Meeting Minutes
ACADEMIC SENATE
Minutes
November 5, 2018
Call to Order
The regular meeting of the Academic Senate, held on Nov 5, 2018, was called to order at 3:04 pm by Senate President Thomas Richmond. The meeting was held in the Moot Courtroom of the College of Law. President Richmond announced that in the absence of Paul Mogren, the Parliamentarian duties for today’s meeting would be assumed by Prof. David Hill (Clinical Professor of Law). He also announced that in response to Senate concerns about difficulties of member participation in discussions due to the acoustic characteristics of the meeting room, it was arranged on a pilot basis today to provide wireless microphones and have two of the University Presidential Student Ambassadors pass the microphones around to persons who are called on for questions and comments.
Present: Rima Ajlouni, Bob Allen, Elena Asparouhova, Rajeev Balasubramonian, Julie Barkmeier-Kraemer, Shmuel Baruch, Gunseli Berik, Donald Blumenthal, Joel Brownstein, Sarah Bush, Kirsten Butcher, Darryl Butt, Brian Cadman, Devon Cantwell, Laurel Caryn, Mike Caserta, Ravi Chandran, Nadia Cobb, Susanna Cohen, Katharine Coles, Sheila Crowell, Tommaso De Fernex, Chuck Dorval, Randy Dryer, Ann Engar, Korkut Erturk, Diego Fernandez, Candace Floyd, Kenneth (Bo) Foreman, Leslie Francis, John Funk, Per Gesteland, Amanda Goodner, Valerie Guerrero, Gema Guevara, Kim Hackford-Peer, Patricia Hanna, Mia Hashibe, Christel Hohenegger, Christopher Hull, Emily Kam, Anne Kirchhoff, Kim Korinek, Anne Lair, Rich Landward, Michael Larice, Dale Larsen, Stephane LeBohec, Lauren Liang, Tom Lund, Brad Lundahl, Jim Martin, Sharon Mastracci, Maureen Mathison, Kaitlin McLean, Dragan Milicic, Ken Monson, Krystal Moorman, Connor Morgan, Susan Naidu, Kathleen Nicoll, Brandon Patterson, Lauren Perry, Wanda Pillow, Elizabeth Pohl, Jon Rainier, Ravi Ranjan, Kalani Raphael, Angela Rasmussen, John Regehr, Brad Rockwell, Nelson Roy, Alejandra Sanchez, Amnon Schlegel, Helene Shugart, Jennifer Shumaker-Parry, Debra Simmons, Sara Simonsen, Carol Sogard, Taylor Stringham, James Sutherland, Thomas Swensen, Alex Terrill, Sylvia Torti, Brenda Van Der Wiel, Jessica Wempen, Tom Winter, Joanne Yaffe
Absent: Alan Abbinanti, Olga Baker, Amy Barrios, Pinar Bayrak-Toydemir, Bryan Bonner, Adrienne Cachelin, Mark Durham, Haley Feten, Ken Johnson, Kaelin Kaczka, Hanseup Kim, Winston Kyan, Sean Lawson, Claire McGuire, Rick Paine, Frank Sachse, Peyden Shelton, Dustin Stokes, Neil Vickers, James Winkler, Julie Wright-Costa, Shundana Yusaf
Ex Officio: Emily Beard, John Boyack, Margaret Clayton, Julio Facelli, Robert Flores, Harriet Hopf, Jane Laird, Thomas Richmond, Ruth Watkins, Dave Hill (acting Parliamentarian)
Excused with proxy: Nitin Bakshi, Howie Huynh, Pearl Sandick, Jon Seger, Emily Thomas, Aryana Vadipour, Taryn Young, Zhou Yu, Eric Hinderaker
Excused: Thomas Crane Giamo, Georgi Rausch
Others: Jackson Kiscr, Bonnie Wright, University Presidential Ambassadors (students) Maddie Lamah and Mitchel Kenney
Approval of Minutes:
The minutes dated October 1, 2018 were approved upon a motion from Kate Coles and a second by Pat Hanna.
Consent Calendar
The Consent Calendar was approved upon a motion from Joanne Yaffe and a second by Kate Coles.
Report from Administration
President Watkins reported that the Garff Executive Education Building opened on October 5th, and the dedication for the new Carolyn and Kem Gardner Commons, the largest classroom building on campus, is scheduled for November 9. She expressed appreciation for these new additions to the campus and thanked all involved.
(Special Report: Campus Shooting): President Watkins asked Barb Snyder, Vice President for Student Affairs, to help present updates on safety and security responses subsequent to the recent on-campus shooting death of a student. This is a heart-breaking event for the President, the University, and especially for the student’s family. There have been two press conferences, and the University has done its best to share the information that could be shared, with openness and transparency, and a sense of commitment to timeliness. At the recent press conference, it was announced that two independent review teams have been formalized. The University does not however have to wait until the reviews are complete to take actions that it can. There are a number of security improvement efforts underway now and had been ongoing prior to this event. Over the last year, the Campus Safety Task Force’s recommendations have been funded and implemented in areas such as campus safety website, lighting, security cameras, training, and additional staffing in critical areas. The President expects that recommendations and implementation in this area will continue.
Vice President Snyder reported that this sad tragedy offered an opportunity to remind young people that they are not invincible and need to help take care of themselves and shared living areas. That office has already begun a review of internal processes for student housing, the Dean of Students office, other areas of student affairs, and across the campus to identify any improvements that could be made. The President and Vice President responded to questions and suggestions from Senators, discussing ideas and specific areas that University administration and the two task forces could look at during ongoing and upcoming reviews (specific questions and responses are found in the addendum to these minutes).
Senate Executive Committee Report
Julio Facelli reported that the main item on the October 19, 2018 Senate Executive Committee meeting agenda was to approve placing the Building Access & Surveillance Policy 3-234 proposal on the Notice of Intent Calendar. The Senate will hear more later in this meeting.
Report from ASUU
ASUU President Connor Morgan began by thanking the University administration and University Police Chief Dale Brophy for their immediate and ongoing response to the shooting. From a student perspective, he was impressed at what was done to keep the students’ interests first and foremost. Other updates were offered. As one of the ASUU’s efforts to engage more diverse student audiences, a recent event coordinated with the LGBT resource center, keynoted by a US Olympian, was a success. The ASUU voting registration efforts come to a head on November 6, Election Day. Connor noted places on campus where people can vote; he strongly encouraged everyone to do so.
Notice of Intent Calendar
Building Access & Surveillance Policy 3-234 Proposal Status
Tom Richmond explained that this item is presented on the Senate Intent Calendar so that Senators have time to consult with their constituents and gather further thoughts on the proposal before it appears on the Debate Calendar for voting. Bob Flores, Leslie Francis, Randy Dryer, Dale Brophy and Devon Cantwell represented the subcommittee developing the policy on which the Senate will ultimately vote. Bob Flores updated the Senate with an outline and the basic components on what is being proposed. Background on the proposed new policy is that the current 20+ year-old policy focuses on use of keys for building access and does not cover an increasing use of electronic access systems and video surveillance systems. Although everyone at today’s meeting’s presence on campus is being tracked in a variety of ways, there are no clear regulations at this time covering issues such as: installing surveillance systems, administering systems, storing data, identifying permissible & prohibited uses of data.
The final policy will balance adequate protection of persons and property with privacy and academic freedom, while following all applicable laws. The guiding principles for the revised regulations are then: enhance campus safety and security; respect privacy; notice, transparency, consultation; adherence to federal and state laws–such as FERPA, HIPAA, GRAMA, and the Clery Act.
The main new elements of the initiative are developing an oversight committee (“SSAC”), a registration-approval-review process, criteria for approving access and surveillance systems along with data storage, and a set of permissible and prohibited uses of surveillance data. Details of these elements were also presented. The new policy will also continue, and improve upon, the current regulation in the area of tracking and safeguarding mechanical locks and keys.
The proposal will be a combination of a main Policy and, initially, one Rule. Other specific rules and detailed procedures can be added later. One example is that the proposal will start with “fixed-location” systems, and eventually will need to be expanded to cover issues of mobile surveillance systems. Bob explained that four phases are anticipated for comprehensive access and surveillance policies. The first would be the enactment of the basic regulations by the Academic Senate and Board of Trustees, with an aim to have this phase in place before the January legislative session. Next would be to form a SSAC oversight committee and develop and implement the registration & approval process. Phase 3 would be a 2020 report to the Senate with updates, conclusions, and future suggestions. Last would be the addition of other regulations, such as for mobile surveillance systems and special events.
Members of the policy subcommittee addressed various questions from the floor. Ensuring that this policy addresses privacy concerns was a main objective, and Randy Dryer thanked UofU Police Chief Brophy for his assistance in that area. Bob explained that the policy as drafted has clear prohibition on use of data for routine human resource employee tracking purposes, or for faculty and student tracking. Leslie Francis recommended that Senators review the current policy draft’s language on the use of surveillance for purposes other than crime detection. For instance, consider whether its constraints be expanded to include investigation of non-criminal serious misconduct. Bob explained that the Senate can consider whether use of surveillance data can be allowed for purposes of administrative investigation proceedings. Chief Brophy expressed that the policy as drafted will allow the campus police to continue to do their job without hinderance. Bob concluded by expressing gratitude to all who have been working on the project and invited Senate members to contact him now to provide their input before the proposal returns on the Debate Calendar.
Debate Calendar
Discontinuation of Environmental Engineering Program
Tiffany Hortin, Administrative Officer of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, explained why the department is proposing to discontinue the Environmental Engineering Program, and the degrees and certificate associated with the Program (Masters of Engineering, Masters of Science, Doctorate of Philosophy, and Certificate in Environmental Engineering). When established in the 90s, it was aimed at enhancing interdisciplinary collaboration, and now this type of collaboration, that of focusing on energy and the environment, is automatically happening in many areas and disciplines. There are no more students currently enrolled in the program, and there is a plan for any students who might want to come back. A motion from Randy Dryer, seconded by Pat Hanna, to approve discontinuance of the Environmental Engineering Program and the associated degrees and certificate was approved.
Division of Family Planning within the OBGYN Department
David Turok presented a proposal to create a Division of Family Planning as a part of the OBGYN department in the School of Medicine. It was clarified that this will not be a free-standing division and so will not be independent of the existing department—but rather will be situated as a sub-unit within the OBGYN department. The current Family Planning area of the department has been an impactful resource in the community. For instance, Family Planning provided birth control to 7400 women in the Salt Lake area at no cost and is currently following 4400 to assess impact on educational opportunities, income, and a variety of social and medical outcomes. A motion by Susana Cohen, seconded by Kate Coles, to approve the proposal passed.
Information and Recommendations Calendar
Emphases in Journalism, Strategic Communication, and Communication Studies – Communication BA/BS
Natasha Seegert presented the Communications department proposal to change three course sequences currently offered to three emphases. This change will help amplify students’ transcripts, assist the department and its students to reliably track students’ progress, allow the department to do degree audit and exceptions more carefully.
Emphasis in Accounting – Quantitative Analysis for Markets and Organizations BS
Scott Schaefer explained that the new QAMO major was approved by the Senate about two years ago, and part of the original proposal was an option to have an emphasis in finance. This proposal does the same thing for accounting; students in the QAMO major will now have the option of an accounting emphasis by adding accounting coursework.
Invest in U Income Share Agreement
Courtney McBeth, Special Assistant to the President, and CFO Cathy Anderson updated the Senate on the Invest in U Income Share Agreement (ISA) pilot program recently approved by the Trustees. This Presidential Initiative program aims to provide debt-averse University of Utah students with another funding tool to accelerate timely degree completion, by filling in financial aid gaps. Graduates in this 5-year pilot program will pay 3.1% of their salary for 8.5 years (some exceptions will apply) and sustain a self-perpetuating fund for future students’ needs. For the 2019 program launch, the initial fund size is $8 million in investor and institutional funds, and ISAs will be provided to up to 2000 students from 10-15 majors. If the initial trial is successful, this model could be expanded across more areas of the campus, and incorporate possible institutional, foundational and corporate partnerships. If not, there is a plan on how to phase the program out. Courtney explained that one key to success is clear communication to students and parents and presented sample marketing and outreach ideas to be implemented during the launch in early 2019. In response to questions, Cathy explained that financial modeling was done to set the payback rates for the pilot phase, and the pilot will generate information about future rates and opportunities if the initiative is successful.
International Travel Health Insurance & Emergency Services
Sean Bridegam, Global Risk Manager for the Office for Global Engagement, explained that the issues of student and employee travel risk management have been before the Senate two times in the past few years, and this presentation would provide the Senate updates. Since 2016, student international travel risk management improvements have included: Learning Abroad international programs travel risk management process integration and standardization; the University Student Travel Registry platform launch; Rule R3-030D, International Travel Safety and Insurance Rule adoption by the Senate in April 2018. Currently there are over 1000 annual registered student travelers participating in University programs and activities abroad (FY 2018), and compliance for travel registration and insurance enrollment is above 95% for students. In addition, a risk and safety assessment process is in place for all University international student programs. A travel review process in place for all independent student travel to international locations
The second half of the information is employee international travel risk management updates. As of a few years ago, most employee travel was not disclosed to the University until travelers returned. The first step to ensure that the University is supporting employees appropriately is to gather data beforehand, and measures have been put in place, with more coming. The current challenge is to increase preregistration compliance (which is about 65% currently), increase international travel insurance enrollment compliance, and to clarify messaging and define the role of University HR in these processes, as international travel resources are a benefit to employees. The University international travel insurance required provides for health, safety, and security resources, and does not replace regular travel insurance. The OGM continues to work on improving and clarifying international employee travel procedures and communications, and feedback is welcome.
Open Discussion
The following remarks were made during the Open Discussion portion of the meeting.
- Student Devon Cantwell encouraged faculty to look at a current study on effective mental health for graduate students, and to let their students know about the variety of graduate student mental health programs available. These types of discussions appear to also have a positive effect also on students’ mental health.
- Student Presidential Ambassador Maddie Lamah asked for more clarification on campus safety, focusing on the measures taken for upper campus, which seems to have more assaults than lower. Bob Flores explained that there is not a great policy distinction between the different parts of the campus. However, upper campus has more activity around hospitals, so there is a greater prevalence of security officers.
- Tom Richmond thanked Presidential Ambassadors Maddie Lamah and Mitchel Kenney for their valuable assistance with the microphones during the meeting and noted that the pilot use of the microphones for this meeting seemed to have been successful in addressing concerns about the room acoustics and resulting difficulties of member participation in discussions.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 4:52 pm.
Academic Senate Meeting Security Update Report Addendum
Questions and Responses
Monday, November 5, 2018
Subsequent to the Administration’s campus security updates presentation, the following questions were posed:
Question from Kate Coles (Humanities): We live in a world in which violence, and threats, and stalking of women is normal, and she wonders how to develop a police force, and should it look like the force that we have right now. Is it going to understand that though this is normal to security forces, it should not be treated by them as normal, and that they actually need to take action in contrast to old attitudes?
Response
Ruth Watkins: These are very important issues. She has strong confidence in the University Police Department, but also recognizes that part of conducting independent reviews is a chance to ask what is happening in society, and how does the university prepare for it. The campus has grown in not only how many students, visitors, faculty and patients, but also grown in the context of Salt Lake. Because growth yields both positive and negative influences, the President has a strong commitment to a process of constant self-reevaluation, in terms of what is being done, how it is being done, training, preparation, and more.
Question from Devon Cantwell (ASUU): Students from her College had concerns around campus safety, so was happy to see the press release addressing the efforts in this area. Her specific concern, having a decade of advocacy experience with domestic and interpersonal violence, is the lack of acknowledgement that the shooting was not a neutral-target attack, but rather one of intimate partner violence.
Additionally, she has become increasingly aware of how many students lack knowledge of what intimate partner violence is, and that it includes past relationships. As a result, there are many students who do not know that campus resources apply to them. As part of the broader ongoing campus safety assessment, would the administration consider adding IPV and DV as maybe a specific charge to evaluate, asking what resources and support is being provided?
In tandem, her review of the latest campus wellness annual budget report indicates that there is not enough funding to staff the Wellness Center to the degree that can provide preventive versus reactionary measures. Statistics support that these types of violence are a problem on college campuses, and in the state of Utah. A suggestion is to create a specific task force that looks at how to work with IPV and DV on campus, and better support those groups focusing on that issue.
Response:
Barb Snyder: She agreed, and believes this is another opportunity, not to say need another one, to continue to generate support improvements that raise awareness and improve education–for faculty, staff and students–about healthy relationships and what constitutes an unhealthy one.
Question from Sarah Bush (Science): Can we revisit the gun control policy on campus, given this situation?
Response
Ruth Watkins: The University follows the laws of the state of Utah, and as a state entity, it adheres to the law concerning these entities as well. As independent citizens, individuals are encouraged to voice their personal opinions to governing bodies if desired, on topics covered by state and local laws. She ventured that there were probably multiple views and thoughts in the room, and the President refrained from expressing personal ideas on this.
Question from Ravi Chandran (Mines & Earth Sciences): Would the campus be safer if police officers were patrolling randomly? Many students and faculty leave at night and walk a distance to their cars. It could be a topic of debate.
Response
Barb Snyder: There are currently uniformed and plain-clothes security officers patrolling the campus regularly. However, the fact that Ravi made the comment indicated that these have not been observed. She believes that the review will help look at whether this is an area that needs to do a better job, or a different job, with the public safety office resources.
Ruth Watkins: One benefit of having outside experts look at the current situation is that they can help determine if there are not enough resources dedicated to that. She also prompted meeting attendees, especially those that come and go at odd hours, to check to make sure that doors are firmly locked when leaving. Recent findings were that a locked door stays a locked door on campus about 50% of the time.
Question from Nadia Cobb (Medicine): Her building in Research Park is very accessible, and people are there all hours of the day and night. The swipe cards that were supposed to be provided have not all been. The process was to have begun in April and has not been completed; her understanding is that the process stopped immediately after the incident—possibly due to security resources being diverted. Additionally, a topic that has come up in her department is whether there is a way to consolidate evening class locations that allow for a concentration of security monitoring.
Response
Ruth Watkins: The President offered to follow up on the security access issue for the building and provided some thoughts on this and the other good ideas. It was announced last week that students with U parking passes can park in some A lots after 3 pm. A step past that would be considering this idea of consolidation of locations so that there is increased activity around those leaving evening classes. One of the investments that came from the security task force recommendations was easy access to a safe walking partner with a quick phone call. To the extent possible, she asked that this phone number be shared with students and colleagues.
Question from Krystal Moorman (Pharmacy): Echoed that she is also someone who has not seen a security presence when leaving late, and then asked if the task force would look at the lag time experienced in shelter-in-place notifications. Last year, there was a 10-minute difference between when the first shelter-in-place text was received by a student and when her notification arrived. In this latest situation, the time between the 911 call and the notification was one hour and 40 minutes. The time that the campus is most at risk is really immediately after the situation. Because not everyone has their phone on (for instance during a class), she offered ideas from other campuses such as loudspeakers, and similar tools.
Response
Ruth Watkins: The President noted that this is a reasonable question. She also clarified that the lag from person A to person Z is somewhat inevitable due to the size of the institution and the numbers that need to be reached. The police must be a little judicious about sending a shelter-in-place alert; there is a delicate balance determining when to send one and when to wait until there is more information. The independent review will help answer whether the campus has the balance right, assist with these other questions, and make sure we’re doing this as well as we can.
Question from Mardie Clayton (Nursing): Speaking from a personal experience, with someone close who suffered a traumatic attack while a student at another school, she offered that there could be opportunity for the University to become a leader in best practices in this area on a national level, as this is not the only University facing these serious issues.
Response
Ruth Watkins: Along the lines being articulated, the administration has made a commitment to Lauren McCluskey’s family that the University will do its best to learn what can be learned and think about best practices for institutions. Other university president colleagues have contacted the President to express sympathy and empathy, as many have also experienced tragedies on their campuses.