Grundy Reporter

Illinois State Senate Committee on University Statutes and Senate Procedures met Nov. 15.

Here are the minutes provided by the committee:

Present: Chair Shawn Gilmore, H. George Friedman, Michael Grossman, William Maher, Collin Ruud, Joyce Tolliver, Kelli Trei

Ex officio: Jessica Mette, Sharon Reynolds, Jenny Roether

Absent: Walter Deering

I. CALL TO ORDER

A special meeting of the Senate Committee on University Statutes and Senate Procedures (SP) was called to order at 11:00 am with Chair Gilmore presiding.

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Approval of the minutes of the November 8, 2021 meeting was deferred to the next meeting.

III. PUBLIC COMMENT

No requests received.

IV. CHAIR’S REMARKS

Chair Gilmore noted that the New Business item (SP.22.03, Proposed Revisions to the Constitution, Article VI, Section 9 (Senate review) and the Bylaws, Part D.1.a – Senate Executive Committee Duties) was directed to SP by the Senate Executive Committee.

The issue is regarding the process of the Senate Review Commissions and their implementation work and was referred with a comment concerning the use of the verb “implement.”

V. OLD BUSINESS

SP.19.15, Proposed Revisions to the Statutes, Article IV, Section 1 – The Department, Section 2 – Department Organized with a Chair, Section 3 – Department Organized with a Head, and Section 4 – Change of Departmental Organization

The proposal will be presented for second reading and action at today’s Senate meeting.

SP.20.05, Revision to the Bylaws, Part D.8 – Senate Committee on Educational Policy and Standing Rule 13 – Formation, Termination, Separation, Transfer, Merger, Change in Status, and Renaming of Units

Chair Gilmore commented that he drafted a new version of the proposal to reconcile the Senate Committee on Educational Policy’s previous draft proposal and some of the concerns noted by SP at the last meeting. He noted that the new draft is a starting point, but will require revisions. SP will discuss the draft proposal at the next meeting.

SP.20.07, Revision to the Bylaws, Part E (Governing and Advisory Bodies) and Part F (Senate Representatives to Other Bodies)

No new discussion.

SP.20.23, Proposed Revisions to the Statutes, Article I, Section 5 – Chancellors and Vice Presidents, Article II, Section 3a(1) – Faculty Role in Governance, and Article III,

Section 1 – The University

Chair Gilmore noted that he discussed the proposal with several people including the Office of the Chancellor and Rob Kar, Chair of the Senate Executive Committee, to clarify Senate and committee processes. He commented though SP had modified the proposal to respond to previous concerns from the Office of the Chancellor, new suggested language was not approved by SP, leading to concerns from that Office.

The proposal will be presented for second reading and action at today’s Senate meeting.

SP.20.25, Revision to Senate Governing Documents Regarding Emergencies

No new discussion.

SP.21.05, Revision to the Bylaws, Part D.7 – Conference on Conduct Governance

No new discussion.

SP.21.10, Revision to the Bylaws, Part D.1.c – Senate Executive Committee, Membership

No new discussion.

SP.21.11, Proposed Revisions to the Constitution, Article VI, Section 7 and the Bylaws,

Parts A.1-9, B.1-5, and D.1.c.1 (Presiding Officer)

No new discussion.

SP.22.01, Proposed Revisions to the Statutes (USC ST-83)

Chair Gilmore noted that he would like the committee to identify areas for SP focus on the current revisions and determine if any sections should be referred to other Senate committees.

Maher suggested that the Faculty Advisory Committee (FAC), the Council of Academic Professionals (CAP), and the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure (AF) should all review the proposed revisions. SP noted that the full packet of proposed revisions should be sent to each committee, but feedback should be requested on the specific language that pertains to each committee. Chair Gilmore will send the proposed revisions to FAC, CAP, and AF and request their feedback.

Friedman commented that there are some concerns with the new definitions in Article II, Section 1 (faculty), Section 6 (staff), and Section 8 (visiting faculty and visiting academic professionals). Chair Gilmore suggested that the review of these proposed definitions be delegated to a subcommittee consisting of Friedman, Grossman, Mette, and Tolliver. SP agreed and the subcommittee will report back to SP after reviewing/discussed these revisions.

Chair Gilmore noted concern with the proposed constraint of “faculty” in the Faculty Role in Governance section (line 236). He commented that this is a separate matter from the definition in that section.

Chair Gilmore commented that another element in Article II (and throughout the document) is “academic staff.” Reynolds noted there are numerous other documents that use “academic staff” (e.g., Campus Administrative Manual, Provost Communications). SP commented that most uses of “academic staff” should be reconciled to which employee group is being referenced. Chair Gilmore noted the current wording in the Statutes, Article IX, Section 4a:

The academic staff which conducts the educational program shall consist of the teaching, research, scientific, counseling, and extension staffs; deans and directors of colleges, schools, institutes, and similar university units; editors, librarians, and such other members of the staff as are designated by the president and the chancellors/vice presidents.

Chair Gilmore noted that if SP recommends that “academic staff” should be kept, then it should appear earlier than Article IX in the Statutes. If the recommendation is to remove the term, then it should be clear about the impact on other documents. Friedman noted the need to review the use of the new terminology in each instance where “academic staff” is removed. Chair Gilmore will review each instance of the suggested removal.

Tolliver clarified that campus-level documents have to conform to the Statutes, so if there is a change in the Statutes then the campus-level document would need to revised also. Chair Gilmore noted the University Senates Conference transmittal letter states that “academic staff” is not a System HR category; however, the term is used in many areas on all three campuses so this should be acknowledged.

Friedman commented that if “academic staff” is removed from the Statutes, then it can still be used at the campus-level as long as it is defined within those documents.

Chair Gilmore commented that the revision on line 1880 to remove “all members of the academic staff” and insert “tenure system and non-tenure system faculty” is not consistent with the previous revisions that were passed by the Senate on October 14, 2019 via SP.17.12 (Proposed Revisions to the Statutes, Article II, Section 3 – Faculty Role in Governance and Article X, Section 2 – Academic Freedom). He noted that the use of “academic staff” relied upon the definition in Article IX, Section 4a.

Tolliver suggested that when the revisions are sent to the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure, it would be helpful to provide them the history of the recent revisions that were approved by the Senate.

Mette noted that the revision in line 1299 to remove “or which includes in the title the term “research” modifying the term “professor”, “associate professor” or “assistant professor”” appears to remove notice rights for some employees as it reduces the list to only teaching associate, research associate, or clinical associate and remove the titles of research professor, research associate professor, and research assistant professor. 

Tolliver commented that she did not recall any intention to make a substantive change in this section and suggested that Sarah Zehr, Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs, would be better able to address this concern. Mette will follow-up with Zehr. Chair Gilmore noted that the revisions in Articles IX and X are not clearly marked which makes it difficult to compare the suggested revisions to the current language. Maher suggested the past practice of presenting side-by-side columns for comparison to the Senate with the current Statutes language on the left and the proposed wording on the right. Grossman noted that color coding could also be used for discussion purposes. SP will discuss this issue further at the next meeting.

SP.22.02, Revision to the Bylaws, Part A.3 and Standing Rule 14 – Setting the Agenda for Senate Meetings

No new discussion.

VI. NEW BUSINESS

SP.22.03, Proposed Revisions to the Constitution, Article VI, Section 9 (Senate review) and the Bylaws, Part D.1.a – Senate Executive Committee Duties

See Chair’s Remarks for additional information.

VII. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 12:25 pm.

https://www.senate.illinois.edu/committees.asp