January 30, 2002

Dear Colleagues,

We had a very busy Senate meeting in January, and I want to summarize the recommendations made, some events that have occurred since, and report on pending activities.

First, thank you to all of you who have worked so diligently on new and continuing committees. There are a number of very important activities under way, and you are to be commended for donating your time, energy and ideas to these issues.

I will start with decisions made at the Senate meeting, and also discuss committee appointments:

• Arts and Digital Imaging: The report of our committee was passed by the Senate (see minutes of the January 8 meeting on our website) and submitted to Dr. John Sutusky, VP for Finance and Administration. He shared it with Dr. Crouch, who requested that the Deans' Council review the report, which met January 14. The council accepted that the service should move to the academic unit of the university, but recommended a new committee to review the report in detail and to address issues. Senators are serving on that committee. Please review the report, on the web, to see the recommendations.
• Post tenure review policy: The Deans' Council also approved the policy we approved at the January meeting. The President’s Council approved the policy at their January 23 meeting. Again, thank you to Phil Privitera, Jerry Webb, and Subbi Mathur for working on this policy. This policy is also on our home page on the web.
• New group to define faculty: Another group that is being formed is to define full-time and part-time faculty. Two senate representatives will serve with Tom Higerd and Deans Ripich and Leuner.
• University Hearing Committee: Six names have been submitted to the Provost for possible appointment to the University Hearing Committee. The names are submitted to the Provost, who will make assignments based on the rotating members for these two-year terms.
• Faculty contracts committee: Rich Hernandez reported at the January meeting(as well as at the Senate retreat on tenure) on the status of this committee’s work. He reported to the Dean’s Council in January, and there was much discussion. The committee has submitted a report, which will be presented at the February Senate meeting. I am optimistic that principles that would govern a universal contract (with college- or program-specific portions) will emerge from this committee’s diligent efforts. However, efforts to define tenurable salary are being deferred to committee assignments described following.
• Assignments to standing committees: This year, there are major issues affecting faculty, our positions and our careers that are being discussed. The work of the Senate is always important, but it seems to me that this year is particularly challenging. Thus, I have asked each of the standing committees to assume responsibility for a particular charge in this area.
• Academic Affairs: Chair, Philippe Arnaud. Will take responsibility for addressing issues of faculty compensation. They will communicate extensively with the Faculty Affairs Committee, but will review the existing salary increase policy, and also look at "base salary" definitions.

• Faculty Affairs: Chair, Subbi Mathur. Will assume responsibility for addressing issues of tenure. They will look at the faculty handbook, determine whether we need to revise the definition of tenure, and based on the discussions at the faculty senateretreat in December, will present a report on tenure in general, and tenure recommendations for MUSC. Additionally, a mentoring workshop for faculty regarding tenure and promotion may be a program for this spring.

• University Affairs: Chair, Mary Mauldin. Will continue and complete study on Gender Equity, initially under the leadership of Deborah Carson and now that of Kit Simpson. I am also asking them to explore the issues described below regarding transition and communication.

• Governance: Chair, Francine Margolius. Will continue to work on the handbook revisions, will conduct elections, and will be assisting in definition of faculty. I would like this committee to explore the possibility of implementing a faculty mediation program, in conjunction with the provost. Initial conversations with the Provost have indicated support and interest.

Recent policies under review include a criminal background check, and conflict of interest and external funding policy.

• Elections: I would also like to suggest that our elections take place in the spring, so that newly elected Senators can overlap the service of outgoing Senators, to learn what we are doing and how to do their jobs. We have done this in the past, and it seems to work well. If the Governance committee supports it, I’d like to start this process now. We might have to move our meetings to a larger space, which is a good problem to have!
• Continuity, transition and overlap: One of the major challenges for us is communication, particularly the transitional period between senators rotating off, and those coming on to the Senate as new senators. This affects ongoing work of committees and the senate, and is particularly troubling with regard to university committees that include Senators, who then rotate off the Senate and there is no communication regarding progress on the issue. We are receiving policies to review that had no communication to the Senate until they are submitted to us to approve: but there were Senators serving on the committee!

Again, thank you for your support. We are having excellent attendance, good participation on committees, great discussions at Senate meetings, and we’re doing important work.

I have asked senators to keep their faculty and deans informed about what they are doing on the Senate, and the importance to them of what we are doing. I learned that we have 1250 faculty members. Our 38-plus member team has our work cut out for us, and will ask for help from all the faculty from time to time!

Please let me know how we can improve what we do.

Anne Osborne Kilpatrick, Chair