Council of University System Faculty
CUSF Meeting of September 17, 2002
CUSF GENERAL MEETING AT UMCP
SEPTEMBER 17, 2002
Delegates Present: Drs. D. Parker (Chair), P. Alreck (SU), F. Alt (UMCP),
A. Alcott (CSC), Z. Berge (UMBC), V. Brannigan (UMCP), C. Burry (UMB), E. Chapin
(Past Chair), R. Chenette (UMB), J. Collins (UMBI), M. Diriker (SU), J. Gelatt (UMUC),
S. Gibson (UB), S. Havas (UMB), B. Laufer (TU), J. Lombardi (FSU, alternate), M.
McClive (FSU), B. Noonan (UMES), A. Norcio (UMBC), K. Olson (UMCP), J. Organ (BSU),
W.E. Orser (UMBC), A. Pandey (SU), L. Richardson (UB), M. Siegel (TU), C. Smith
(UMCP), D. Spinner (UMES), J. Zimmerman (TU, alternate).
Delegates Excused: P. Alt (TU)
Delegates Absent: R. Jagus (UMBI), M. Mumper (FSU)
Guests: Dr. C. Dan Mote, UMCP President; Dr. Ruth Robertson, Associate
Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
Dr. Parker called the meeting to order at 10:00 am. Dr. Carl Smith introduced
UMCP President, Dr. C.D. Mote. Dr. Mote welcomed everyone and gave a history of
Shared Governance at both Berkeley and UMCP. He stated that the structure of
shared governance at UMCP was different from Berkeley in that at Berkeley it is
faculty dominant, with no role for students and staff. He also stated that the
relationship between the UMCP Senate and the administration appears to be a good
working relationship. He hopes that the Senate will take on more issues where
the campus community needs support, such as the Facilities Master Plan. Dr. Mote
stated that he finds the Senate’s efforts valuable and continues to ask for
their support. Dr. Mote then answered questions about Shared Governance, Review
of Administrative Faculty and the lack of math and writing skills students enter
universities with, although they have high standardized test scores.
Chair's Report: - Dr. Parker gave the following information
1. Regents' Faculty Awards - CUSF will select at least two faculty members
from different comprehensive institutions and at least two from different
research institutions. CUSF will select one additional faculty member from
either a comprehensive institution or a research institution. Dr. Ruth Robertson
is the USM staff member on the committee. The Chair asked if anyone is
2. MHEC Faculty Advisory Committee - Dr. Memo Diriker is going.
3. Chancellor Kirwan will join us at the 11/20/02 CUSF Meeting at BSU from
approximately 11:30 - 1:00. It was difficult to schedule him earlier due to his
4. The Senate Chairs' Meeting with the CUSF Executive Committee will take
place on 10/29/02.
5. Associate Vice-Chancellor for Governmental Relations very important to USM.
A. United Voice Task Force for Maryland Higher Education
B. USM Maintaining the Momentum - slide show, B. of V.'s, Local
Governments, Alumni,faculty, etc.
C. CUSF's Legislative Affairs Committee
6. Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs Search - Chair has communicated with
Chancellor Kirwan and Faculty will be involved.
7. Coppin State College Presidential Search - finalists will be on campus.
This search was conducted in the manner CUSF recommended and which had
previously been agreed to by Regents.
8. Coherence and Compatibility of Bioscience Programs Biosciences Work Group,
Biotechnology Strategy Team
9. The Regents' Education Policy Committee There is a change in two dates
January 22, 2003 at UMB and March 19, 2003 at UB
10. BOR is concerned about student housing at all USM campuses.
11. Students Evaluation of Faculty, Student Housing, Shared Governance,
Tuition and Fees. These issues will require our coordination.
12. NTTF - no new benefits, existing policies and best policies will be
Dr. Parker asked all to peruse the new agenda format for upcoming CUSF
meetings. He said that action items will need to be in writing prior to the
start of the meeting.
Dr. Ruth Robertson brought greetings from the USM Office. She said that
maintaining the momentum is on the minds of Don Boesch and Brit Kirwan. Today,
the message we maintain at the grassroots level is as effective as possible,
particularly in the budgetary process. We need to do something active. Why is it
more important to support Higher Education at USM? Email points to Dr. Robertson
or Dr. Parker. USM to remain strong and grow - why it is better to support us -
need bullet points. Faculty are working with the products (i.e., students).
If state cuts take place, programs will suffer.
Regents Faculty Awards: multiple awards - teaching, scholarship, mentoring,
and collaboration. Deadline is 12/6/02 Information is posted on the USM website
(see link on CUSF web site) and must come through each campus President s
Questions arose concerning Elkins Professorships; Dr. Robertson will look
into and get back to us.
Two questions from the June 2002 meeting were addressed: Disaster Recovery
Plans for Libraries and Emergency planning.
Approval of Minutes: The June 2002 meeting minutes were approved with minor
Discussion began about the short and long-term goals of CUSF. Dr. Parker said
that each meeting will be spent examining action items. It is important for
members to get these action items to the Chair prior to the CUSF meetings.
Committees and their members convened at 11:00 am and were asked to begin
discussion about their tasks for the upcoming year. The charge of each committee
and its members is to decide what are the critical issues; what do you want to
propose as a body and what can be dealt with critically.
CUSF as a whole reconvened at 12:40 pm. The following are reports from each
of the Committee Chairs:
Legislative Affairs - Dr. Memo Diriker (Co-Chair): Main issue is budget.
Major news about budget will not be heard until after November. CUSF needs to
provide a unified face, work at the grass roots level, and maintain a line. We
have 2-3 legislative sessions where CUSF will have to represent faculty. CUSF
needs to pay attention not only to USM appropriation, but also other issues such
as role of USM and K-12 issues.
Dr. Lee Richardson (Co-Chair): It will take a great deal of organizing on
anything related to budget. CUSF is on record in terms of collective bargaining.
To make anything happen we as a body need to organize our campuses. If we
organize our campuses now, we can be ready for the next legislative session. We
need to begin working with labor representatives and campuses to be ready.
Faculty Affairs - Dr. Vince Brannigan (Chair): We are on record to Dr. Kirwan
about CUSF s votes in the past regarding collective bargaining, We need to stay
on top of that. Stephanie Gibson will take on issue of collective bargaining and
shared governance. CUSF in the past two years unanimously voted for the right of
faculty to choose collective bargaining.
Dr. Frank Alt. Individual Faculty issues. Tenure and non-tenure track faculty
issues. Retention purposes - how many campuses received retention monies; Salary
distribution across campuses (question arose about merit and when there are no
monies do faculty have to go through the merit process. Ruth Robertson will
check into whether that is a USM policy. It is also part of the P&T process,
it s not just about receiving monies but about recognition)
Dr. Pam Alreck. Gender issues in line positions (Deans and Chairs) - will
contact one person at each institution to gather that information.
Another issue the committee will address is the interaction with Academic
Affairs and how faculty are assigned to programs and are programs being
overloaded with students and under loaded with faculty
Dr. Steve Havas indicated that the Committee would come back to the October
14th meeting with a motion for CUSF to vote on amending the BOR grievance policy
to allow appeal to the USM when BOR policies are being violated and the
grievance procedure is not working adequately on a campus to address that.
Academic Affairs - Dr. Martha Siegel (Chair): Discussion about what happened
at AAAC summer retreat in August 2002. John Collins was at that retreat and
plans to attend all AAAC meetings this year. He will submit brief reports to
CUSF. There were four areas discussed (1) K-16 workgroup, CUSF will try to
encourage more momentum and support for what was 3-unit approach to education (MHEC,
MSDE and USM). Issues of seamlessness between community colleges and 4 yr.
institutions. Particularly in terms of the agreements and how they are
implemented. CUSF needs to support the system. It will also be important for us
to examine transfer students and the course content that they come to the 4 yr
institutions with; (2) Issues about alternative routes to certification in
teacher education; recognizing that there are many internal issues at each
institution. Brigid Noonan is representative on K-16 workgroup. (3) Technology
Fluency on agenda for 9/18/02 BOR Ed Policy meeting; funding for professional
development and infrastructure.
Issue of policy on tenure and non-tenure faculty; should go to Faculty
Affairs and is on the agenda for 9/18/02 BOR Ed Policy meeting. CUSF needs to
look into programs and the issue of quality control versus programmatic level.
Pay for part-time faculty, benefits for full-time non-tenure track faculty
(Presidents are in favor, but there are no monies for this issue this year).
Suggestion to talk with Don Boesch for individuals involved in
part-time/full-time faculty issues.
Domestic partners - BOR supports benefits for domestic partners, however it
was stated this is not the time for BOR to make a commitment to that effort.
Administration/Finance - Dr. Carl Smith (Chair): Reported that budget
data is needed from each of the campuses, and they are in the process of
collecting this data. The issues the committee is concerned with are (1)
privatization and its impact on faculty and staff; (2) absorbing budget cuts in
such a way as to protect the pedagogical mission and quality of environment for
faculty and staff; and (3) the equity between public funding of public higher
education and public funding of private higher education.
Discussion on the political power of aspirational peers and its importance
took place. A list of peers that gives the appearance of making us look good,
when in reality we are not needs to be obtained and addressed at the campus
level. The CUSF Chair will obtain this information. Further discussion
surrounded how to choose aspirational peers.
Membership/Rules Dr. Barbara Laufer (Chair): According to the CUSF
Bylaws (2/19/02) Article 2.2 reapportionment will occur every three years in
August (began in 1993) and is scheduled to take place at this time. According to
Article 2.3 membership will be based on current FTF at each campus as determine
by the Standing Committee on Nominations (which is now the Membership and Rules
Committee). The committee suggests that the Bylaws (2.3) be changed to reflect
current name of this standing committee.
According to the FTF reported to the system by the various campuses,
appearing as a CUSF link, FTF are as follows:
*Bylaws changes unanimously approved 2/19/02 removed the prohibition which
restricted institutions with a primary, non-teaching research mission to one
representative; the new result of which provided for one more representative for
UMBI. Given that there were no caveats as to when this change would take effect
(e.g., at the next scheduled reapportionment) the assumption is that it would
become effective immediately and a second representative from UMBI has been
However, the issue of reapportionment raises a number of Action Items for
CUSF to address:
1. Should 2.2 Bylaws be changed in terms of FTF proportionality? Would there
ever be a cap in terms of total number of representatives? Should there be a cap
given that there are a number of vacancies for delegates and alternates?
Committee thinking is that if this is the will of Council that it not become
effective until next reapportionment cycle in 2005.
2. Should 2.3 Bylaws be changed in August? Given that Council does not
traditionally meet in August this seems problematic especially when respective
campuses would not be in session to elect any additional representatives. Would
reapportionment be better done in early part of the year in order to facilitate
Spring campus elections for Fall terms? Which data set for FTF, i.e., fiscal
year data as of 7/1 from data journal or FTF reported to federal government as
3. Should Article II Section 1 of Constitution be changed? There is NO
indication as to when faculties elect their representatives to CUSF nor is there
any mention as to when they begin their 3-year terms.
Dr. Laufer suggested that, since the reapportionment had not yet taken place,
UMBI may not be entitled to seat its recently elected second delegate. Dr.
Collins objected strenuously to this idea, noting that for some time UMBI has
had more faculty than several USM institutions which already have two CUSF
delegates, and that this was not a matter of reapportionment. Dr. Collins said
that recent changes to the CUSF By-Laws merely removed a cap which previously
had limited UMBI and UMCES to one delegate. After a few minutes, discussion on
this issue was cut off by the Chair in the interest of time. Dr. Parker said
that the matter would be dealt with later as part of a broader discussion of
what further By-Laws changes may be needed.
For the past year, the faculty at the School of Medicine (UMB) has been
working on by-laws for faculty (~1000 faculty). Dr. Havas recommended the
following motion: In the spirit of shared governance, CUSF unanimously and
strongly recommends that the BOR Ed Policy Committee accept the UMB School of
Medicine faculty assembly by-laws, as approved by the school of medicine
faculty, rather than make any changes to these by-laws. (The motion was
Alcott Arthur - Faculty Diversity Issue - October 12, 2002 at Towson
University - $20.00 registration fee. Chancellor Kirwan will give the luncheon
Next meeting will take place at Frostburg State University on the 14th of
October. Dr. McClive will get information out to everyone regarding directions
The meeting adjourned at 1:50 pm.