Duluth representative Eric Gustafson summarized activities occurring at UMD, including preparation for Lobby Day, development of a World Wide Web page, a food drive, and discussions concerning the semester conversion.

Morris representative Heather Aagesen reported that the MCSA has also been discussing semester conversion issues and the proposed technology fee that may be instated.

GAPSA representative Bruce Bromerek reported that GAPSA is in the process of establishing the membership of and organizing the Academic Health Center Provostal Student Consultative Committee. It has also begun a dialogue with Governor Carlson regarding support for the University's biennial budget request and working closely with UMCHE in developing the student legislative agenda for the upcoming year.

The final report was provided by MSA representative Jesse Berglund. MSA, he said, has been discussing the tenure and faculty unionization issues and their potential effects on students and the University in general. Discussions culminated in the development of resolutions on both issues. MSA is also working on lobbying efforts and identifying individuals for legislative internships for this year.

Next, Sean Ohmswinnie presented the 1997 Federal Legislative Agenda which was distributed to all student senators. U of M representatives will be traveling to Washington, D.C., in March, he said, to lobby for those items in the proposed agenda. They include: 1) rejecting any Congressional efforts to cut funding of the Federal Student Loan Program; 2) encouraging competition between direct lending and GSL programs; 3) urging Congress to pass legislation which would use tax incentives to increase the overall amount of financial aid available to students; 4) supporting the restoration of the tax deduction for interest paid on student loans; 5) supporting the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act; 6) urging Congress to address the inconsistencies in federal policies concerning Federal Work Study; 7) rejecting current attempts to eliminate or cut back federal funding for Harris and Javits graduate fellowships; 8) supporting all University and Federal efforts to provide safe and affordable child care to all students; 9) rejecting all forms of "Gag Rule" legislation; and 10) supporting Pell Grant funding.

A motion to approve the UMCHE Legislative Agenda was approved on a voice vote by a majority of members present and voting.

APPROVED

To approve the following Resolution:

WHEREAS the ability of students to access summary data of quarterly student evaluations would assist in course registration process, would provide a great service to students and would hold faculty more accountable to students;

WHEREAS the Carlson School of Management currently allows student access to faculty evaluations and provides faculty with the option of making their evaluations public in accordance with the Minnesota Data Practices Act; and

WHEREAS eight of the University's Big Ten peers currently allows student access to faculty evaluations;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the University of Minnesota Student Senate supports student access to the summary data of student evaluations of faculty and urge faculty, administration and the regents to provide a means for this student benefit;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Student Senate urges all collegiate units of the University of Minnesota release the summary data of said evaluations for student review, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT one year after implementation of this policy, the administration should report to the Regents detailing the results of the policy and addressing what other measures could be taken by the University to more effectively and efficiently make evaluations available to students.

DISCUSSION:

SSCC Chair Rob Vanasek introduced the Resolution and provided a brief history concerning the rationale for its creation and explained that if approved by the Student Senate, the Resolution would be forwarded to the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP) for further consideration.

One senator asked for clarification of the term 'summary data' and expressed concern that passage of the Resolution would only lead to an increase in the micromanagement of the University by the public. In response to the senator's question about summary data, Senator Donovan replied that the SCEP is already addressing that issue.

Other student senators argued in favor of the Resolution noting that faculty have the option to release evaluations. Because of Minnesota's Data Privacy Act, however, releasing the data cannot be mandated. Currently, the Carlson School of Management has in place a policy in which faculty can make their evaluations public and most voluntarily participate. The program has been enthusiastically received by both faculty and students, reported students from that college.

Others expressed concern with the language in the first "Be it further resolved" clause in which the evaluations would be released for "public" review, suggesting it opens the door for further public scrutiny. If the purpose of publishing the evalutions is to assist students in making decisions about course registration, the phrase should be changed to read: ". . . for student review . . ." A motion to that effect was then made.

A motion to suspend the rules to consider the amendment was approved 32 to 11 and the motion to amend the Resolution as indicated was approved 30 to 10.

The Resolution, as amended, was then unanimously approved 41 to 0.

APPROVED

To endorse the following Policy Statement Against Sexual Assault:

Sexual assault is a criminal act defined by Minnesota State Law for Criminal Sexual Conduct (Statutes I. 609.342s-1; II. 609.343; III. 609.344s-1; IV. 609.345s-1; V. 609.3451) as sexual contact achieved

• without consent, or
• with use of physical force, coercion, deception, threat, and/or
• the victim is
  • mentally incapacitated or impaired,
  • physically impaired (due to alcohol or drug consumption),
  • asleep or unconscious.

The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that violence of all forms is prohibited at this University. Violence is defined as including but not limited to physical assaults and bias-motivated actions based on gender, race, sexual orientation, or disability. Sexual violence, including sexual assault, is an attack not only on a person's body but also on their dignity and will not be tolerated.

The University's commitment to a community free from violence and sexual assault includes the following:

• The University commits itself to providing a variety of educational programs and services to all members in the University community. As an educational institution we must not neglect the importance of education as it pertains to sexual violence;

• The University shall provide an array of services to both the survivors and the offenders of sexual assault. The University's responsibility in relation to sexual assault includes but is not limited to the adjudication process. The survivor, the accused, and the community all have needs that must be addressed;

• The University recognizes that the decision to report a sexual assault of any member of the University community by another member of the University community rests with the survivor (the person who was assaulted). Because reporting is the only way that action can be taken against an alleged attacker, however, the University strongly encourages the reporting of sexual assaults to appropriate officials;

• As a University and as a community, we strive to ensure the safety and respect the dignity of each student, staff, or faculty member. The commitment of the entire University community to this policy contributes to our goal of creating a campus free from sexual violence;

• The University will provide an appropriate judicial process that is sensitive, supportive, fair, expedient, and respectful of the individual needs and rights of all involved. This process will allow for interim measures to be taken when necessary to ensure the well-being of the survivor, the accused, and/or the witnesses. This process will not be prejudiced by any actions that may be taken in the criminal or civil courts at the county, state, or federal level;

• The University will act promptly and appropriately in cases where the judicial process discussed in the previous paragraph has found the accused party or parties guilty of sexual assault.

DISCUSSION:

Senator Mary Jane Sommerville introduced the Policy Statement and provided a brief background and history of the document, noting that such a policy is required by Federal law for institutions of higher education. Currently, the University of Minnesota has no such policy. She introduced Associate Vice President Jane Canney and Ms. Jamie Tiedemann, who elaborated further on the policy statement. Dr. Canney noted that the policy does not address sexual harassment and that another document was being drawn up to address that issue.

With no discussion, the Policy Statement Against Sexual Violence was approved by a majority of members present and voting.

APPROVED

WHEREAS shared governance is important to all parties, and

WHEREAS this new system of labor governance could effectively dismantle the authority and effectiveness of the University Senate, and

WHEREAS the University Senate is the primary governance structure for both faculty and students, and

WHEREAS there has been no guarantee of students having a voice in the proposals for a faculty union, thereby hindering student representation of University issues and policy, and

WHEREAS depriving students of University representation will silence some of the faculty's strongest supporters, and

WHEREAS students are concerned about possible tuition increases and strikes brought about by a union;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the University of Minnesota Student Senate requests faculty to vote down the University Faculty Alliance's proposed unionization.

DISCUSSION:

A senator called for a motion to suspend the rules to consider the above Resolution.

The motion to suspend was approved 33 to 3.

Senator Corey Donovan then introduced and reviewed the Resolution. Students, he said, are extremely concerned about the future of the University Senate and the concept of shared governance should the faculty unionize. The Clerk of the Senate explained that if the faculty elect to unionize, the University Senate in all likelihood will be modified but not dismantled. Matters concerning conditions of faculty employment, which are currently addressed by the Faculty Senate, would be bargained for through the union. Other matters affecting the University, such as educational policy issues, would continue to be addressed by the Senate. How a Senate would be constructed would also become a negotiable item with the union.

Another senator said he did not feel it was appropriate to vote on the Resolution until more information was provided. The Resolution appears to be one-sided and while it is easily supported emotionally, there has been no opportunity to hear all sides of the debate. He suggested the proposal be sent to committee for further consideration.

A motion to refer the Resolution to the Student Senate Consultative Committee for consideration failed by an overwhelming majority.

A member of MSA reported that MSA had reviewed the Resolution and approved it by a large majority.

At this time, the Resolution as presented was approved 14 to 10 with 11 abstentions.

APPROVED

In other new business, students were reminded that the presidential candidates would be on campus December 9-11 and were encouraged to attend the various forums.

Martha Kvanbeck
Abstractor