, and behavior (including academic misconduct, sexual misconduct, and discriminatory behavior) all intersect.
Rebecca Ropers, vice provost for faculty and academic affairs, Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost, sought opinions from the committee as to whether behavior should be considered when evaluating academic integrity. There appeared to be a consensus among committee members that defining academic integrity is a far easier task than putting parameters around what constitutes “professional behavior.” Ropers stressed that, in order to further this potentially divisive discussion at the University, discourse and recommended actions must be centered on the institution’s culture rather than specific incidents.
The University’s General Counsel, Douglas Peterson, met with AF&T in November, and noted that with recent societal shifts in behavior and discourse, the University may need to begin asking difficult questions such as:
- To what extent should character and behavior issues be built into the promotion and tenure process?
- Is evaluating character and behavior as part of academic integrity essential to the University’s expectations of a tenured faculty member?
- How inherent is character and behavior in the execution of one’s duties in teaching, research, and service?
Peterson noted that issues of character and behavior are being more closely looked at in the corporate world as well; businesses are now engaging in self-reporting activities as accountability to society becomes part of a business’s broader mission. It is important that the University begin addressing these issues as they relate to the University’s overall mission, Peterson added.
Social Concerns Committee Carbon Solutions Forum
On October 3, 2019, the Social Concerns committee hosted a community forum on energy and climate change. The forum fulfilled the committee’s charge “to initiate on a regular basis campus fora on current controversial issues” and was sponsored by University Senate Governance. Ellen Anderson, senior energy research in the Institute on the Environment’s Energy Transition Lab, moderated the forum. Panelists were Cameran Bailey, solar planning advisor, Metropolitan Council; Gabriel Chan, assistant professor, Humphrey School of Public Affairs; Jay Coggins, professor, Department of Applied Economics; Troy Goodnough, sustainability director, University of Minnesota Morris; and Joe Robertson, global strategy director, Citizens’ Climate Lobby. Topics included the intersection of climate change and social justice issues; the economics of solving the climate challenge, the role of innovation, and the role of rural communities in supporting the energy transition. The event was live-streamed and recorded, and about 100 people attended, including both in-person and online viewers. The committee received several compliments from panelists and attendees on the forum’s structure, content, and synergy. A big thank you to the volunteers from the Social Concerns Committee and across the University who planned and organized this engaging event!
University Senate Governance Working for U
FCC
Fall semester 2019 was busy as usual for the Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC). In addition, to being a cosponsor of Steps Forward: A Campus Conversation – Our University History: Understand, Acknowledge, Engage, a campus community event that was held on November 14, the FCC remained actively involved in the ongoing liberal education redesign discussion, and participated in interviews for the finalists of the the provost and vice president for human resources positions. The FCC also heard from Meredith McQuaid, associate vice president and dean, Global Programs and Strategy Alliance, about the International Travel Registry, a component of the Administrative Policy: Traveling on University Business, which requires all international travelers on University business (faculty, staff, graduate assistants, residents, fellows, and students) to register their travel. In addition, members learned about Digital Arts, Sciences & Humanities (DASH), a program that aggregates the University’s technology support resources for faculty and graduate students, and brainstormed with Professor Ben Wiggins, program director, about how to get the word out about DASH. Other items that came before the committee included a discussion with Tina Marisam, director and Title IX coordinator, Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, about its recommendations concerning responsive actions that should be taken when a faculty member engages in sexual misconduct that violates University policy. Additionally, senior administrators and the FCC had a productive discussion concerning the upcoming structural changes to the University’s retirement plans and what the institution should do in terms of communication to help alleviate concerns that employees have raised. The FCC also received information about what to expect regarding the 27 pay periods that will occur in fiscal year 2021 and were asked to provide feedback to the Office of Human Resources on the draft communication documents in order to ensure clarity.
SSCC
The Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) and Student Senate addressed a variety of issues this semester and met with a variety of personnel from all over the University. Topics included a discussion with President Joan T.A. Gabel and members of her staff regarding the University’s Systemwide Strategic Plan. Gabel told the SSCC at its November 8th meeting that one of her top priorities since assuming office is to complete the University’s Strategic Plan by the end of the spring semester and present it to the Board of Regents by June 2020. The president and her staff have been actively consulting with student leaders and asking for feedback around several areas of commitments including student success, community and belonging, fiscal stewardship, and an area dubbed “MNtersections,” which focuses on leveraging strengths of the different system campuses to serve the residents of Minnesota in the areas of health, food, and the environment.
Additionally, Student Senate and SSCC Chair Amy Ma, in conjunction with student leaders from around the state of Minnesota that comprise the Student Advisory Council (SAC), worked to bring the issue of food insecurity to the forefront of public discussion. The SAC worked with the Office of Governor Tim Walz to declare October 24th, 2019, as “College Food Insecurity Awareness Day” in Minnesota. With that theme in mind, members of the SSCC worked to compile food information and resources for students to be included in an email to students on all five system campuses. Representatives from Boynton Health met with the Student Senate at its November 7th meeting and said that in a comprehensive survey, one in five students across the University of Minnesota system reported they have experienced food insecurity at some point during the previous twelve months. Multiple student senators have made efforts to continue working with Boynton staff to further address this issue.
CSCC
The Civil Service Consultative Committee (CSCC) started off a very productive semester by amending the Civil Service Employment Rules to include language clarifying expectations for unscheduled childcare needs during inclement weather conditions. Public hearings to gather constituent feedback were held on November 4, 2019, and the final proposed amendments will be reviewed and approved at the December Board of Regents meeting. The Civil Service Senate also voted to update language in the University Senate Constitution, Bylaws, and Rules, including the CSCC charge, after a comprehensive review. The amendments reflect current Civil Service Senate procedures, and were drafted by the CSCC leadership in close partnership with the University Senate Office.
CSCC leadership traveled to the Morris and Crookston campuses in October to meet with system campus leadership, introduce themselves to constituents, and hear about concerns facing civil service employees in other parts of the state. The CSCC will continue to focus on issues brought to them by constituents through the spring semester, including an amendment to the Civil Service Employment Rules allowing bereavement leave. The Civil Sercice Senate will vote on this amendment, followed by public hearings and final approval by the Board of Regents by the end of the spring 2020 semester.
The Joint Compensation Committee (JCC), made up of members of the P&A and Civil Service Senates, is finalizing a report outlining the concerns of P&A and civil service staff regarding compensation policies and practices. The JCC will present its report to both consultative committees for approval with the intention of bringing it to the full P&A and Civil Service Senates, and eventually to University administration with the goal of partnering to work towards improvements in compensation practices for staff.
PACC
The 2019-20 academic year began with a well-attended P&A Senate retreat in August. Noelle Noonan, chair of the P&A Senate and P&A Consultative Committee (PACC), invited senate members to join her in working to strengthen communication and relationships between the P&A Senate and its constituents, as well as with faculty, students, and University leadership.
To address an opinion piece published in MinnPost, which was highly critical of the number of P&A staff at the University, the PACC crafted and submitted an open letter response to MinnPost, where it was published.
Erin Heath, P&A Senate and PACC chair-elect, is leading a review of the P&A Senate’s mission statement and subcommittee structure, following revisions to the P&A Senate Constitution, Bylaws, and Rules that were approved in April 2019.
In November, P&A leadership traveled to the Morris campus and met with Chancellor Michelle Behr and Interim Vice Chancellor Melissa Bert, as well as P&A Senate members and constituents on the Morris campus. The November P&A Senate meeting was hosted on the Morris campus, with engaging presentations from Regent Tom Anderson and Extension educator Chyseis Modderman, along with a Twin Cities-based presentation from Julie Showers, associate vice president, Office for Equity and Diversity.
The Benefits and Compensation Subcommittee is working with the Office of Human Resources on P&A staff concerns regarding the Market Refinement Study, employee engagement, the Administrative Policy: Parental Leave for Employees, the Wellbeing Program, policies on flexible work arrangements, and the Regents Scholarship. The Communications Subcommittee continues to publish a monthly P&A newsletter, and is working on developing a “ready-to-go” slide deck that highlights the work of P&A staff across the University system and showcases the efforts and accomplishments of the P&A Senate. The Outreach Subcommittee is focusing on ensuring that all units have representative members in the P&A Senate. The Professional Development and Recognition Subcommittee held two Seminar Series events this fall and is collaborating with the Civil Service Consultative Committee to co-host an upcoming seminar event.
A View from the Inside
Your Role in Establishing University Policy
Amber Bathke
Senate Associate, University Senate Office
Did you know that the University of Minnesota has roughly 200 University-level administrative policies? It may not be the most exciting aspect of our jobs, but there is no doubt that policy has a profound effect on our daily work. The University is unlike many other workplaces, however, in that all members of the University community can have a voice in policy creation and revision. Indeed, in a large, decentralized institution such as the U of M, the people in charge of “making the rules” rely on input from faculty, staff, and students to help ensure that the policies that govern our community are as clear, fair, and equitable as possible.
If you’re like me, though, you may find the policy process a bit nebulous. Before I started working in the University Senate Office about three years ago, I worked at the University for ten years and completed two degrees here, and in all that time had only a vague understanding of policy. I knew which ones were applicable to my job and I knew how to follow them, but I had no idea how they were developed, or that I could have had input into that process.
Now, however, my position involves extensive interaction with policy not only in terms of applying it, but also helping to facilitate its creation and maintenance. As staff to several governance committees, the University and Faculty Senates, and formerly the P&A Senate, I have observed and summarized in minutes dozens of policy consultation sessions, including several rounds of consultation with the Equity, Access and Diversity and Social Concerns Committees and the University Senate on the proposed Administrative Policy: Equity and Access: Gender Identity, Gender Expression, Names, and Pronouns; the Administrative Policy: Parental Leave for Employees; numerous educational policies with the Senate Committee on Educational Policy (SCEP); and many others. I also serve as the University Senate Office representative on the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) and liaison to the Policy Program. In this role, I coordinate with policy owners and my colleagues in the University Senate Office to move policies through the governance consultation process. You might say that I’m a policy ‘insider,’ at least in terms of how the review process works. So let me share with you what I have learned in this position.
First, it’s helpful to know there are several layers of policy at the University. Board of Regents policies are aspirational in nature, and provide high-level guiding principles and direction. Administrative policies provide specific rules and provisions for implementing Board of Regents policies and setting expectations for administrative operation of the University. Individual campuses, colleges, and departments may also establish their own policies.
Second, the Administrative Policy: Establishing Administrative Policies (affectionately dubbed the "policy on policies") governs the creation of University-wide policies. It stipulates certain criteria for what constitutes a policy, as well as outlines the process for policy creation and maintenance. This includes a heavy emphasis on consultation, and University Senate Office procedures augment the consultation component. Broadly, the steps in the policy process are preliminary review, formal consultation, Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) review, President’s Policy Committee (PCC) approval, a 30-day comment period, and publication.
Preliminary Review
When a policy is due for comprehensive review, the director of the University Policy Program notifies the University Senate Office, and staff work to arrange for relevant committees to review and provide feedback to the policy owner proactively. Although the committees are advisory to the administration, their feedback often leads to significant revisions.
Formal Consultation
Once a policy owner has drafted a new policy or has significant revisions to an existing policy, they must consult with relevant stakeholders, including but not limited to designated University Senate governance committees. Proposed new policies typically make the rounds to many committees, and the chair of the Senate Consultative Committee determines which committees will be designated for consultation in the future. Human Resources policies, for example, require conversation with the consultative committee of the relevant staff group(s); in this way, all faculty, civil service, and P&A employees have an indirect voice in the process via their elected representatives on the Faculty Consultative Committee, the Civil Service Consultative Committee, and the P&A Consultative Committee. Student-facing policies usually must involve the Student Senate Consultative Committee.
Considering and addressing issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion is a critical aspect of the policy process. In recent years, the process was expanded to include what is known as the Equity Lens: policy owners are encouraged to consider their policies’ impact on different groups, especially those that are typically underrepresented. As part of this effort, a subcommittee of the Diversity Community of Practice reviews all new policies and those undergoing substantial revision, and many discussions of the Policy Advisory Committee center around equity, as well. Equity issues also often take place organically during University Senate committee meetings—for example, the Senate Committee on Educational Policy has frequently discussed equity as it relates to the academic calendar and religious holidays. Recently, the committee suggested some small changes to the Administrative Policy: Academic Calendars in an effort to detangle the academic year from the Christian calendar, such as changing the “hard end date” for the fall semester from December 23rd to a number of days after the start of the semester.
PAC Review and PPC Approval
Once a draft is relatively final, the policy owner is invited to a meeting of the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) to present the policy. In the case of existing policies, the PAC decides whether changes are significant enough to warrant review by the President’s Policy Committee (PPC). If yes, the policy owner will be invited to a meeting of that body. If not, the policy can be published to the University Policy Library website without going to the PPC. The PPC must review and approve all new policies.
30-Day Comment Period
If the PPC deems it necessary, the policy undergoes a 30-day public comment period. During this period, the policy is posted on the homepage of the Policy Library website, listed under “Policies under Review,” and an announcement is posted in the Brief notifying the community of the opportunity to review and provide feedback.
Publication
Provided no major issues come out of the 30-day public comment period, the policy can be published at the owner’s discretion. Sometimes, implementation is delayed to coincide with the beginning of a new semester or for other logistical reasons. The community’s ability to comment doesn’t end with publication, though—anyone can submit feedback via a comment form located at the bottom of every policy on the University Policy Library website. Feedback may be entered anonymously and can be provided at any time, not only during the 30-day comment period or comprehensive review—and policy owners receive each and every comment.
The University is committed to a thorough and inclusive policy review and development process. Feedback from students, faculty, and staff—including you!—is an important part of that process. To stay informed as policies make their way through the process, watch for the Policy Program’s quarterly newsletter, announcements about policy in the Brief or on the MyU homepage, or simply visit the Policy Program website to see what’s new. In addition, senate and committee meetings are generally open, and members of the University community are welcome to attend to listen to any conversations that interest them. The University Senate website contains information on major topics that will be discussed at upcoming meetings, as well as a senate/committee meeting calendar. You can also sign up to receive minutes from University Senate committees and senates. Finally, consider applying for a committee or running for a senate. You need not be a senator to serve on a committee, or vice versa.
You have a unique opportunity to have a say in how your employer runs the business, so to speak—so get involved and use your voice!
University/Faculty Senate Meeting Recaps
November 7, 2019 Meeting
The meeting began with President Joan T.A. Gabel’s official introduction to the senate, and included approval of revisions to the Administrative Policy: Faculty Development Leaves and a spirited discussion about proposed changes to the Twin Cities liberal education requirements. Proponents of Plan A, which would disallow “double dipping” (now called double certification), pointed to the University’s role in producing informed, well-rounded citizens, as well as concerns about equity related to double certification. Proponents of plan D, which would allow double certification, cited concerns about four-year graduation, especially in engineering fields, and diminished opportunity for experiences such as double majoring, language study, and study abroad.
December 5, 2019 Meeting
Following a brief, routine meeting of the University and Faculty Senates, the Twin Cities Delegation of the Faculty Senate met to discuss and take action on the proposed revisions to the liberal education curriculum. Prior to the meeting, a number of stakeholder groups, including the College of Liberal Arts Assembly and the Student Senate Consultative Committee, submitted position statements on the proposed changes. A lively debate ensued, followed by a flurry of motions to postpone the vote, amend the plans, or dispense with them all together. Parliamentarian Mitch Zamoff proved invaluable, assisting the president in navigating Robert's Rules of Order amid a complicated web of motions and amendments. In the end, the body voted against both Plan A and Plan D. Senators expressed deep appreciation for the work of the Liberal Education Redesign Committee (LERC) in bringing the conversation this far, but felt there was more work to be done. An item was raised under new business, asking the administration to continue the process, building on the work of the LERC and engaging in an iterative revision process based on feedback from the community, including increased consultation with students. This matter was referred to committee, but senators appeared generally supportive of this suggestion. The president thanked all those in attendance for their engagement in the conversation. Left: Faculty Senator Michael Minta makes a statement from the floor.