The second meeting of the Student Senate for 1997-98 was convened in 25 Law Building, Minneapolis campus, on Thursday, February 19, 1998, at 11:45 a.m. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 45 voting student members and 3 non-members. Mr. Jesse Berglund, Student Senate Chair, presided.

A motion to reorder the agenda was moved, seconded, and approved.

APPROVED

APPROVED

Mr. Berglund reminded senators that the University Senate meeting begins at 2:00 and encouraged students to attend. He particularly noted the importance of student participation on the student evaluations of teaching item, which is on the agenda for action.

[Proposed new language is underlined and language to be deleted is struck out]

ARTICLE III. SENATE COMMITTEES

2. COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES

The Senate Committee on Committees appoints members of certain committees of the Senate and advises the Senate Consultative Committee on the committee structure of the Senate. The faculty/academic professional representatives shall serve as the Faculty Senate Committee on committees and the student representatives shall serve as the Student Senate Committee on Committees.

Membership

The Committee on Committees shall be composed of 9 elected faculty/academic professional members, 6 elected undergraduate students, and one Twin Cities graduate/professional student. The chair of the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees shall serve as the chair of the Senate Committee on Committees.

Of the faculty/academic professional members, 6 shall be from the Twin Cities campus, and one member each from the Crookston, Duluth, and Morris campuses, all elected for three-year terms by the faculty/academic professional members of the Senate from these respective campuses. Faculty/academic professional members must have served as senators within the last five years.

Of the undergraduate student members, 3 shall be elected from the Twin Cities campus, and one each from the Crookston, Duluth, and Morris campuses, all elected by the undergraduate Student Senate members from these campuses the respective campuses from among their number. The Twin Cities graduate/professional student shall be elected by the graduate and professional Student Senate members from among their number. of the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly. Elections shall be held during the spring quarter. Terms of membership shall be for one-year terms. Any undergraduate student committee position that cannot be filled by October 31 will become at-large positions and can be filled by an undergraduate student from any campus may be filled by the Student Senate Consultative Committee on an interim basis until the next general election. Any graduate/professional student committee positions that cannot be filled by October 31 will become at-large positions and can be filled by any graduate or professional student.

The chair shall be elected by committee members from among their number for a one-year term of office. The chair is eligible for re-election to that position.

Duties and Responsibilities

a. To forward annually to the Senate for approval names of faculty members, academic professionals, undergraduate students, graduate/professional students, and chairs it recommends for appointment to those committees of the Senate specified in the Bylaws of the Senate. The committee shall give consideration to 1) representation from the various campuses and units when appropriate; 2) the number of committees on which the faculty/academic professional, undergraduate student or graduate/professional student member currently is serving; 3) the principle of rotation of committee assignments; 4) the recommendations of the respective committee chairs, faculty, academic professional, undergraduate student and graduate/professional student members; and 5) expressions of interest in committee service offered by faculty, academic professionals, undergraduate students and graduate/professional students. In addition, the committee shall select senators for committee membership when appropriate to encourage communication between the Senate and its committees. The committee also shall strive to assure full and adequate representation by race, sex, and academic rank in constituting committees.

b. To review annually the committees of the Senate and recommend to the Senate Consultative Committee any changes in committee structure, charge, or membership which it deems appropriate.

c. To submit an annual report to the Senate.

FACULTY SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES

The Faculty Senate Committee on Committees shall elect its chair from amongst its members for a one-year term of office. The chair is eligible for re-election to that position. The chair shall also serve as the chair of the Senate Committee on Committees.

Duties and Responsibilities

a. Faculty/academic professional members shall To furnish the full committee a slate of faculty/academic professional committee nominees, and student members shall furnish the full committee a slate of student nominees, for review and recommendations.

b. To solicit annually from each newly elected faculty/academic professional member of the Senate a list of Senate committees on which the senator is serving or has an interest in serving.

c. To conduct a survey, at least every three years, of faculty/academic professional interest in serving on committees of the Senate and make a summary of this study available to the Senate.

d. To request annually from deans, directors, and department heads a list of faculty/academic professional members who they believe have the requisite interest and experience to serve on specific committees.

e. To select an additional voting representative from a non-eligible constituency of the University for placement on the appropriate committee for a term of one year, if the Senate Consultative Committee determines that a committee of the Senate will benefit from such representation.

g. To recommend to the Student Senate Committee on Committees and the Senate Consultative Committee such actions or policies as it deems appropriate.

STUDENT SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES

The Student Senate Committee on Committees shall elect its chair from amongst its members for a one-year term of office. The chair shall be eligible for re-election to that position.

Duties and Responsibilities

a. To furnish the full committee a slate of student committee nominees for review and recommendations. Consideration shall be given to 1) representation from the various campuses and units when appropriate; 2) the number of committees on which the undergraduate student or graduate/professional student member currently is serving; 3) the recommendations of the respective committee chairs, faculty, academic professional, undergraduate student and graduate/professional student members, and the presidents of the respective student associations; and 4) expressions of interest in committee service offered by undergraduate students and graduate/professional students. In addition, the committee shall select student senators for committee membership when appropriate to encourage communication between the Student Senate and the committees and shall strive to assure full and adequate representation by race, gender, and class rank in constituting committees.

b. To solicit annually from each newly elected member of the Student Senate a list of Senate committees on which the senator is serving or has an interest in serving.

c. To request annually from student association presidents a list of students whom they believe have the requisite interest and experience to serve on specific committees.

d. To recommend to the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees and the Senate Consultative Committee such actions or policies as it deems appropriate.

e. To submit to the Clerk of the Senate an annual budget request for the Student Committee on Committees.

DISCUSSION:

Mr. Kevin Nicholson, chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC), led the discussion on this item. He explained that last year the SSCC submitted a proposal to the Committee on Committees (ConC) to have the SSCC representatives assume the duties and responsibilities of the Student Committee on Committees, with the thought in mind that combining them would bring greater efficiency and effectiveness to student government. The Faculty Committee on Committees and some students, however, did not believe this to be a prudent approach for the students to take. They did not believe the executive committee of the Student Senate should also be the appointing authority for student appointments to committees. After considerable discussion, the above language was agreed upon. The motion, Mr. Nicholson said, maintains the separateness of the SSCC and ConC and establishes a mechanism for filling positions that cannot be filled through the electoral process. He then opened the floor for discussion.

It was suggested that the language be amended to clarify the election process and whether students at-large may fill the interm appointments or whether they must be Student Senate members. Mr. Nicholson responded that positions that cannot be filled by Ocober 31 would become Student Senate at-large positions.

Does approval of the amendments mean that the faculty and student members of the ConC will be meeting separately? Mr. Nicholson replied that that is the current practice. The faculty and student committees meet separately to fill their respective committee vacancies and then meet jointly to ratify their nominations and to discuss any policy issues that arise. The proposed amendments more accurately reflect the current operation of the committee.

Student Regent Jessica Phillips thanked the students for the opportunity to join their meeting. She said she was a student at the Morris campus and graduated last spring. Her term on the Board of Regents is 1995-2001. Currently there are 12 Board members, 8 represent congressional districts and 4 hold at-large positions, one of which is for a student. The Legislature has discussed revising the selection process, but for now the student seat has been retained. This is due in part to strong student support.

Key issues currently before the Board are the capital request, which includes money for renovation of existing buildings and new buildings and preserves the Mall area as a historic district. The request also includes money for a new math science building at Morris, a library at Duluth, and new housing for existing programs at Crookston. The supplemental request of $41.5 million includes $13 million for recurring salary increases for faculty and staff, $15 million in non-recurring funds for faculty setup and equipment, $4.5 million in non-recurring funds for classroom improvements, and $9 million in recurring funds for academic program initiatives.

The Board is also looking at student housing and has identified an area on the South Mall for a new dormitory. Committees have been created to work on a concrete plan for this project. They involve students, faculty, and members of the Minneapolis City Council. The Board hopes to have the building completed by Fall 1999 or Winter 2000. Additional housing is needed, especially for freshmen. The University will continue to guarantee housing for freshmen students if they apply before May 15.

The floor was then opened for questions.

Q: Will you stay involved after your term expires in 2001?

A: Yes. I will stay active as a Morris alumni, but I will not run again for the student Regent seat. I believe there needs to be turnover in that position.

Q: There are several builders who have submitted requests to develop low-cost student housing in the immediate vicinity of the University. The number of units that are planned meet or exceed the University's requirements through 2010. Since these are already scheduled to be built, why build more dormitories? Funds will have to be raised through tuition or by seeking more money from the Legislature, and we know that the Legislature has not traditionally been in support of funding maintenance for dormitories.

A: The University needs to know who the private housing is being built for. Another dormitory should not be built on campus just for the sake of having a dormitory, however, the University needs to have adequate housing for its students. It is very important that students be involved in the planning process to ensure that the University is meeting their needs.

Q: The Senateís Social Concerns Committee has been discussing a request from the Minnesota Free Burma Coalition to recommend to the Regents that the University divest its stock from Total Oil because of Burma's practice of using slave labor on pipe line projects. Has this issue been discussed by the Regents and has the Board discussed adopting a coherent policy on guidelines for divestments?

A: The Board understands this issue is under discussion in the Social Concerns Committee and believes it is important that it continue through the appropriate channels before a resolution is brought to the Board. Currently, there is not a Regents policy on divestments.

Mr. Berglund thanked Regent Phillips for meeting with the Student Senate and said he hoped she would be willing to join students at a future meeting.

Senator Maier, chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Review, reported that the Subcommittee has met twice. At the second meeting, issues and parameters were discussed and a draft mission statement was started. The mission statement will be coordinated with Professor Fred Morrison, the Senate Parliamentarian, and will be presented to the Student Senate for ratification. Currently there are 7 members, as well as several ex officio members from the Student Senate Consultative Committee. If other students are interested, there are opportunities for more members. The Subcommittee does not intend to revise the whole Constitution, Bylaws and Rules, but expects to clarify some of the questions that have been raised by students during the past few years. Thus far, the Subcommittee has found few areas that need clarification.

One senator asked whether the Subcommittee is looking at changing the voting rules for coordinate campus members? Senator Maier replied that the Subcommittee is focusing on ëclarificationí issues and does not intend to revise the constitution or develop new rules.

Senator Cheryl Jorgensen, president of the Student Legislative Coalition (SLC), provided a brief update of SLC activities. SLC has focused its activities in three areas. First, it has supported the full $249 million capital request and $41.5 million supplemental request with no prioritization. Second, SLC recently approved a resolution to support decoupling the Pell Grant from the State Grant System. If decoupling occurs, students will see an increase in their Pell Grant money without losing any from their State Grant. Third, SLC is working hard to try to keep the student Regent seat.

Ms. Jorgensen concluded by thanking those who attended the Student Lobby Day rally.

Abby Flottemesch, the Duluth Student Body President, reported that 1) the student service fee request at Duluth was not approved after a lengthy debate, 2) a task force has been formed to work with the union on the release of student evaluations of teaching, and 3) the task force that was created this year to improve the relationship between the campus and the surrounding community is moving forward.

Mark Erickson, Student Body President at Crookston, reported that they are working on their student fees proposal. Lobby days were also held last weekend in Minneapolis and there was good student turnout.

Heather Aagesen, Senate Vice Chair from Morris, reported on the opening of a dance club at UMM. The second dance is scheduled for this weekend. Students have also been reviewing how the technology fees money will be allocated and are involved with the Chancellor search. Four candidates have visited the campus thus far. The lobby day effort was also a very positive experience for Morris students.

There was no report from GAPSA.

Kevin Nicholson, provided the MSA report by saying that the fees process is progressing and the Senate resolution on student evaluations of teaching was recently endorsed. There has also been a change to the all-campus elections. A new at-large member has been elected to MSA.

Mr. Berglund reported that the Academic Affairs Committee of MSA and the Senate Student Affairs Committee are reviewing academic advising and he thanked Senators Ylikopsa and Roos for their work on this issue. Last spring, their was a student initiative to increase student study space on the Twin Cities Campus and in response Vice President JoAnne Jackson reallocated space in the Management/Economics Building for this purpose. Mr. Berglund expressed appreciation to her for her assistance to students during her tenure at the University and wished her well in Alabama. Last, he said that students should be concerned about tuition increases and should challenge the administration on this issue.

MOTION:

To endorse the motion on Student Evaluations of Teaching.

DISCUSSION:

Mr. Berglund introduced Dr. Darwin Hendel from the Office of Planning and Analysis and Tina Rovick, a graduate student and member of the Senate Committee on Educational Policy (SCEP) Subcommittee charged with review of this issue. He told senators that while the item is on the agenda for action, amendments are not in order at this time; they need to be proposed at the Senate meeting.

Dr. Hendel said that in response to a request from students, SCEP appointed a subcommittee, which he chaired, to study the question of student access to the student evaluations of teaching. The outcome of the process was the development of a set of 10 questions that will be known as Student Release Questions (SR). The Office of Measurement Services will process the results and provide an example of the new form. The 10 questions will be included on all student evaluation of teaching forms.

A UMD senator said he found the proposed questions to be ambiguous and very similar to those already found on the forms. They also do not allow for elaboration, he said. Dr. Hendel replied that the proposed questions may be similar to those found on the UMD evaluation form because the current questions vary from campus to campus.

A GAPSA senator noted that the wording of the questions could produce an answer between yes or no, but there is no place to record that. Dr. Hendel said that the proposed format was decided upon because it distinguishes these questions from the current questions. Additional feedback may not be necessary for other students to review, although it may be more appropriate for the instructor. This issue will be further considered as the implementation process proceeds.

Another senator asked why it was necessary for SCEP to be delegated authority to make editorial changes. Mr. Nicholson said that SCEP would like to be able to correct grammatical or other minor errors without having to go back to the Senate.

The motion gives faculty the option to release only the information they choose which could be very misleading, noted one person. Therefore, faculty should be required to release all information if they decide to release any information at all. Dr. Hendel said the intent is that if a faculty member decides to release information, all ten questions on the SR form will be released.

Another student commented that the questions are not meant to determine if the instructor is good or bad but to learn about the instructorís teaching style.

A question was also raised concerning whether a faculty member would be able to release the cumulative results of some, but not all, of the classes he/she taught in a particular quarter. If this is the case, an instructor could tailor the student perception of his/her performance in the classroom. Dr. Hendel said the questions are intended to provide information that is course specific. The system is built on mutuality between students and faculty because students want to make more informed decisions about the classes they take, and faculty have responded to that request by assisting in the creation of these questions.

Mr. Nicholson added that the release form includes a disclaimer that the entire SR form will be released upon signature. Procedural issues such as combining courses to produce cumulative results will be considered at a later date. Dr. Hendel said that the implementation process will include an opportunity for students and faculty to collectively develop a system that addresses the needs of the students and also considers faculty concerns.

"Will the questions appear on the spring quarter evaluation forms or will they undergo further revisions?" inquired a senator. Dr. Hendel replied that, if approved by the Senate at its meeting later in the day and then by the Administration, it is expected that the new forms will be available for use spring quarter.

Will SCEP present changes to the University Senate for approval or will they simply report the changes they have made? Dr. Hendel said the changes made by SCEP will be minor and will only be reported to the Senate for information.

A member of SCEP added that the intent of giving SCEP the authority to edit the questions was to facilitate the process in the future and to make the revising process more efficient. He added that there has been strong student support throughout the entire process and it is impossible to eliminate the tailoring of results because of the Minnesota Data Practices Act.

With no further discussion, the motion was overwhelmingly approved.

APPROVED

Mr. Nicholson reported that President Yudof recently attended a Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) meeting where he asked SSCC to consider e-mail activation and transportation and parking issues. SSCC has followed up on both issues by meeting with Computer Services and the Facilities Management Subcommittee. Mr. Nicholson will be reporting the results of those meetings to the President.

SSCC has also initiated plans to visit each of the coordinate campuses spring quarter.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:15 p.m.

Martha Kvanbeck
Clerk of the Senate