Mansfield University Faculty Assembly
Planetarium – Grant Science Center
Thursday, March 12, 2009, 4:00 pm
Minutes
Senate VP Nanci Werner-Burke opened the assembly at 4:04
Attendance: 36
Acceptance of previous assembly minutes (11-11-08): Approved (Moore/Floyd)
Update on student scholarship and support funds
Rebecca Bair and Chris Vaugn gave presentation.
Many MU students receive scholarship offers from multiple colleges. Private giving plays a vital role in making MU their first choice.
Things are grim in the scholarship dept and can affect recruitment & retention. We are down ½ million $ in scholarship support (down in endowments, and 0% unrestricted support from foundation) no study abroad, no honors scholarship… Any money at all from faculty now will go towards student support. Crisis includes schools like Bloomsburg accepting additional 200+ students to offset their budget crisis. This can affect us.
¡ Fewer loans and grants for mid/low-income students
§ Loan reductions -Perkins -$124,140
§ SEOG funds reductions -$28,275
¡ Fewer work study hours/positions and funds
§ Federal work study reductions -$52,219
§ Level institutional employment funds since 2000-01
▪ Decrease the number of students or same number of students will have to work fewer hours
¡ Fewer student’s get scholarships
§ Lure of scholarships from other schools—MU not the first choice
▪ Potential 8% decrease in enrollment in Fall 09
¡ Our students top 3 in PASSHE for financial need*
§ Fewer mid/low-income students get loans
§ Fewer get grants
▪ Potential 10-13% decrease in enrollment in Fall 09
§ Fewer work study hours/positions
¡ We are still a bargain compared to many schools, but our students are lower income…
HOW YOU CAN HELP
¡ Be part of the solution
§ Make a difference in the lives of students
§ Make an investment in your future…your tomorrow at MU
¡ Consider a gift to fund scholarships
§ Consider 1% of your salary…a couple dollars a day for a year….
§ Gifts can be outright or through payroll deduction
Discussion: will a reduction in loans affect a student no matter where they go?
CV: we are low on the Perkins Loan end and low in the work study end compared to other schools.
RB: we have raised more money, but we are not raising $ fast enough to cover our losses. We feel we could raise over $100,000 if faculty contribute.
CV: some students have a revolving scholarship, we must make sure that they continue to receive the committed $.
P Keller: funding formula in system – if a school grows, it gets more $, meaning if we don’t grow, money is in danger of going somewhere else. If we give, we are investing in our own future.
Suggestion from floor: foundation would benefit from being transparent about how the money is being managed. There has been some mistrust how funds have been managed in the past.
Should members from the same department be permitted to serve on the same professional committee? Discussion for possible constitutional amendment:
KV: promotion committee is the only committee that has restrictions (some sub-committees).
Question: how is professional committee associated with APSCUF?
Question about distinction between program and department… is there a difference?
Can senate look into this?
Motion: To amend constitution to reflect that for tenure and sabbatical committees - no two persons from same academic program be allowed to serve on same professional committee. (Scott/Brown)
Passed
1 abstention
Language: can we extend the language that already exists in the constitution?
How effective or useful is the designated campus meeting time? How are students impacted by the current schedule? Discussion of the university class schedule:
There are classes or labs scheduled at 11:30 on Tues. This is difficult – roughly 240 students are in class at the activity/meeting time. These classes defeat the purpose of this meeting time.
This conflict is because the new schedule has eliminated a class time, it was lost. This makes a crucial difference to departments that used all the class times in the old schedule.
DM: We changed the times because of commuter students schedules, and also to distribute classes more effectively (the 8:30 time accommodated more classes than the 9:00 class time).
Do we have fewer class times available? Yes, M,W &F.
PK: no one was using the 8:00 slot. Classroom efficiency has improved with the new schedule.
Response: some depts. were using it.
Q: what is the purpose of a designated meeting time? Is this serving a purpose? What benefit is this to the students? Isn’t the 4-6 time already the time allotted for student activities?
If students are creative enough, they will find the time to meet. Shall be do away with the designated meeting time? There seems to be more difficult for faculty arranging meeting times, so a designated time would be beneficial. Response: what if one is on more than one committee? 4-6:00 meeting time is a disadvantage to single parent households.
Was there an assessment aspect on how effective this new schedule is; is there data?
Motion: implement or initiate data collection on effectiveness of:
1: class times,
2: change of designated meeting time
(Washington/Floyd)
NOT PASSED
Who will be doing this? Addendum suggestion (Brian):
establish ad hoc committee in senate.
Amendment (Marti/FLoyd): student & faculty committee
NOT Passed
PK: we will get a report on classroom usage. Let’s use this data in further discussion.
Keller will look at this as soon as the administrative team is in place.
This originated from department chairs. Faculty were not using the 8 am class time.
DM: do we need a meeting time?
What were goals and how are they working. Do we have a mechanism to assess how the new schedule is working? Issue was better use of classroom time –
1: T/Th class times,
2: change of designated meeting time,
3: MWF class times.
Meeting adjourned: 5:26
Minutes respectfully submitted,
Christine Moulton, Senate Secretary