FACULTY SENATE PRÉCIS

SEPT. 11 and 13, 2007

12:15 p.m.-1:50 p.m., Auerbach 426

Tuesday, September 8, 2007

Attendance:

A	Ball, Kevin A.	P	Fang, Clara	P	Padberg, Carol
A	Beaulieu, Mark	P	Gray, Edward	P	Petry, Elizabeth
P	Borucinska, Joanna	P	Gray, John	P	Russell, Ingrid
P	Canedy, Charles	A	Lei, Yu	P	Shepela, Sharon
P	Carey, Elen	P	Mayer, Howard	P	Siegel, Paul
P	Comiskey, Anne	P	McMiller, Darryl	P	Sumukadas, Narender
A	Davis, Robert	P	Mohamed, Osama	P	Weinholtz, Donn
P	Decker, Robert	P	Mori, Akane	A	Westfall, David
P	Diehl, Susan	P	Nolan, Dennis	P	Williamson, Daniel
Guest	Stewart, Jay	P	Oliver, Peter	=	Present/Absent Attendance: 84% (26 out of 31)

Chair Weinholtz welcomed Senators to the first meeting of the 2007-2008 Senate, followed by having the Faculty Senate individually introduce themselves, and especially welcoming the new Senators.

The Faculty Senate Annual Report 2006-2007 was shared with each of the Senators. Chair Weinholtz explained that the undertaking was both last year’s Faculty Senate Chair Jerry Katrichis’ and his own. He pointed out the goals, and specifically, working with the Staff Association. He said that Maria Marques has joined as an active member. The Senate will have a presentation from the president of the Staff Association to the Senate at a later meeting.

Chair Weinholtz continued with the request for faculty members to participate in University committees.

He offered the Senators the option of having a non-senator faculty member from their college replace them in a Faculty Senate committee to increase involvement and to lessen the load on the Senator.

President Harrison gave an overview with updates of his remarks made at the Faculty/Staff Kickoff

August 29, 2007 (http://www.hartford.edu/daily/news.asp?id=3263).

As was previously announced to the Senate, President Harrison meets with the Faculty Senate Officers every five/six weeks to discuss issues of concern to the University, and to faculty in particular. The President said that he enjoys the relationship and looks forward to a productive year. He credited the Faculty Senate Officers for suggesting the presentation of the goals to the Regents. He said the goals raise reasonable expectations, and the report is worthwhile doing again this year. He said his own goals, in some areas, mesh with the goals of the Faculty Senate.

Provost Search. President Harrison commented that he was pleased that Joe Voelker agreed to serve as Interim Provost. The President has announced the Search Committee for University Provost .He has said that selecting the chief academic officer is one of the most important tasks for a University community. The twelve people who will join him on the search committee are seven faculty members, two officers, two students, and a regent. He expects the committee will arrive at a short list by February, and by March be able to make an offer. There will be several opportunities for faculty who are interested to help frame the search criteria and interview the finalists.

The President spoke of the Strategic Committee’s plans that he outlined at the Faculty/Staff Kickoff on August 29. He expects an intense year of planning from the committee, which is made up of regents, faculty, and administrators, and will be working to develop a five-year strategic plan. Last year the Committee invited visitors from outside the University to speak about important challenges and opportunities facing higher education, and this year we hope to develop a plan with those challenges and opportunities in mind. “To that end, we will be forming subcommittees to look at some the most important areas of concentration. We will also be asking volunteers to join us on those subcommittees, so look for an announcement of those opportunities within the next month,” President Harrison said. Areas of concentration he said would be the following:

• Students: Here we should consider the demographic shifts we face; the range and characteristics of students we recruit on both the undergraduate and graduate levels; the quality of student life both on and off campus; the sense of community we build among students; and student retention.

• Intellectual resources and the faculty: How do we attract and support a faculty and staff that delivers the first-rate educational experience we pride ourselves on? What is the appropriate mix of full-time and contingent faculty for the wide mix of undergraduate programs we offer? If we intend, as I believe we do, to strengthen further the array of graduate programs we offer, how do we support them with faculty and research resources?

• Financial resources: We should plan carefully for providing the resources necessary to support the quality of education and other programs we offer. Here I would look at tuition, room and board rates; fundraising; and developing alternative and non-traditional sources of revenue. We should also be sure we appropriately budget within our means to offer the wide array of programs we have.

• The residential campus and beyond: How do we plan for continuous improvement of our campus to support the array of educational and other programs we offer? How do we support those programs with physical facilities, information resources, and an attractive campus? How do we ensure a commitment to sustaining our environment and its resources?

He reminded the Senators that the Committee will be asking for their help as they proceed in this planning process.

President Harrison also discussed fundraising. The challenge, he said, is to put more focus on fundraising. A small committee of Regents have been working with the President and with Mr. Rizzo to help figure out how to complete some of the project that we have started, i.e., the Handel Performing Arts Center. Also, how do we develop fundraising for academic programs (endowments). “We have raised around $157 million in the time that I have been here, but a large percentage went to capital (buildings), because we needed them.” Financially, the President said we had a very good year. We finished, pending the auditor’s review of the financial statement, with a $4 million surplus. This is the 10^th year in a row that the University has experienced a surplus, of which the President said he is very proud. Most of that has been put away for a “rainy day” fund. The President suggested that $2 million of the four be used to a set up a reserve fund focused on the apartment that we have pledged students will lease. The University committed to filling 136 spaces for nine (9) years in the downtown SageAllen project. The University capped the exposure at $2 million. This is at the suggestion of the auditors. At this time there are only 88 spaces filled. He believes during the course of the year it will fill up.

He also suggested that $1 million be put aside for re-doing the exterior of Regent’s Park, the largest of the residential halls. He described it as needing a new roof, new windows, and it will probably take two summers to complete.

On a very proud note, President Harrison invited the Senators to visit Hawks Hall, and the Alumni Plaza.

The President announced actualizing of the proposal from the Diversity Task Force that Katherine Black chairs to fund two doctoral scholarships. The first will be filled this year and will offer the recipient, among other things, an intellectual home, the opportunity to enrich our community and the opportunity to finish his/her graduate work. Hopefully, these fellows will like it here and decide to stay. It will be open across all disciplines. Faculty Senate has an electronic copy of the Committee’s report and will share it with the entire Senate via e-mail.

Interim Provost Joe Voelker spoke of the common theme on the presentation made to the University Education Committee of the Regents; a report by Vice President for Student Affairs, Dr. Peters and residential life staff, as well as Professor J. Brown on the Preceptor Program, which is designed to help with retention of students from the first year to the second. The Interim Provost also said the freshman class came in with an enthusiasm that he had not seen before in his previous four years.

He listed the following initiatives where there has been a financial investment this year:

1. The Academic Technology Committee. Improvement of general purpose classrooms, to provide additional smart classrooms, and to make them uniform so that faculty does not need to learn a different technology for each class.
2. Discipline Specific Initiatives – The faculty will be invited to propose other uses of technology that do not fit the generic classroom.
3. Emerging technologies – Katherine Black will be trying to involve faculty members who would like to pioneer cutting-edge initiatives. These will be through grants as well.

The Deans held an all day retreat during the summer to discuss initiatives that would eventuate in globalizing our students’ awareness. Interim Provost Voelker thought it went very well. The speaker was Michael Geisler, (http://www.middlebury.edu/about/pubaff/news_releases/2007/pubaff_633205459226601622.htm) the Dean of the Language School at Middlebury College. He brought a wealth of expertise and experience. The dialogue was informative concerning increased competitiveness in study abroad. The Deans look forward to working with the Faculty Senate’s International Committee.

A University Regent is interested in the field of complexity, the area where order and chaos meet. Mr. J.P.Van Rooy has been a great reader and has applied complexity theory to business and been very successful. He is interested in supporting an effort that would start modestly, perhaps a faculty reading group, and over the years evolve into something greater. To begin this year, this might involve inviting an author who is an expert in this field. It is richly interdisciplinary, and a great opportunity for intellectual engagement across colleges.

In this incoming faculty class, unfortunately diversity is not richly represented, although we have a new African-American faculty member in the History Department, who is here at this point in a visiting position.

The following Faculty Senate Committees reported:

1. Academic Standards – Senator Petry reminded the Senate that discussion of the changes proposed by the Academic Standards Committee on the academic dishonesty policy have been tabled.

2. Bent/Larson/Trachtenberg – Senator Russell informed the Senate of the “call for nominations” release date: September 29. Submissions are due in the Faculty Senate office on February 1, 2008.

3. Curriculum Committee – Faculty Senate Chair/Curriculum Interim Chair Weinholtz presented a verbal report of the September Curriculum Committee. After reviewing submissions, the Committee decided changes were so minor and did not need Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee review or approval. http://uhaweb.hartford.edu/facsenate. He will be working with the Committee to make the procedures uniform, and comprehendible.

4. Development – Chair E. Gray introduced Vice President for Institutional Development, Don Rizzo. He is working with Mr. Rizzo on a brochure that features faculty, the first features Senator Canedy.

5. Professional Standards –Senator Shepela informed the Senate that the revision of the FPM section 3.5 regarding a faculty employee reporting to a relative, which was previously voted by the Senate had been discussed at the Deans/Faculty Joint Committee. The new wording suggested by the Deans/Faculty Joint Committee was approved by the Senate with the addition of the sentence—“The appropriate officer (i.e., President, Vice President or Provost) must be immediately notified of any change in this reporting structure.”

6. Student Affairs – Chair Oliver and the Committee will work for follow-up on last year’s faculty service issues.

7. Orders of the Day – meeting adjourned at 1:50 p.m. until Thursday, September 13.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Attendance:

P	Ball, Kevin A.	P	Fang, Clara	P	Patterson, Jeremiah
A	Beaulieu, Mark	P	Gray, Edward	A	Petry, Elizabeth
A	Borucinska, Joanna	P	Gray, John	A	Russell, Ingrid
P	Brown, Jennifer	P	Lei, Yu	P	Shepela, Sharon
A	Canedy, Charles	P	Machuga, Susan	P	Siegel, Paul
A	Carey, Elen	A	Mayer, Howard	P	Sumukadas, Narender
P	Comiskey, Anne	P	McMiller, Darryl	P	Weinholtz, Donn
P	Davis, Robert	A	Mohamed, Osama	P	Westfall, David
P	Decker, Robert	P	Mori, Akane	A	Williamson, Daniel
P	Diehl, Susan	P	Nolan, Dennis	A	Zimmerman, Christopher
Guest	Stewart, Jay	P	Oliver, Peter	=	Present/Absent Attendance: 68% (21 out of 31)

Chair Weinholtz reconvened the meeting by welcoming the Campus Safety Committee made up of Lee Peters, Vice President for Student Affairs, Lynn Kelly, Director and Professor, A&S School of Communication, Judy Carlson, Director, Public Safety, and Graziano DiCiaula, University Student, residence assistant. This Committee was appointed by the President of the University to think of how we do business and to suggest new ways of doing business if they are needed. Universities throughout the country are setting up similar protocols. This committee is going to platforms like the Faculty Senate, the Staff Association, and others to spread the word to the campus community to seek input into creating systems that can be used in emergencies. Dr. Peters said we will need to set high-tech and low-tech solutions. Dr. Peters spoke of The Situation Management Team, which is made up of people from across campus and has established various communication venues. Currently there is campus e-mail, campus voice-mail, webpage, and cell-phone notification list. Dr. Peters said, an e-mail was issued early September requesting that all students, staff, and faculty register their cell phone numbers with the Committee to create a list to notify in emergencies. The Invisible Network is another support group that Dr. Peters mentioned. That Committee will come to Senate to share their charge and answer questions next month.

Part-Time Faculty update by Professor J. Stewart. Adjunct Pay at UHA & “Competing” Schools

May 2006 vs. September 2007. Topics included The “Competing” Schools, Pay Differences, Benefit Differences and the Consequences for the University of Hartford. Professor Stewart used Capital Community College (& MCC); Central Connecticut State University, University of Connecticut, All have union contracts, now until 2010, Quinnipiac University (Until 2006 had union negotiation), Assoc. Provost: “only realistic comparison,” added St. Joseph College, Comparing basic adjuncts, no contracts, were used as Competing Schools.

Pay Differences were outlined for a 3 Credit Course. Pay Differences with University of Hartford*:
with no teaching experience found benefits to be basically the same. However, consequences for the University were listed as:

nAlienating adjunct faculty who teach nearly 50% of our courses because:

nPay is low

nBenefits are minimal

nNo formal recognition of differences in training or experience

nBut we now have three teaching awards for adjunct faculty members.

nWe are losing some of our best adjunct teachers.

Other Developments

nSpring 2006 Letter to President Harrison

nSuggested that we are losing good teachers.

nRequested a further increase in adjunct pay for the 2006-2007 year

nSigned by 99 tenured or tenure track faculty.

nPresented to President Harrison and Provost Randall at end of Fall 2006 semester.

nThis summer Pres. Harrison stated that the adjunct committee is continuing to meet and address these problems.

Donald Rizzo, Vice President for Institutional Advancement. Institutional Advancement Report to the Board of Regents, for fiscal year 2007. Mr. Rizzo said this is an Exceptionally Successful Year for Advancement partially for the following reasons: You may also see the actual visual presentation at:

nNew programs and practices are taking hold.

nNew staff are building relationships.

nThe silos are nearly down.

nDeans and faculty are engaging.

nAccountability/measurement is established.

nProduction as well as activity levels reached an all-time high.

He listed the following as some significant indicators…

n Total Gifts AND Pledges

n Gifted Cash Received in Fiscal Year

n Unrestricted Gifts

n Trends in Alumni Participation

n Faculty and Staff Giving

n Planned Gifts Received

n Planned Giving Expectancies

n Face-to-Face Donor Visits

n The Cost Per Dollar Continues to Decrease

Next Steps in Strategic Management

§ Focus for first two years: Recruit staff with talent and strong work ethic.

§ Last year: Maximize activity levels and streamline work process.

§ Next year: Work on process refinement and quality.

§ Major Gifts

§ Step One: Are we calling on the right people? Wealth and capacity to give are key. Research will work to “optimize” prospect portfolios.

Step Two: Are we doing the right things in cultivation? Engagement and “ownership” are the key to giving.

§ Cultivation planning, mapping, evaluation, and reporting will be upgraded. Skill development will become a greater focus.

§ Major Gifts

Step Three: Are we converting and closing?

§ Ratios and benchmarking are key to process improvement.

§ Key ratios will be calculated and tracked.

§ Ratio of cultivation calls to solicitation calls

§ Ratio dollars asked to rated dollar capacity

§ Ratio of gift size to size of gift solicited

§ Ratio of successful closings to asks

§ Number of cultivation calls per prospect

§ Frequency of cultivation calls per solicitation

Annual Giving Step One:

§ Are we retaining our existing donors?

§ Donor loyalty leads to donor selection.

§ Strategies will be designed to bring our retention levels to industry standards; the best schools retain 70%+ of their donors from year to year.

§ This is about segmentation, targeting, and messaging.

Step Two: Are we re-acquiring past donors and acquiring new donors?

§ Growing the base of donors against natural attrition is key to growth.

§ Building special strategies to identify affinities, solicitation preferences, and effective cases is also key.

Annual Giving Step Three: Are we moving donors up the giving ladder?

§ Growing revenue with larger gifts—better strategy than more gifts.

§ Designing predictive selection segmentations and targeting.

§ Designing better selection solicitation strategies based upon donor preferences and program differentiation.

§ We will enhance personal calling at the leadership level of the annual giving program.

§ Enhancing stewardship and recognition for the annual giving program.

Institutional Partnerships

§ Are we balancing our desire to serve faculty with our interest in the larger grants? We will:

§ Enhance the skill development and confidence of
faculty to seek fewer, but larger, grants.

§ Engage institutional planning to identify a wider spectrum of corporate and foundation investment opportunities.

§ Expand our outreach to logical faculty and staff collaborators to enhance proposal development.

§ Expand our outreach—personal visits—to staff at prospective and current corporation/foundation
partners.

Advancement Services

§ Our ability to collect, organize, store, and retrieve information is essential to our ability to work.

§ Push forward with “data scrubbing” to prepare
for conversion.

§ Continue to refine the management information reporting inventory.

§ Prepare for streamlined information input and
gift processing.

§ Continue to refine gift stewardship processes
and reporting.

§ Adopt new prospecting and research technologies and techniques to improve targeting and segmentation.

Alumni Relations

§ Our ability to earn the support of alumni and friends is conditioned on our ability to engage them actively with the life of the University. We will:

§ Continue to expand the marketing for the on-line community.

§ Continue to refine and manage the process of
recruiting volunteer talent, especially the Alumni Board.

§ Continue to focus alumni event planning on pockets of more capable alumni donor prospects.

§ Continue to engage alumni staff in closer partnerships with gift officers to optimize cultivation and engagement.

§ Continue to refine the alumni recognition programs such as the Anchor Awards.

Summary

§ This will be a year of qualitative process enhancement target to all relevant variables.

§ Skilled and disciplined staff

§ Effective and efficient processes

§ A compelling and urgent case

§ Capable prospects

§ Good information systems

§ Inspired and inspiring leadership

Vice President Rizzo then gave the Senators an opportunity to ask questions.

12. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. The next Faculty Senate Meeting will be held September October 9, and 11, 2007, 12:15 p.m. to 1:50 p.m., A426.

Respectfully submitted,

Maria Marques

Recorder