West Virginia University at Parkersburg
Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes
October 21, 2013
Present: Senators/Representatives: Dianne Davis (Vice-Chair), Torie Jackson (Chair), Maggie Berdine (Secretary), Al Newhart, Mary Beth Held, Aaron Crites (ACF), Matthew Santer (BOG), Cynthia Watkins, Uta Hempel, Dave Williams, Missy Spivy, Rob Anderson, Joyce Stover
Updates:
Advisory Council of Faculty Report: Aaron Crites, WVUP Representative to the ACF, reported on the Thursday, October 17 meeting of the Council. 
1. Senate Bill 330: The main topic of the meeting was Senate Bill 330, the primary concern was its impact on faculty retention and salaries. The original bill set long-awaited base salaries for staff. However, after the Bill’s passage, faculty were added. The Bill was passed in March of 2011 with a goal of FACTS (Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, Systematic). Initially, NEPC contracted with the firm of Fox-Lawson to develop a database to establish “fair market equity” at 5% above or below an established cohort of “peer institutions.” Also, since HEPC was dissatisfied with the scope of Fox-Lawson’s work, so their contract was renegotiated at a higher rate and a watch-dog firm Mercer was hired to oversee Fox-Lawson’s work. 
Concerns: 
1. The scope of the cohort remains unclear. 
2. The current Senate Bill 330 will take the determination of salaries out of the hands of individual institutions and Boards of Governors. HPEC will make the final decision on salaries for CTC institutions and all CTC institutions must comply. Mr. Crites confirmed that 300 does not set “goals” but is “law.”
3. The Presidents’ representative to the ACF, from West Liberty, did a “private study” of the repercussion for every institution in the state to finance 330. Meeting this new law will require $21,000, 000 - $59,000,000 funding from all state institutions. The Presidents’ representative indicated that meeting the requirements of this law will result in pay raises for some and position cuts for others. 
4. Positions of constituent parties: Administration opposed, Staff supportive, Faculty concerned about position cuts and impact on programs.
5. Author of 330, Senator Robert Plymale “eagerly expects its full implementation” 
6. “No benchmark” as to when the law will be enacted;
7. With 15% budget cuts in the last two years, faculty and programs will be cut
8. The state has not done a study to see how this will play out financially. 
[Mr. Crites requested that the CTC Code on Tenure be shared with Senators. A copy is attached]
Suggestions to address concerns: 
1. WVUP should follow the example of most of the CTC institutions, which have hired a lobbyist to represent them. We should also consider representation by an attorney.
2. Extend an invitation to our service area representatives to attend a Faculty Assembly meeting to discuss the repercussions of 330. A firm agenda should be followed. 
3. Chair Jackson argued for a shared appeal from our representatives, rather than one representative. Suggested procedure: 1. a formal letter addressing concerns, 2. follow-up phone call by individual faculty senators who have some connection to service area legislators, 3. this strategy should be a shared responsibility. 
2. NACEP (National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships): is looking at advanced placement. By law every public high school in the state will be required to offer four advancement placement courses. “Overwhelming response” of AFC representatives was positive. Rhonda Tracy and Cindy Gissy will be WVU-P’s representatives at the upcoming NACEP Conference in Florida. Concern was expressedabout standards since these courses will be taught by high school and adjunct faculty;

Board of Governors Report: Faculty Representative Matt Santer requested a vote from the Senate on the proposed Smoking Ban. Discussion followed concerning current penalties for violations of existing restrictions. Concerns expressed that total will be even harder to enforce.  The vote was 10 opposed, 1 in favor.
Faculty Senate Chair Report:
Institutional Effectiveness Council: Meeting focused on retention:
1. IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System) data showed disturbing statistics:
     a. first-time full-time retention rate had dropped from 70% to approximately 40%.;
     b. last year’s GPA average was 2.43 for that group;
     c. this year, 101 out of approximately 500 students had a 0.0 GPA.
     d. The Council asked for additional data: GPA for all students for this year; for IPEDS group 
         specifically: age, courses taken, veterans’ status, first-generation status, driving distance, 
         socio-economic status, ACT or Accuplacer scores, and high school GPA.
    Responses to statistics: 
     a. lowering standards is not an option, 
     b. train 20 successful student mentors to assist low-performance students,
     c. investigate WCE (Workforce and Community Education) options for low-performing 
         students. 
      d. Dual enrollment: New mandate from CTC to “wrap” developmental courses around 
          college-level courses. Example, the STRETCH Program.
2. Vice President for Academic Affairs Anthony Underwood reported there is currently an 
     advising evaluation website, but it is not anonymous.  
3. Council needs assistance in developing goals and assessment for Strategic Plan Goal: an 
    excellent place to work

Old Business:
Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the September 30 and October 7 Senate meetings were approved as written.
Advising: Guests Tyler Orhn, President of the Student Government Association and SGA member Joshua Campbell responded to faculty concerns about the SGA’s “Resolution” in response to the Student Success Center Council’s proposed Advising Policy. Concerns about this policy were expressed at the September 30 meeting: “…serious consideration cannot be given to developing a website that evaluates faculty advisors 1) until the college has an advising system that is consistent and credible; 2) until the role of faculty advisors in the registration system is clearly defined; 3) until policy and procedural changes and updates are clearly and consistently communicated to faculty; and 4) until appropriate and timely training of faculty is funded.”   
The SGA had  passed a “Resolution and “Addendum” to that proposed policy: Resolution Concerning the West Virginia University at Parkersburg Proposed Advising Policy:
Whereas, students have voiced a growing concern about communicating with their advisors; 
Whereas, faculty contracts do not guarantee employment of faculty over the summer semester which could impact the meeting of students and advisors; 
Whereas, the amount of students per program may overload the amount of advisors per program which could impact the communication between advisors and students; 
Whereas, the amount of students per program could call for additional training for advisors that are not familiar with their advisees program; 
Whereas, the majority of students on campus report a negative experience with advising, which 
would point to the need for more adequate training of advisors; 
Whereas, the ability of students to transfer advisors may contribute to overloading select 
advisors on campus; 
Whereas, problems have occurred with advisors going on sabbatical, creating an issue 
scheduling a meeting time with students for advising; 
Therefore be it resolved, by the West Virginia University at Parkersburg Student Government 
Association here assembled that substantial changes be made in the implementation and 
procedure of this proposed policy. While studies may show that the policy has proven 
advantageous to students; the policy as proposed will cause problems and confusion for advisors 
and advisees.  Signed: L. Tylor Ohrn, Presidet of the Student Government Association

Proposed Advising Policy Addendum: 
•	  Including links to the updated college catalog when registering for classes on OLSIS. 
•	  Select student advisors mentoring other classmates in the same academic program.
•	  Continual advising training for faculty members based on their academic division
•	  A reduction of courses that are not attached to a specific degree program; more 
    flexibility in electives applying to majors. 
•	  The elimination of faculty members advising students outside of their academic     
    division in the Welcome Center. (Unless they have received proper training in the 
    program.) 
•	Better defined course schedules for the upcoming semester. (Clear communication as to which classes are only offered in the Fall or Spring Semester to assist with planning.)
•	Allowing students admitted to the Regents Bachelor of Arts program to be advised by a faculty member within their emphasis of study. 
•	A gradual implementation of mandatory advising to properly transition and assist both faculty and students in the increased workload. 
•	Staffers in the Welcome Center only advising first year students and faculty members 
advising transfer students assigned to their academic program. 
•	Increased education of the benefits of students meeting with their advisors. 

Faculty concerns about Advising Policy: 
•	The whole advising system had inadequacies
•	Only negative data is reported 
•	One person needs to take responsibility for advising
•	There is a chronic problem with inaccurate program information being used to advise students

New Business:
Faculty/ Staff Gathering: was discussed. Uta Hempel offer the hospitality of her home for such              
           an event.
Information to bring to the next meeting: Senators were asked to gather comments on the current advising system from which the Senate can create a concerns list. It was also suggested that Pat Mollohan, who now has the responsibility of updating the college catalogue, be invited to the next meeting.  
November Meetings: The next meeting will be on November 4.  
 The meeting adjourned at 12:15
Submitted by Maggie Berdine, Secretary