Indiana University Northwest Text


February 20, 2009
Indiana University Logo





Time:  1:00 p.m. –  3:00 p.m.

Location:  Hawthorn 107

1.         Call to Order

The meeting is called to order at 1:10 p.m.  The President notes that a quorum does not exist at this point and that while waiting for others to arrive the meeting will proceed to the President’s announcements

2.         Approval of minutes of January 16, 2009 meeting

At approximately 1:30 p.m. with a quorum present Prof. Tolhuizen moves to approve the minutes, and Prof. Fisher seconds.  Minutes approved unanimously.

3.         President’s Announcements

A.        The Wall of Fame has become a Wall of Shame as a result of neglect.  While     faculty continued to receive awards for teaching, research and service, the names of current recipients have not been noted on the wall, e.g., Founder’s Day  Teaching Award.  In addition, the Board of Trustee’s Award has disappeared   from the wall Pres. Gallmeier recently contacted Prof. O’Dell and V.C.A.A.  Malik regarding this issue and progress was made.  All plaques will be updated and/or restored by the end of the semester according the VCAA Malik.

            A question arose regarding the possibility of a pedestrian crosswalk on Broadway.  Prof. Fisher indicated that this issue had been addressed in the past.  Broadway is a state road and the state will not approve the walkway.

Pres. Gallmeier continues with a note of thanks to all concerned regarding the action taken regarding faculty recognition plaques, specifically thanking Prof. O’Dell, Prof. Delunas, Lecturer Jon Becker, and VCAA Malik.  Pres. Gallmeier will continue to monitor this initiative, and asks that if faculty received an award in the last 6-8 years, that they notify Academic Affairs.

 B.         Pres. Gallmeier and an IUN delegation met with Pres. McRobbie in Indianapolis to discuss IUN campus issues.  He reports the following:

1.         The possibility of a merger with PUC was discussed.  President McRobbie and Chancellor Bergland indicated that they were receptive to the idea of the merger.  Chancellor Bergland provided Pres. McRobbie with a copy of the news article written by Prof. Vinodgopal.  The president believes the merger idea is timely and has merit.  He also indicated that preliminary work, including research, is needed to assess possible action.

2.         Pres. Gallmeier reported that he made a case for promoting the urban identity of the IUN campus.  He argued that this strategy was very successful for the IUPUI campus and could be successful for IUN.  Pres. McRobbie agreed.  Pres. Gallmeier also stated a need for the new Chancellor to support this idea and Pres. McRobbie agreed.

3.         The structure and leadership on the IUN campus was also discussed, specifically the reporting responsibilities of the Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs (VCFA).  Pres. McRobbie indicated that the VCFA is a direct report to the Chancellor.   It was also stated that the VCAA should make final decisions regarding academic matters.   The VCFA plays a supportive role to the VCAA in matters of the budget.

4.         The search for a new Chancellor will likely begin in June.   Pres. Gallmeier suggested that an IUN representative serve as a co-chair of the committee but Pres. McRobbie was not receptive to this idea.  Pres. Gallmeier also suggested an earlier start for the search, but this was not accepted.  There was a discussion regarding the desired profile of a new Chancellor.   It was suggested that the individual possess skills in teaching, research, and service as well as fundraising.  They should have an interest in and experience with an urban campus.   A possible model for a successful candidate would be Ken Gross Louis. Prof. Delunas suggests that the individual should also have a familiarity with the operation of professional schools, and with the area’s need for a hospital.

Discussion of the above issues by the faculty organization then followed. 

Prof. Flint noted that we will miss the more immediate opportunity to merge given that IUN and PUC will soon be looking for chancellors.  He states that there is an opportunity to save on administrative costs.  Prof. Tolhuizen asks if PNC is involved and Pres. Gallmeier indicates that is not the case at the present time. The discussion continues and Prof. Schoon points out that a merger really needs to focus on the benefits to the academic environment and the community.  He also states that if a merger is not likely in the short-run then it might be wise to explore opportunities for collaboration, including transfer of credit between institutions. Prof.  Gerzma indicates that as a part of the previous strategic planning initiative the issue of merger was explored, but that it was determined to be premature in the absence of action on the part of those at higher levels of administration.  Prof. Ige points out that faculty can be proactive, and have an impact.   Prof. Hug agrees with Prof. Schoon.  

It is decided that Pres. Gallmeier should contact his counterpart at PUC to determine the PUC faculty views on this issue.  Pres. Gallmeier suggests reaching out to IUN’s Board of Trustees’ representative.  This is not pursued.  The representative will, however, be asked to attend either an Executive Committee meeting and/or a Faculty Organization meeting.

            C.        UFC Student Rights and Conduct

There are proposed changes to Student Rights and Conduct.  Prof. Coffin presents these changes and the faculty members in attendance reviewed the changes.  Prof. Coffin states that “Gender Identity” is not a substitute for sexual orientation and that this is an addition to the policy as opposed to a substitution.  In addition, the section regarding “Advisors” establishes that the faculty advisor can speak on behalf of the student at “formal” hearings. Prof. Rominger asks if IUN has adopted a policy on Student Rights and Conduct.  Prof. Delunas states that at the time of AQIP review, VC Coopwood indicated a policy was being reviewed by the attorneys. Prof. Rominger restates the importance of having a campus policy. It was determined that the proposed policy is not problematic and that it should proceed.  


4.         Chancellor’ Report:  none.


5.         Vice Chancellors’ Reports: none.


6.         Recommendations on P & T Procedures and McRobbie Memorandum – Professor George Bodmer  (Presented by Pres. Gallmeier)

 P&T Procedures

The proposed P&T procedures were presented and reviewed.  It was noted that a vote will take place in April. 

Prof. Hug notes that Point 7 could be problematic given that SPEA’s MOU allows for Bloomington faculty to be a part of the tenure review process.  Pres. Gallmeier asks Prof. Hug for a memo delineating this issue.  Prof. Delunas indicates a similar issue existed in the CHHS. 

Prof. Coffin notes that the language of the memo is permissive rather than obligatory.   The use of the word “should” suggests that actions do not have to be taken and this is problematic.  He suggests that the intent of the document needs to be examined.  A discussion of this issue takes place and it is determined that the committee should be questioned regarding the use of this language and its purpose.

 McRobbie Memorandum

The memorandum is presented and reviewed. 

Pres. Gallmeier notes that he met with VCAA Malik and Chancellor Bergland on Monday to clarify the issue of a Chancellor’s recommendation for a candidate.  It was stated that the Chancellor of the campus will not be writing a letter of recommendation for candidates under the procedures outlined in the memo.  

Prof. Coffin notes that the memo also does not require that the candidate whose tenure is denied be given a reason for the denial.   He suggests that remedies can’t be pursued if a reason(s) for denial are not provided.    It is also noted that a reference to a “summary dossier” is no longer in the document.   Pres. Gallmeier notes it is now considered to be part of the section titled “Executive Review” in the P&T Recommendations.  Issues regarding the composition of the summary dossier and the candidate’s right to compose the dossier were discussed.  The faculty determines that these issues also need to be addressed in next week’s P&T meeting.


7.         Task Force on Administrative Structure and Process – Professor Don Coffin

The resolution is presented and reviewed.  Prof. Coffin suggests that this is an opportunity to be proactive.  It is important to take the lead and begin to identify what qualities we desire in a Chancellor.  Prof. Coffin states that COAS and CHHS were intended to have two representatives, and he offers to amend the resolution to reflect this point.  Prof. Coffin also clarifies the meaning of “instability” and responds that the concern with instability is a reference to the frequent changes made in the administrative structure.  There is a call to question by Prof. Flint and the resolution is unanimously approved.  Pres. Gallmeier will put out a request for nominees on Monday.

8.  IT Spring Housekeeping Campaign – Carol Wood

            A.        Efforts are being made to increase the security of our network.  Intrusion detection initiatives and firewalls were implemented and now the principle of  least privilege will provide additional security.  Hackers are taking aim at computer hard drives and recent incidents have highlighted the need for increased  security.  Under the principle of least privilege faculty will not sign on as administrators unless it is necessary.  This decreases hackers access to vital information.    Faculty will be given a second id should there be a need to download programs etc. that require administrative privileges.  This policy will be implemented first on new installations in the Math Department and those who have new computers already will be retrofitted under the new program.

             B.         Soon there will be a weeklong campaign to increase awareness regarding security issues.  IT will also be providing shredding services for sensitive paper as well as electronic documents.  If you need to review information held on zip drives it can be reviewed by requesting assistance from the help desk. 

             C.        There will be a ribbon cutting ceremony to celebrate the new facilities/equipment  located in Hawthorn 108 and 230.

Prof. Caucci asks where faculty can obtain assistance with Mac technology issues.  Director Wood indicates that a ticket can be placed with tech support or she can be contacted to arrange assistance.

 9.  General Education/CETL Intensive Writing Working Shops – Professor Mary Ann Fischer

Prof. Fisher hands out a student letter that highlights the need for action regarding student writing.   CETL is hosting a series of writing workshops to assist faculty.   The first 18 to sign-up for the workshops will receive the book “Elements of Teaching Writing.”   This is an important initiative and requires faculty in all divisions to work toward improving our students’ writing skills.

 10. Elections Committee – Professor Jean Poulard  (Presented by Pres. Gallmeier)

Pres. Gallmeier spoke with Prof. Poulard regarding the need for upcoming elections.   Prof. Poulard indicated there were five nominations for Faculty Board of Review and he suggested that these five individuals be placed on the board without elections.  Pres. Gallmeier indicates that an election needs to be held and the faculty concurs.   Pres. Gallmeier also notes that elections will be needed for a Vice President, Secretary, UFC, At-large Executive Committee member as well as other executive committee members, and an At-large P&T Committee members.  He will contact Prof. Poulard regarding the need for action.

 11. Library Committee – Professor James Tolhuizen and Associate Librarian Cynthia Szymanski

Prof. Tolhuizen reports that the library’s budget has not increased in 15 years.   Over the last 3 years the committee has examined the formula for allocating funds and 11 proposals for revision were made.  The committee is recommending three of these proposals:

            A.        The library will post a separate document detailing its expenditures.

            B.         The library allocations will be based on external as opposed to internal averages for serials.

            C.        A 3-year memory will be implemented as opposed to the current 7-year memory.

Question:  Why move to an external average for serials?  Assoc. Librarian Szymanski indicates that this allows for a more accurate assessment of the recent costs of serials in different fields and Prof. Tolhuizen points out that it also reduces strategic behavior by departments.

Question:  Why move to a 3 year memory?  Assoc. Librarian Szymanski indicates that this provides an opportunity for changes to be made on a more frequent basis.

Question:  Is there a way to get access to libraries on other campuses, particularly for system schools.  Assoc. Librarian Szymanski indicates that there are ways to arrange for this, and expanded access arrangements are being explored.

The resolution is called to question by Prof. Blohm and it is passed unanimously.

 12.  Old Business: none

 13.  New Business

Prof. Delunas requests assistance in AQIP tasks.  She states that this help is important to the success of the initiative and that AQIP will be revising the portfolio.  She also announces the Grand Opening of the Medical Clinic on March 2, 2009 at 11:30 a.m.

Other announcements:

The School of Education needs representation on the Founder’s Day Award committee.

Death of a Salesman will begin tonight. 

The men’s basketball team was asked to participate in the US Collegiate Athletic Tournament.

 14. Adjournment   

Prof. Tolhuizen moves to adjourn.  Prof. Flint seconds the motion.  Motion passed unanimously at 3:00 p.m.








Return to Faculty Org Main Page

Indiana University Northwest
3400 Broadway - Gary, Indiana  46408


Copyright Complaints bullet Privacy Statement