1

UNIVERSITY SENATE Seventh Meeting, Monday, 23 April 2012, 2:30 p.m.

Room 302, Stewart Center AGENDA (as amended) 1. Call to order Professor Morris Levy 2. Approval of Minutes of 19 March 2012

3. Acceptance of Agenda

4. Remarks by the President President France A. Córdova

5. Remarks of the Chairperson Professor Morris Levy

6. Résumé of Items Under Consideration For Information

by Various Standing Committees Professor Timothy Folta 7. Question Time

8. University Senate Document 10-6 For Action

Grief Absence Policy for Students (GAPS) 2nd Revision Professor Sally Hastings

9. University Senate Document 11-14 For Action Endorsement of the University Honors College Professor A. Paul Schwab

10. University Senate Document 11-10 For Action Honors College Governance Committee Professor Teri Reed-Rhoads

11. University Senate Document 11-11 For Action

Faculty Representation on the Board of Trustees Professor David Williams

12. University Senate Document 11-15 For Acton Committee for Sustainability Planning and Assessment Professor A. Paul Schwab

13. University Senate Document 11-13 For Action Changes to the Senate Bylaws to Enhance Professors Joan Fulton & Natalie Carroll Efficiency & Effectiveness of the Senate- Part 1

14. University Senate Document 11-17 For Action Changes to the Senate Bylaws to Enhance Professors Joan Fulton & Natalie Carroll Efficiency & Effectiveness of the Senate- Part 2

15. University Senate Document 11-18 For Action Senate Nominating and Steering Committee Nominees Professor Natalie Carroll

16. University Senate Document 11-19 For Action Senate Standing Committee Nominees Professor Natalie Carroll

17. University Senate Document 11-20 For Action Faculty Committee Nominees Professor Natalie Carroll

2

18. Annual Report of the Athletic Affairs Committee For Information Director of Athletics Morgan Burke

19. Update from the Budget Interpretation, Evaluation and For Information Review Committee Professor Larry DeBoer

20. Foundation of Excellence Update For Information Vice Provost Date Whittaker

21. New Business 22. Memorial Resolutions

23. Adjournment

Note: The annual reports of the Faculty Affairs Committee, University Resources Policy Committee, the Student Affairs Committee and Educational Policy Committee are attached (See Appendix J).

3

UNIVERSITY SENATE Seventh Meeting, Monday, 23 April 2012, 2:30 p.m.

Room 302, Stewart Center

Present: President France A. Córdova; Morris Levy, (Chairperson of the Senate) presiding, Professors: Thomas W. Atkinson, Zarjon Baha, Ebony M. Barrett-Kennedy, Patricia E. Bauman, Alan M. Beck, Evelyn Blackwood, Donald D. Buskirk, Barrett S. Caldwell, Joseph W. Camp Jr. (Secretary of Faculties and Parliamentarian), Natalie A. Carroll, Richard A. Cosier, William A. Crossley, Wei K. Cui, Marius D. Dadarlat, James R. Daniel, Jenny L. Daugherty, Frank J. Dooley, Janusz Duzinkiewicz, Peggy A. Ertmer, Melissa E. Exum, Timothy B. Folta, Michael J. Fosmire, Joan R. Fulton, Gabriele F. Giuliani, James P. Greenan, John B. Grutzner, Chong Gu, Sally A. Hastings, Patricia Y. Hester, Michael A. Hill, Peter M. Hirst, William L. Hoover, William J. Hutzel, Chad T. Jafvert, Steven D. Johnson, Richard D. Johnson-Sheehan, Patrick P. Kain, David L. Kemmerer, Rosemary L. Kilmer, Harold P. Kirkwood, Cheng-Kok Koh, Stephen F. Konieczny, William G. Krug, Robert A. Kubat, James S. Lehnert, Morris Levy, Rebecca A. Logsdon, W. Gerry McCartney, William D. McInerney, Robert E. McMains, Rabindra N. Mukerjea, Robert W. Morman, Douglas C. Nelson, Abdelfattah Nour, James G. Ogg, D. Marshall Porterfield, Darryl Ragland, Phillip L. Rawles, Teri Reed-Rhoads, J. Paul Robinson, Alysa C. Rollock, Joseph W. Rust, Timothy D. Sands, A. Paul Schwab, Cleveland G. Shields, Louis A. Sherman, Thomas H. Siegmund, Mark J.T. Smith,Keith M. Stantz, J. Jill Suitor, A. Charlene Sullivan, Elizabeth J. Taparowsky, Thomas J. Templin, Lynda J. Thoman, Feng-Song Wang, A. Dale Whittaker, David Williams, G. Thomas Wilson.

Absent: Professors: Walad G. Aref, Robert A. Barret, J. Stuart Bolton, Danita M. Brown, Sharon A. Burns, Stephen R. Byrn, Carlos M. Corvalan, Beverly Davenport Sypher, Edward J. Delp III, John P. Denton, Alphonso V. Diaz, Paul B. Dixon, Nancy E. Edwards, Levon T. Esters, Geraldine S. Friedman, Kevin D. Gibson, Matthew D. Ginzel, R. Neal Houze, Christine A. Hrycyna, Charles M. Krousgrill, Eric P. Kvam, Mark A. Lawley, Michael Levine, Martin A. Lopez-de-Bertodano, Craig L. Miller, Mary B. Nakhleh, Suzanne L. Parker, Zygmunt Pizlo, Jean-Christophe Rochet, , Sandra S. Rossie, Glenn G. Sparks, Ronald Sterkenburg, Marion T. Trout, Samuel S. Wagstaff Jr, Jeffrey X. Watt, Fenggang Yang, Li Zhang. Guests: George Bodner, Richard Buckius, Morgan Burke, Mary Jane Chew, Audeen Fentiman, Jacque Frost, Ed Howat, Cliff Johnston Christopher Kulesza, Maria Levy, Lewis Luin, Valerie O’Brien, Dennis Savanio, Chris Sigurdson, Mark Simons, Jon Story, Eric Weddle, Lauren Westburg, Sharon WhitlockHoward Zelaznik. 1. The meeting was called to order at 2:35 p.m. by Chairperson Morris Levy. 2. The minutes of the meeting of 19 March 2012 were approved as distributed by

unanimous voice vote. 3. Professor James Lehnert made a motion to amend the agenda by removing Senate

Documents 11-16, Update to Executive Memorandum C-26. His motion was seconded and the amendment was approved by unanimous voice vote. Following the approval of the amendment, the agenda was approved by unanimous voice vote.

4. President France A. Córdova presented remarks to the Senate (See Appendix A). As this was her last Senate meeting as University President, the assembly gave her a round of applause upon the conclusion of her remarks.

4

5. Professor Levy presented the report of the chairperson (see Appendix B). Following his remarks, Professor Levy invited several former Senate Chairpersons to join him at the podium. The former Chairpersons were Professor George Bodner, Professor Howard Zelaznik and Professor Joan Fulton. Professor Levy next invited President Córdova to join them at the podium. Professor Levy then read the proclamation on a certificate, the A+ Certificate, that he presented to the President to honor her efforts at shared governance. Professor Fulton then showed the assembly a partially-completed quilt that she is making that includes two elongated gold-colored strips. She asked each member of the assembly to sign their names along one of the strips prior to leaving the hall at the end of the Senate meeting. Once it is finished, Professor Fulton will present the autographed quilt to President Córdova on behalf of the University Senate.

6. Professor Timothy Folta, Chair of the Steering Committee, presented for information the Résumé of Items under Consideration (ROI) by Various Standing Committees (see Appendix C).

7. At “Question Time” no questions were forthcoming. 8. Professor Sally Hastings, Chair of the Student Affairs Committee, presented for Action

Senate Document 10-6, Grief Absence Policy for Students (GAPS) 2nd Revision. Her motion to approve the document was seconded. Professor Hastings briefly described the rationale for the revision to the document. As modified, the revised document will now be in force on the West Lafayette campus and the regional campuses will be able to create their own Grief Absence Policies. Voting was done electronically and the motion passed with the following result: 95% Yes, 5% No.

9. Professor A. Paul Schwab, Chair of the University Resources Policy Committee, presented for Action Senate Document 11-14, Endorsement of the University Honors College. His motion was seconded. As there was no discussion, the vote was taken and the document passed by a vote 92% of the Senators in favor, 5% opposed and 3% abstaining.

10. Professor Teri Reed-Rhoads, Chair of the Educational Policy Committee (EPC), presented for Action Senate Document 11-10, Honors College Governance Committee. Her motion was seconded. Professor J. Paul Robinson asked if the Governance Committee will be involved in determining the honors curriculum. Interim Dean of the Honors College Dennis Savaiano replied in the affirmative. The vote was taken and the document passed by a vote of 88% in favor, 8% opposed and 4% abstaining.

11. Professor A. Charlene Sullivan presented for Action Senate Document 11-11, Faculty Representation on the Board of Trustees. Professor David Williams made the motion to approve the document and his motion was seconded by Professor Robinson. The regional campus Senators rose to state that each of their Senates had unanimously supported this document. The motion passed by a vote of 96% in favor, 1% opposed and 3% abstaining. The matter will now be taken to the Board of Trustees by Professor Levy.

12. Professor Schwab presented for Action Senate Document 11-15, Committee for Sustainability Planning and Assessment. This committee will be charged with overseeing sustainability at Purdue University. His motion was seconded. Senator Rebecca Logsdon made a motion to include a graduate student on the committee. This was accepted as a friendly amendment. Professor Natalie Carroll noted that the wording in Part B should be changed to reflect that APSAC and CSSAC will choose their members for the committee. This is necessary as the Senate Nominating Committee

5

only has purview over selection of faculty members to committees. Professor Schwab accepted this as a friendly amendment. Professor Janusz Duzinkiewicz made a motion to include one faculty member and one student member from each of the regional campuses. Professor Lou Sherman pointed out that the current wording limits the membership to 20 members. Adding these members would increase the membership by eight and Professor Sherman made a motion to remove the wording proposed by Professor Duzinkiewicz. This motion was seconded. Professor Levy clarified the wording of the document with the proposed amendments. Professor Duzinkiewicz spoke against Professor Sherman’s amendment. Senator Joe Rust explained that he was one of the PSG sponsors of the original document and supported its passage. At the request of Professor Folta, Professor Sherman explained the original wording of the document. Professor John Grutzner asked if the original wording explicitly excludes regional campus representation. Professor Sherman said that it did not exclude regional campus members. At this point in the discussion, Professor Sherman withdrew his amendment to exclude regional campus members. It was noted that to include regional campus members, the ceiling for members would have to be increased. Senator Rust proposed removing the number 20 and replacing it with 28. His motion was accepted as a friendly amendment by Professor Schwab. Professor Frank Dooley suggested a word change to “… with no less than eight student members…” This was also accepted as a friendly amendment. Professor Thomas Siegmund proposed an amendment to add “Environmental” to the title of the document. Senator Rust spoke in opposition to this amendment which died due to the lack of a second. Senator Rebecca Logsdon asked if there had been discussion about the background of the members with respect to experience that would be pertinent to this committee. Professor Schwab stated that no such discussion had occurred. Senator Rust expressed the hope that members would be selected based on interest in serving on the committee. Professor Schwab noted that the BIER Committee is made up of members with an interest in the committee’s charge and expects the same will occur for the Sustainability Committee. The discussion ended and the vote was taken. The motion passed with 71% in favor, 21% opposed and 8% abstaining.

13. Professors Joan Fulton and Natalie Carroll presented for Action Senate Document 11-13, Changes to the Senate Bylaws to Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Senate- Part 1. They explained that an ad hoc committee was formed a year ago to make recommendations to improve the Senate’s efficiency and effectiveness. Professor Fulton noted that at the Senate Advisory Committee meeting it was mentioned that research suggests these types of changes are good for an organization. The proposed ex officio members would be more permanent members, sans vote. The addition of ex officio members would allow non-Senator faculty members to serve and provide their expertise to the committees. The motion to approve was seconded. Professor Folta asked if ex officio members could be leaders of the committees. The answer to that question is “no.” Professor Gabriele Giuliani asked if they would count toward the quorum. The answer to that was also “no.” The vote was taken and the motion passed with 88% approving, 8% opposing and 4% abstaining.

14. Professors Fulton and Carroll next presented for Action Senate Document 11-17, Changes to the Senate Bylaws to Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Senate- Part 2. The motion to approve was seconded. No discussion occurred and the vote was taken. The document passed with 73% in favor, 24% opposed and 3% abstaining.

15. Professor Carroll presented for Action Senate Document 11-18, Senate Nominating and Steering Committee Nominees. The document was moved and seconded. Voting for this document was done by secret paper ballot. Professors Grutzner, Hill and Greenan served as tellers. The votes were tallied and Professors April Ginther, David Sanders

6

and Holly Wang were selected for the Steering Committee while Professors Stephen Byrn, Richard Cosier, Buster Dunsmore, Michael Fosmire, Patricia Hart, Michael Hill, Peter Hirst, Iñigo Sanchez-Llama and Cleveland Shields were chosen for the Nominating Committee.

16. Professor Carroll presented for Action Senate Document 11-19, Senate Standing Committee Nominees. Her motion was seconded. The vote was taken and the document passed with 90% approving, 3% opposed and 7% abstaining.

17. Professor Carroll presented for Action Senate Document 11-20, Faculty Committee Nominees. Her motion was seconded and she noted that the nominees for the Censure and Dismissal Committee would be eligible to serve immediately. The vote was taken and the document was approved with 85% approving, 8% opposing and 7% abstaining.

18. Director of Intercollegiate Athletics Morgan Burke presented for Information, the Athletic Affairs Committee Annual Report (see Appendices D and E). Following the presentation he answered questions from the floor. Professor Abdelfattah Nour asked how successful the tutoring programs were for the student-athletes, were they responsive to the tutoring program and were the student-athletes provided information on graduate and professional school opportunities. Associate Director Ed Howat stated that the master tutor program has been particularly effective as the student-athletes come to the sessions well-prepared and they seem more accountable than in other tutoring programs. The master tutor program is very beneficial and more master tutors need to be recruited. If any Senators know of potential master tutors, they should inform Directors Burke or Howat. A small stipend is associated with the tutoring duties. Director Howat said that a consulting group from Indianapolis helps to coordinate graduate and professional school opportunities for the student-athletes and it the group also helps to maintain a career center on campus. Professor Giuliani noted that the graduation rate for student-athletes is a little higher than for the general student population. Research shows that if student-athletes complete four years of eligibility there is a 90% chance they will graduate. Professor Giuliani asked if there were data on the success rate of student-athletes once they were employed compared with the general student body graduates. Director Burke does not have the summary statistics needed to answer the question. Professor Nour asked if the student-athletes are involved in service-learning courses/experiences. Director Burke noted that there is an appendix to the report that summarizes the service-learning and other experiences of the student-athletes. Any and all student-athletes can serve, if they wish to do so.

19. Professors Larry DeBoer, Cliff Johnston and Lou Sherman presented for Information updates from the BIER Committee (see Appendices F, G and H).

20. Vice Provost Dale Whittaker presented for Information a summary of the Foundations of Excellence activities that have occurred recently (see Appendix I). Professor Robinson suggested that too few senior professors are involved with first-year students and efforts should be made to enhance these interactions. Vice Provost Whittaker agreed and suggested several ways in which this might be accomplishes such as small research/seminar groups based on the faculty members interests and having the senior faculty members teach the foundational courses.

21. Under New Business, a round of applause was given to President Córdova since this was the last Senate meeting for her prior to her retirement.

22. Memorial Resolutions had been received for Stuart Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Physics Albert W. Overhauser and Professor Emeritus of Industrial Engineering James

7

W. Barany. The Senate members stood for a moment of silence to honor their departed colleagues.

23. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m.

REMARKS FROM THE PRESIDENT 

 

Dr. Córdova acknowledged and thanked each of the Senate Chairs she has worked with during her 

tenure. She described the Senate as an invaluable part of the university, and congratulated Senate 

members for their accomplishments and for successfully giving the faculty a voice. Her closing 

statement: “I know you will continue to serve well and to strengthen Purdue in the next administration.” 

Board of Trustees Purdue University Senate Annual Report (April 12,'12) Academic Year 2011-12 (agenda drafted 7/13/11;

black bold = accomplished; black non-bold = yet to be done; red = unanticipated accomplishments)

Old Business: 1. Purdue Cares (SAC; for action) 2. BIERC (re-population and agenda) 3. Health Care and Insurance Policies (BRHC): Promote Tier-1 lab savings 4. Core Curriculum Developments (+EPC) 5. Regional campus issues (transfer/reciprocity/credit hours/GAPS; EPC; IFC) New Business: 1. Revised Research Faculty Policy (FAC/URPC) 2. Open Access Policy (URPC/Library Comm.) 3. WL Senate Representation of Regional Campus Faculty (FAC) 4. Undergraduate Admissions Policy (EPC) 5. Faculty Grievance Policy (FAC) 6. Faculty Survey (FAC): COACHE Survey 7. Honors College (EPC) 8. Special Advisory Committee for New Presidential Search; incl. the largest survey of faculty, staff and students in Purdue history 9. Host CIC faculty Governance Annual Conference 10. Faculty Summer Salary Revision Initiatives: 1. Task Force on Expanding Purdue Child Daycare (Senate/Provost)-meeting 2. Ad Hoc Committee on Improving Senate Effectiveness and Participation 3. Review and Evaluation of SPS/PRF/OVPR operations (BIERC/URPC) 4. Review of International Travel Insurance Requirements (URPC/FAC) 5. Proposal for Adding a Faculty/Senate Member of the Board of Trustees 6. Re-Evaluation of Student On-Line Assessment Quality and Use (Joint Task Force) FAC 7. Review of Early Retirement Outcome and Future Plans (URPC/BIERC) 8. Review of Physical Facilities (Customer Service and Operations ; URPC)- Sustainability Proposal 9. Review of Procurement Services (URPC)- Successful New Director Search 10. Evaluation of new position of SATS Director (EPC/URPC) 11. Appreciation of Purdue Food Services and Dining Hall University Senate Summer 2012 Plans: 1. Undergraduate Curriculum Council: Implementing the "Core" 2. Dealing with HB 182: Coordinating "Core"/General Education courses

system-wide and statewide 3. Dealing with HB 1220: Reviewing credit requirements for baccalaureate degree programs; reducing programs to 120 credit maximum or otherwise justifying those >120 credits to ICHE

THE UNIVERSITY CODE RE FACULTY AND THE CURRICULUM "A 4.00 General Powers and Responsibilities of the Faculties Subject to the authority of the Board of Trustees and in consultation with the president of the University, the faculties shall have the general power and responsibility to adopt policies, regulations, and procedures intended to achieve the educational objectives of Purdue University and the general welfare of those involved in these educational processes. A 4.05 Specific Powers and Responsibilities of the Faculties Among other responsibilities necessary to meet the obligations of its general powers, the faculties specifically shall: a) Advise the president and the Board of Trustees concerning policies for admission and academic placement of students* b) Advise the president and the Board of Trustees concerning policies governing the conduct and the dismissal of students from the University in furthering the educational and general welfare of both the students and the University c) Review and approve the academic degree titles conferred by the University and the general requirements for the several curricula of the University leading towards academic degrees and nominate all candidates for such degrees. Subject to the right of review by the appropriate University faculty through its governing body and except when the interests of that faculty as a whole or the University as a whole or the interests of other schools are affected, the power to develop curriculum. course content, instructional and examination procedures, and undergraduate degree requirements, and to nominate candidates for these degrees is delegated to the various school faculties of the University." (Except when otherwise mandated by the governor, legislature and ICHE??) Hb 1220: reducing credit hours to a mandated 120 credit ceiling will both violate our University Code and, potentially, create a two-tiered baccalaureate degree system: 1. The Purdue degree (120 credits or externally certified, accredited, or licensed degrees of more than 120 credits), and

2. The Purdue-lite degree (120 credits in many agricultural and science areas, frontloaded with high school AP credits, 30 credits of "Core" and diminished upper-division or elective courses.)

23 April 2012

TO: University Senate FROM: Timothy Folta, Chairperson, Steering Committee SUBJECT: Résumé of Items under Consideration by the Various Standing Committees STEERING COMMITTEE Timothy Folta, Chairperson foltat@purdue.edu The primary responsibility of the Steering Committee is the organization and distribution of the agenda for each meeting of the University Senate. This committee also receives communications from any faculty member or group of members and directs such communications to appropriate committees or officers for attention. ADVISORY COMMITTEE Morris Levy, Chairperson of the Senate

levy0@purdue.edu The responsibility of the University Senate Advisory Committee is to advise the President and/or Board of Trustees on any matter of concern to the faculty. NOMINATING COMMITTEE Natalie J. Carroll, Chairperson ncarroll@purdue.edu The Nominating Committee is responsible for presenting nominations for the University Senate and University committees. In filling committee vacancies the Nominating Committee seeks to have all interested Senators serve on at least one committee. EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE Teri Reed-Rhoads, Chairperson trhoads@purdue.edu 1. Student access and success 2. Review of GPA requirements in early years 3. GPA requirements after readmission 4. Transfer credit 5. Evening Exams 6. Honors College FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE David J. Williams, Chairperson djw@purdue.edu 1. On-line Course Evaluation System 2.   Request for a Faculty Member on the Board of Trustees 3. Future of Faculty Informetrics Committee  STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE Thomas J. Templin, Co-Chairperson Sally Hastings, Co-Chairperson 1. Student Conduct ttemplin@purdue.edu 2. Revision of GAPS (Grief Absence Policy for Students) sahnolte@purdue.edu UNIVERSITY RESOURCES POLICY COMMITTEE A. Paul Schwab, Chairperson pschwab@purdue.edu 1. Changes in the Business Operation Model for Purdue Employee Travel 2. Student resolution concerning Comprehensive Energy Master Plan 3. Endorsement of University Honors College 4. Committee for Sustainability Planning and Assessment Chair of the Senate, Morris Levy, levy0@purdue.edu Vice Chair of the Senate, J. Paul Robinson, jpr@purdue.edu Secretary of the Senate, Joseph W. Camp, Jr., jcamp@purdue.edu University Senate Minutes; http://www.purdue.edu/faculty

University Senate Document 10-6 2nd Revision

19 March 2012 TO: The University Senate FROM: University Senate Educational Policy Committee (EPC) Student Affairs Committee (SAC) SUBJECT: Grief Absence Policy for Students (GAPS) DISPOSITION: University Senate for Discussion REFERENCES: Part2, Section VI, C or Part 5, Section I, B (make Bill of Student Rights A) Proposed

Proposed Grief Absence Policy for Students Policy Statement: Purdue University recognizes that a time of bereavement is very difficult for a student. The University therefore provides the following rights to students facing the loss of a family member through the Grief Absence Policy for Students (GAPS). GAPS Policy: Students will be excused for funeral leave and given the opportunity to earn equivalent credit and to demonstrate evidence of meeting the learning outcomes for missed assignments or assessments in the event of the death of a member of the student’s family. Scope: This policy applies to all full-time and part-time students currently enrolled on the West Lafayette campus of in the Purdue University System. Immediate Family: Students are eligible for up to three (3) days of excused absence over five (5) consecutive calendar days for the death of a spouse, parent, child, grandparent, grandchild or sibling, or a corresponding in-law or step-relative. Relative living in the student’s home: Students are eligible for up to three (3) days of excused absence over five (5) consecutive calendar days for the death of an uncle, aunt, niece, nephew or first cousin living in the student’s home. Relative: Students are eligible for one (1) day of excused absence for the death of an uncle, aunt, niece, nephew or first cousin. In the event of the death of another family member or friend not explicitly included within this policy, a bereaved student should petition for grief absence through the Office of the Dean of Students (ODOS) by meeting individually with an ODOS staff member for case evaluation. In addition, students may be granted additional absences to account for travel considerations, to be determined by the distance of the verified funeral services from the campus. where they are enrolled (“campus”), as follows: Within 150 mile radius of campus- No additional excused absence days Between 150-300 mile radius of campus- One additional excused absence days Beyond 300 mile radius of campus- Two additional excused absence days Outside the 48 contiguous United States- Four additional excused absence days A student should contact the ODOS to request that a notice of his or her leave be sent to instructors. The student will provide documentation of the death or funeral service attended to the ODOS. Given proper documentation, the instructor will excuse the student from class and provide the opportunity to earn equivalent credit and to demonstrate evidence of meeting the learning outcomes for missed assignments or assessments. If the student is not satisfied with the implementation of this policy by a faculty member, he or she is encouraged to contact the Department Head and if necessary, the ODOS, for further review of his or her case. In a case where grades are negatively affected, the student may follow the established grade appeals process.

Approved (via email vote): Thomas W. Atkinson Zarjon Baha Danita M. Brown Paul Dixon Sally A. Hastings Brett R. Highley Patricia Hester Chad T. Jafvert Steven J. A. Kimble Stephen F. Konieczny Mary B. Nakhleh James G. Ogg Sandra S. Rossie Thomas J. Templin Lynda Thoman Li Zhang

University Senate Document 11-14 19 March 2012

TO: The University Senate FROM: University Senate Resource Policy Committee SUBJECT: Endorsement of University Honors College DISPOSITION: University Senate for Discussion Whereas: The Purdue University Senate Resources Policy Committee has studied and discussed the creation of an Honors College, and Whereas: The Academic Organization Committee, (a subcommittee of the Educational Policy Committee that reports to EPC), strongly supports the establishment of the Honors College. Therefore, be it resolved that: The Purdue - West Lafayette University Senate Resources Policy Committee endorses the creation of an Honors College by Purdue - West Lafayette consistent with the proposal from the Provost and President to the Board of Trustees in July of 2011 and brings this endorsement forward for discussion and endorsement by the Purdue University Senate. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Purdue University Resources Policy Committee.

Paul Schwab Chair, University Resources Policy Committee Purdue University Senate Approving: Disapproving: Abstain: Absent: M. Fosmire J. Grutzner W. Cui W. Hoover A. Diaz R. Johnson-Sheehan G. Friedman E. Kvam N. King D. Nelson M. Levy J. Rust R. Logsdon P. Schwab L. Sherman K. Stantz M. Trout

University Senate Document 11-10 19 March 2012

To: The University Senate From: University Senate Educational Policy Committee Subject: Honors College Faculty Governance Committee Disposition: University Senate for Information and Endorsement Purdue University-West Lafayette Rationale for Honors College Faculty Governance Committee A faculty advisory and governance committee is charged to determine the initial structure and continuing function of the Honors College based on the report of the task force and soliciting and incorporating feedback from faculty across the university. This committee will advise the Honors College on academic matters and approve curricular offerings. The following initial governance model is proposed:

Honors College Faculty Governance Committee

• One faculty member elected/appointed by each College, the Krannert School of Management, and Libraries.

• A maximum of six at-large faculty members nominated by the Honors College and then approved by the Educational Policy Committee of the Faculty Senate to constitute broad and inclusive representation.

• Three year rotating terms with one-third turnover each year. No more than two consecutive terms allowed.

• The Honors College Faculty Governance Committee will advise the Dean, act as a Curriculum Committee and be a communication interface among the Honors College, the University Senate, and the respective academic units (Colleges, the Krannert School of Management and the Libraries).

• The approval of the Honors College curricula will reside with the Honors College Faculty Governance Committee.

• The Honors College should appoint/elect student ex officio members of the Governance Committee.

It is also recommended that all tenure/tenure track, clinical and research (if allowed by University policy) faculty at Purdue be eligible to teach in the Honors College (HC).

Whereas: The Purdue University Senate Educational Policy Committee has studied and discussed the creation of an Honors College Faculty Governance Committee, and Whereas:The Academic Organization Committee, (a faculty committee that reports to EPC), strongly supports the establishment of the Honors College and has no further recommendations for the Educational Policy Committee to discuss,

Therefore, be it resolved that: The Purdue - West Lafayette University Senate Educational Policy Committee endorses the creation of an Honors College Governance Committee by Purdue - West Lafayette and brings this endorsement forward for discussion and endorsement by the Purdue University Senate. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Purdue University Senate Educational Policy Committee, Teri Reed-Rhoads Chair, Educational Policy Committee Purdue University Senate Approving: Disapproving: Absent: James R. Daniel Danita M. Brown Frank J. Dooley Peggy A. Ertmer Chong Gu Joan R. Fulton Katherine Horton Martin A. Lopez-de-Bertodano Christine A. Hrycyna Craig Miller Harold P. Kirkwood Lindsey Payne Robert A. Kubat Thomas H. Siegmund Teri Reed-Rhoads Glenn G. Sparks Matthew Swiontek A. Dale Whittaker

DRAFT: for Senate Steering Committee University Senate Document 11-11

19 March 2012 To: The University Senate From: University Senate Advisory Committee Subject: Request to the Trustees to Advocate for a Faculty Member on The Board of Trustees Disposition: University Senate for Approval WHEREAS: The ten members of Purdue’s Board of Trustees are all appointed

by the Governor as represented in Indiana Code 21-23-3, with the mandate that three members be selected by the members of the Purdue Alumni Association from the members of that Association, including one that must be a graduate of the School (now College) of Agriculture, and that one Board member be a full-time student, and

WHEREAS: The Faculty are an essential stakeholder as well as provider of the

teaching, research and engagement missions and operations of Purdue University that are overseen by the Board of Trustees, and

WHEREAS: A Faculty member can provide a perspective to the Board of

Trustees on academic issues that have not historically or currently been part of the Board’s expertise; that such a member would expand the Board’s perspective and deliberative effort in a manner parallel to that provided by the mandated student Trustee, and

WHEREAS: There is neither prohibition nor conflict of interest for a current or former Faculty member to serve as a Purdue Trustee.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The Purdue University Senate requests that Purdue’s Board of Trustees advocate to the Governor that the Board of Trustees should include a Purdue Faculty member (including past, current or Emeritus Faculty) among the Trustees. We also request that President Córdova transmit this Resolution to the Board of Trustees at the next official Board of Trustees regular meeting. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the University Senate Advisory Committee, Morris Levy, Chair

University Senate Document 11-15 19 March 2012

As Amended TO: The University Senate FROM: University Senate Resources Policy Committee SUBJECT: Committee for Sustainability Planning and Assessment DISPOSITION: University Senate for Discussion

WHEREAS, the Purdue University Board of Trustees authorized the completion of a Comprehensive Energy Master Plan (CEMP) to look at the production, distribution, and demand of the campus going forward to meet the university's energy needs through 2035, and WHEREAS, Purdue received a cumulative grade of “B-” on the 2011 College Sustainability Report Card, which evaluates the progress universities have made in the area of sustainability based on information provided by university administrators1, and WHEREAS, Purdue has been ranked 8th in the Big Ten for sustainability, falling behind universities such as Michigan State University, University of Michigan, Pennsylvania State, University of Minnesota, University of Wisconsin-Madison and Indiana University, which all performed better than Purdue in the Sustainability Report Card rankings, and WHEREAS, data from the Office of Sustainability indicates that Purdue’s total campus energy usage has increased year after year and will continue to do so2, and WHEREAS, Michigan State University, an institution of comparable size and energy demands as Purdue and current home to the largest coal-burning plant on a college campus, has formed a taskforce made up of students and faculty to develop that university's "Energy Transition Plan” with a goal to have 40% of energy come from renewable sources by 20303, and WHEREAS, the Purdue University Sustainability Strategic Plan, adopted in April 2010, established a goal to "source renewable energy for 10 percent of the campus's total energy demand" by 20254, but concrete, university-wide objectives have not been set to achieve this goal, and WHEREAS, the University Resources Policy Committee of the University Senate is concerned with "planning optimal utilization of the physical facilities of the University, including buildings, the library, scientific and equipment and educational aids" and has subcommittees including Architectural and Landscape Design and Planning and Budget Interpretation, Evaluation and Review, and

1 Sustainable Endowments Institute (2011), "College Sustainability Report Card - Purdue University," found at http://www.greenreportcard.org/report-card-2011/schools/purdue-university 2 Energy Stewardship (2010). Purdue University: Electricity Multiyear comparison, http://www.purdue.edu/sustainability/energy.htm 3 Energy Transition Plan (2012). Michigan State University: http://president.msu.edu/energy-transition-plan/energy-transition-plan.pdf 4 Purdue University (2010), Sustainability Strategic Plan, http://www.purdue.edu/sustainability/pdf/Purdue_University_Sustainability_Strategic_Plan_April_2010.pdf

WHEREAS, this committee has the opportunity to engage stakeholders across the university in setting goals for the sustainability future of Purdue and evaluate institutional progress in achieving these goals, and WHEREAS, progress towards greater utilization of alternative and renewable sources of energy would provide opportunities to utilize the campus as a "living laboratory" to evaluate new energy technologies and energy saving strategies, producing innovative research in the growing field of energy systems and policy and providing possibilities for new coursework and student experiences in these areas, and WHEREAS, such a commitment will benefit Purdue's long-term sustainability, economic wellbeing, and prestige as well as advance the objectives of the Innovative Purdue section of the Decadal Funding Plan5 and thus contribute to the economic prosperity of the State of Indiana; THEREFORE, be it RECOMMENDED by the Purdue University Senate Resources Policy Committee that Purdue University Senate establish a new committee with the following parameters:

A. The committee shall report to the University Resources Policy Committee (URPC).

B. The committee shall be composed of representatives of the student body as appointed by Purdue Student Government; one graduate student as appointed by the Purdue Graduate Student Government; one member of the faculty and one student from each Purdue Regional Campus; members of the Purdue faculty as appointed by the University Senate Nominating Committee; one member of the clerical staff as appointed by the Clerical and Service Staff Advisory Committee; and one member of the Administrative and Professional Staff as appointed by the Administrative and Professional Staff Advisory Committee. Membership will have a maximum of 28 members with no less than 8 student members and two faculty members from URPC.

C. The purpose of the committee shall be to set five-year goals to advance the sustainability of the university, guided by Purdue University’s Sustainability Strategic Plan including but not limited to reducing overall energy consumption and transitioning to greater utilization of clean and renewable sources of energy, determine measurable objectives for achieving these goals, and evaluate progress in meeting the objectives.

D. Recommendations developed by the committee shall include a comparative economic analysis including life cycle cost including cost of capital, operations, maintenance and integration into the existing grid and distribution systems.

E. The committee shall submit a report of its findings to the University Senate at least one time each academic year.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Purdue University Resources Policy Committee.

5 Purdue University, Decadal Funding Plan, http://www.purdue.edu/provost/documents/Senate-DecadalUpdate-23Jan12.pdf

Paul Schwab Chair, University Resources Policy Committee Purdue University Senate

Approving: Disapproving: Absent: M. Fosmire W. Cui J. Grutzner A. Diaz W. Hoover G. Friedman R. Johnson-Sheehan N. King E. Kvam M. Levy D. Nelson R. Logsdon P. Schwab J. Rust L. Sherman K. Stantz M. Trout

University Senate Document 11-13 23 April 2012

TO: The University Senate FROM: Ad hoc Committee to Evaluate Efficient and Effective Operation of the Purdue University Senate SUBJECT: Efficient and Effective Operation of Purdue Senate DISPOSITION: University Senate for Discussion REFERENCES: Senate Bylaws Current Proposed The senate committees shall be constituted of senators, advisors to the senate and students provided for in other sections of these bylaws. Elections will be held annually at the last two regular meetings of the senate to fill elective vacancies on each senate committee for the coming year for terms beginning June 1, and at such other times as vacancies may need to be filled. The report of the Nominating Committee, including names proposed, will be circulated with the agenda for the meeting at which elections are to take place. At least one nominee shall be identified for each elective vacancy on each senate committee, except that two shall be named for each vacancy on the Steering and Nominating committees Members of the Steering and Nominating Committees shall be elected at the March meeting and members of other committees shall be elected at the April meeting. In each instance, nominations may be made from the floor. When the number of nominees exceeds the number of vacancies to be filled, election shall be by written ballot, and a plurality is sufficient to elect. Advisors to senate committees shall be chosen in accordance with the provisions in section 2.00c.

The senate committees shall be constituted of senators, advisors to the senate and students provided for in other sections of these bylaws. Elections will be held annually at the last two regular meetings of the senate to fill elective vacancies on each senate committee for the coming year for terms beginning June 1, and at such other times as vacancies may need to be filled. The report of the Nominating Committee, including names proposed, will be circulated with the agenda for the meeting at which elections are to take place. At least one nominee shall be identified for each elective vacancy on each senate committee, except that two shall be named for each vacancy on the Steering and Nominating committees Members of the Steering and Nominating Committees shall be elected at the March meeting and members of other committees shall be elected at the April meeting. In each instance, nominations may be made from the floor. When the number of nominees exceeds the number of vacancies to be filled, election shall be by written ballot, and a plurality is sufficient to elect. Advisors to senate committees shall be chosen in accordance with the provisions in section 2.00c.

The Nominating Committee may recommend for Senate vote the appointment of ex officio members to Senate Committees. Ex officio members will be faculty members who are not Senators and bring valuable expertise to the respective committee. Ex officio members have no vote on the Senate Committee, but may otherwise participate fully in the deliberations of the committee.

University Senate Document 11-17 23 April 2012

TO: The University Senate FROM: Ad hoc Committee to Evaluate Efficient and Effective Operation of the Purdue University Senate SUBJECT: Efficient and Effective Operation of Purdue Senate DISPOSITION: University Senate for Discussion REFERENCES: Senate Bylaws

Current Proposed

The normal term of an elected senator shall be three years, beginning on the June 1 following his/her election. In the event a Senator does not complete his or her term, a replacement Senator shall be elected for the remainder of the original term. After reapportionment of the senate in December, the individual faculties (see Section 2.00 b5) will complete the election of senators who are to assume office on the coming June 1, and report the results to the secretary of the senate by February 1. The individual faculties will set up their own methods for nomination and election of senators. They may provide alternates to serve, if an elected senator is unable to serve temporarily, or to replace a senator recalled on request of the senate.

The normal term of an elected senator shall be three years, beginning on the June 1 following his/her election. A Senator can serve no more than 2 consecutive terms (3 years each) on Senate. In the event a Senator does not complete his or her term, a replacement Senator shall be elected for the remainder of the original term. After reapportionment of the senate in December, the individual faculties (see Section 2.00 b5) will complete the election of senators who are to assume office on the coming June 1, and report the results to the secretary of the senate by February 1. The individual faculties will set up their own methods for nomination and election of senators. They may provide alternates to serve, if an elected senator is unable to serve temporarily, or to replace a senator recalled on request of the senate.

University Senate Document 11-18 23 April 2012

TO: The University Senate FROM: University Senate Nominating Committee SUBJECT: Nominees for University Senate Nominating and Steering Committees REFERENCE: Bylaws of the University Senate DISPOSITION: Election by the University Senate The Nominating Committee proposes the following nominees for service n the University Senate Nominating and Steering committees. The persons elected are to serve the period of years shown following each name. Resumes of the nominees are given below (when submitted). A. For the 9 vacancies on the Nominating Committee, the following 17 faculty members are

proposed: Name Years Department Kirk Alter 3 Building Construction Management Technology Bob Barrett 1 Computer & Electrical Technology & Info System

Technology, IPFW Stephen Byrn 2 Industrial & Physical Pharmacy Richard Cosier 2 Management Marius Dadarlat 2 Mathematics Buster Dunsmore 3 Computer Science Michael Fosmire 3 Libraries Matthew Ginzel 1 Entomology Patricia Hart 3 Languages & Cultures Michael Hill 2 Veterinary Clinical Sciences Peter Hirst 3 Horticulture And Landscape Architecture Mark Lawley 1 Biomedical Engineering Michael Manfra 3 Physics Zygmunt Pizlo 3 Psychological Sciences Ińigo Sanchez-Llama 3 Languages & Cultures Cleveland Shields 2 Human Development & Family Studies Ronald Sterkenburg 2 Aviation Technology

B. For the 3 vacancies on the Steering Committee, the following 6 faculty members are

proposed: Name Years Department Don Buskirk 3 Industrial Technology Carlos Corvalan 1 Food Science April Ginther 3 English David Sanders 3 Biological Sciences Holly Wang 3 Agricultural Economics

Approving (via email): Patricia Bauman Natalie Carroll Michael Fosmire Joan Fulton William McInerney Suzanne Parker J. Paul Robinson Samuel Wagstaff

Nominating Committee – Nominates elective members for all senate committees. Solicit information from the faculty concerning faculty preferences and qualifications for committee assignments annually.

Kirk Alter

Building Construction Management Technology

Bob Barrett Computer & Electrical Technology & Info System Technology, IPFW

Stephen R. Byrn Industrial & Physical Pharmacy

Dr. Stephen R. Byrn is Charles B. Jordan Professor of Medicinal Chemistry in the Department of Industrial and Physical Pharmacy, Purdue University. Dr. Byrn set in motion the development of the field of Solid State Chemistry of Drugs with his books and papers on the subject the first of which were published in the mid-1970’s. He has also taught over 100 short courses on Solid State Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Solids and has educated over 50 Ph. D. students and postdoctoral fellows. Dr. Byrn has had numerous grants including one of the first 13 NIH Centers for AIDS Research. Dr. Byrn is cofounder of Purdue’s graduate programs in regulatory and quality compliance. He is also cofounder of the Purdue-Kilimanjaro School of Pharmacy graduate certificate program in industrial pharmacy and manufacturing in Moshi, Tanzania. Dr. Byrn has served as chair of the Pharmaceutical Sciences Advisory Committee to the FDA and chaired several USP committees. Dr. Byrn is also cofounder of SSCI, Inc. (Solid State Chemical Information) a cGMP research and information company. SSCI, Inc. is now owned by Aptuit. Dr. Byrn is a technical founder of Andara now owned by Neurometrix, Inc. and is co-founder of Improved Pharma, a company dedicated to accelerating drugs to proof of concept. Dr. Byrn is an elected Fellow of the AAPS and has received several awards for his research and entrepreneurial activities including the first AAPS David Grant Award for Research Achievement in Physical Pharmacy. In September 2010, the Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences dedicated a special issue to Dr. Byrn. His current research interests include strategies for accelerated drug development and the use of synchrotron X-rays for pharmaceutical research.

Richard Cosier

Management Richard A. Cosier is the Avrum and Joyce Gray Director of the Burton D. Morgan Center for Entrepreneurship. He stepped down on June 30, 2010 as Dean of the Krannert School after serving since 1999, and continues on as Leeds Professor of Management at the Krannert School. He formerly served as Dean and Fred E. Brown Chair of Business Administration at the University of Oklahoma and Associate Dean for Academics, Professor of Business Administration, and Chairperson of the Department of Management at Indiana University. He also held a faculty appointment at the University of Notre Dame. Prior to his academic career, he was a planning engineer with The Western Electric Co. Dean Cosier joined Purdue in 1999. Krannert is widely recognized as a leading business school. The Wall Street Journal, BusinessWeek and U.S. News & World Report consistently rank Krannert among the world’s elite business programs. At Krannert, during the spring of 2000, Dean Cosier announced a $10 million gift from alumnus Jerry S. Rawls. This completed funding of Rawls Hall, which houses a portion of the Krannert School. While at Oklahoma, he concentrated on curricular improvement and private fund raising. In 1997, Dean Cosier announced an $18 million endowment from Wall Street fund manager Michael F. Price and a matching $12 million from the State of Oklahoma. In recognition of Mr. Price, the College of Business at OU was named the Michael F. Price College of Business. In total, Dean Cosier’s fund raising and development helped add more than $150 million to the Krannert/Purdue and Price/Oklahoma endowments, contracts and fund raising efforts.

Dr. Cosier has published more than 60 articles and columns and presented numerous papers at professional meetings. He has co-authored a management textbook and has a chapter on conflict that was included in a popular management text. He has been active in many executive development programs and has served as a management education consultant for several organizations. Dr. Cosier is the recipient of several teaching excellence awards and a Richard D. Irwin Fellowship. He is listed in Who’s Who in America and belongs to several professional organizations. He was on the board of directors at First Fidelity Bank, N.A. of Oklahoma City, Century, Inc. of Midwest City, Oklahoma, and Bank One, Lafayette, Indiana. He currently serves on the board of directors for Kite Companies, a NYSE public company, and Roll Coater in Indianapolis. Dr. Cosier is past chair of the AACSB Board of Directors. The AACSB is the international accreditation organization for business schools.

Dr. Cosier’s past service includes chairing the Norman Economic Development Coalition, a unique partnership between the University of Oklahoma, the City of Norman, and the Norman Chamber of Commerce that generated Norman’s first-ever economic development plan. Serving a successful four year term from 2001-2005, Dr. Cosier was the original Director of the Burton D. Morgan Center for Entrepreneurship in Purdue’s Discovery Park. He again now serves as Director of the Center. From 2001 to 2009, he was on the Executive Committee and Board of Directors of the Greater Lafayette Community Development Corporation. He is a former member of the board of directors of the Lafayette-West Lafayette Development Corporation. Dr. Cosier has also been active with the United Way of America at the national and local levels, serving as the Chairman of Purdue’s 2003 campaign.

Marius Dadarlat

Mathematics

H.E. (Buster) Dunsmore Computer Science

Dr. H. E. (Buster) Dunsmore is an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Science, Purdue University. His research areas include Software Engineering, Software Architecture, Object-Oriented Design and Programming, and Web Programming. He was Chair of the College of Science Undergraduate Education Policy and Curriculum Committee 2005-2010. In 2007 he led the effort which revised the College of Science Undergraduate curriculum to include team experience, technical writing and presentation, and great issues in science. He has served as Chair of the Computer Sciences Undergraduate Committee for eighteen of the last twenty years. In 2010 he led the effort which revised the CS Undergraduate Curriculum to include tracks (specialty areas for students in their junior and senior years) and senior projects. Dr. Dunsmore was named Outstanding Teacher in the College of Science at Purdue University in 1980. He was the 1996 recipient of the Murphy Outstanding Undergraduate Teaching Award at Purdue University. He was chosen as a Founding Fellow of the Purdue University Teaching Academy in 1997 and as a Member of the Teaching Academy Executive Council in 2006. In 1999 Buster was selected for the "Book of Great Teachers" honoring the outstanding teachers at Purdue University since its founding in 1874. He was selected in 2001 as one of the Outstanding Indiana Information Technology Educators by the Indiana Information Technology Association (INITA). He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Upsilon Pi Epsilon (honor society for the computing sciences).

Michael Fosmire Libraries

Michael Fosmire is an associate professor of library science and has been a member of the Purdue faculty since 1999. This is his second term on the Senate. During his first term, he served on the Nominations Committee and the University Resource Policy Committee and was a member of the first University Core Curriculum Committee. He enjoyed serving on the Nominations Committee, as it provides the opportunity to connect faculty across campus with the committees that most interest them, enabling the Senate to carry out its business, and to ensure that a variety of perspectives are represented on those committees.

Michael is the head of the Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Technology Division of the Purdue Libraries, responsible for providing library and information services for three of Purdue’s Colleges. He has written extensively on integrating information literacy in science and technology curricula and science librarianship, and received the 2010 P-A-M Achievement Award from the Physics-Astronomy-Mathematics Division of the Special Libraries Association for his sustained leadership and contributions to the community of physics librarians.

Matthew Ginzel

Entomology

Patricia Hart Languages & Cultures

Patricia Hart is Professor, Department of Spanish in the School of Languages and Cultures. She has been at Purdue for 25 years. During that time, she has served as Chair of Spanish, Director Graduate Studies for the Department, and is currently Director of the College of Liberal Arts Film and Videos Studies interdisciplinary program.

Michael Hill Veterinary Clinical Sciences

Although my title puts me in the Swine Production Medicine discipline and I have an interest is swine lameness research, my major responsibility lies in managing and participating in three, major, team-taught laboratories for freshmen and sophomore veterinary students. These involve training in behavior and husbandry techniques as well as diagnostic and therapeutic techniques to prepare student s for their clinical years. I have also been Professor of Record for two elective junior year courses and give a few lectures in a core Swine Production Medicine course.

I have served on various committees in the School of Veterinary Medicine over the years and this is my second term representing my colleagues on the Faculty Senate. I served on the Nominating Committee of the Senate in my first term and currently serve on the Steering Committee. I look forward to rejoining the Nominating Committee.

Peter Hirst

Horticulture And Landscape Architecture

Mark Lawley

Biomedical Engineering

Michael Manfra Physics

Zygmunt Pizlo Psychological Sciences

Ińigo Sanchez-Llama Languages & Cultures

Professor Íñigo Sánchez-Llama received his BA in Hispanic Philology from the Complutense University (Spain) in 1989 and his Ph.D. in Literature from the University of California at San Diego in 1997. Before joining to Purdue in 1999 he was Lecturer of Spanish at the University of California at San Diego; he also held visiting appointments at the University of Notre Dame. He is currently Full Professor of Spanish and Chair of the Spanish and Portuguese Department at the School of Languages and Literatures.

His main academic specialization is Modern Spanish Peninsular literature and culture from the 1700s to the early decades of the twentieth-century. Within this area, he has worked in Spanish women’s writing, canon formation, and issues of sociology of literature. He has published a monograph in Isabelline women writers, articles in North American and European refereed journals including Hispanic Review, Romance Quarterly, Hispanic Research Journal, Revista de Estudios Hispánicos, Hispania, Hispanófila, Letras Peninsulares, Revista Hispánica Moderna, Revista Canadiense de Estudios Hispánicos, and Boletín Galego de Literatura, and four critical editions of Isabelline women’s writing, novels written by Benito Pérez Galdós (1843-1920), and criticism written by Emilia Pardo Bazán (1851-1921).

He is currently working in book, which deals with representations of modernity in Modern Spanish essays written between the 1850s and 1931.This project has already led to articles and courses and modernity. In addition Professor Sánchez-Llama has received several grants to do archival research on this topic in Spain from Purdue University and the Program for Cultural Cooperation between Spain Ministry of Culture and United States’ Universities located at the University of Minnesota.

Cleveland Shields

Psychological Sciences

Ronald Sterkenburg Aviation Technology

Steering Committee – Shall propose the agenda for every session of the senate, ensure the distribution of the agenda to each member of the senate at least five days before each regularly scheduled meeting. The Steering Committee may schedule an annual report of each of the senate committees to the senate. The various councils will be requested by the Steering Committee to inform the senate of their activities, studies, and recommendations at fixed intervals to be established by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee shall receive communications from any faculty member or group of members who wish to present any proposal before any meeting of the senate.

Carlos Corvalan

Food Science

Carlos M. Corvalan is Associate Professor of Food Science in the College of Agriculture and, by courtesy, an Associate Professor in Biological Engineering and in Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University. He received his Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Litoral, Argentina, and completed a postdoctoral fellowship at Purdue University.

Dr. Corvalan is an active researcher with over 40 peer reviewed publications, has given over 50 presentations at national and international meetings, and taught advanced courses in science and engineering. His research at the interface between science and engineering focuses on analytical and computational modeling of flows of complex fluids in a variety of mechanical, chemical, and biological processes. His lab is currently studying the effect of surface active species on industrial and biological free surface flows of complex fluids in multidisciplinary projects supported by NASA, USDA and the DoD.

Dr. Corvalan has served on university committees including the Food Science Graduate Committee, the College of Agriculture Grade Appeals Committee, and Purdue Computer Science and Engineering Multidisciplinary Program Committee. He has actively participated on faculty search committees and considers the participation of faculty essential in maintaining a dynamic and vibrant community of scholars and researchers.

April Ginther

English

April Ginther is an Associate Professor of English and the Director of the Oral English Proficiency Program. The OEPP is responsible for screening the oral English proficiency of all prospective international teaching assistants and for providing instruction for those who do not pass the local exam. More than 500 examinees are screened each academic year with the help of a semi-direct, computer-administered exam designed by Ginther and colleagues. As the director of the OEPP, her primary responsibilities include test development, administration, and quality control of the OEPT in addition to the direction of the instructional side of the program. The OEPP offers 11 sections of Classroom Communication for ITAs each semester and has and instructional and administrative staff of 30.

Ginther began her work in language testing at Educational Testing Service as a postdoctoral fellow and then as an associate research scientist (1994-97). At ETS, she conducted research related to the revision of the Test of English as a Foreign Language, now known as the TOEFL iBT. She also served on the TOEFL Committee of Examiners (2004-09) and also as the Chair of the TOEFL Research Committee (2006-2009). Her collaboration with ETS continues as she is currently working on a study of language proficiency test score use and interpretation in higher education which was funded by ETS.

She teaches graduate courses in the Second Language Studies and Linguistics Programs and regularly offers two seminars: Quantitative Research Design, and Language Testing and Assessment. Her current research interests include the development of automated scoring systems for oral language, the development, implementation, and evaluation of university programs promoting internationalization, and the development of second language oral

proficiency as a function of socialization. She is currently the co-editor of the journal Language Testing.

David Sanders

Biological Sciences

David Sanders is an Associate Professor of Biological Sciences at Purdue University. He received his Bachelor of Science degree from Yale College in Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry. He conducted his Ph.D. research in Biochemistry with Dr. Daniel E. Koshland, Jr., who was then editor of the journal Science, at the University of California at Berkeley. David Sanders originated the idea of the “Molecule of the Year” feature in Science. Following a position as a Visiting Scientist at the University of California at San Francisco, he was a postdoctoral fellow at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, which is affiliated with M.I.T. It was there that he began his studies on the entry of viruses into cells with a focus on the inhibition of infection and applications to gene therapy. Dr. Sanders joined the Markey Center for Structural Biology at Purdue University in 1995, where he is Executive Committee Representative of the PULSe Molecular Virology program and also a member of the Purdue Cancer Center, the Birck Nanotechnology Center and the Oncological Sciences Center. He was the discoverer of a biochemical reaction that leads to the entry of cancer-causing retroviruses into cells. He also is the holder of two U.S, patents on novel gene-therapy delivery techniques. His work on the Ebola virus led to his participation in the U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency's Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention Program, a product of the Nunn-Lugar legislation. His responsibilities included inspecting the Vector laboratory in Siberia, which was the site of biological-weapons development in the era of the Soviet Union. He has investigated the transmission of viruses from other animals, especially birds, to humans and is often invited to speak on ethics, biodefense, evolution, gene therapy, vaccination and influenza viruses in public forums including regular interviews on WIBC in Indianapolis. He is a recipient of the National Science Foundation CAREER Award for his work on an enzyme that is involved in production of the greenhouse gas and potential energy source, methane. He is also an American Cancer Society Research Scholar and received the Lions Club Cancer Research Award. In 2003 he conducted his sabbatical research at the Weizmann Institute in Israel. He is currently a principal investigator on a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Experiment Grant for the reform of the undergraduate premedical curriculum. David Sanders has been the Convener of the Department of Biological Sciences

Safety, Undergraduate Studies, and Undergraduate Curriculum Reform Committees. He served as elected Chair of the College of Science Grievance Committee. He currently serves as Department of Biological Sciences representative to the College of Science Faculty Council and the Undergraduate Education Policy and Curriculum Committee (now UCAP). He is also the Purdue University representative on the Indiana State Core Transfer Library Life and Physical Sciences Academic Panel.

Holly Wang

Agricultural Economics

Dr. Holly Wang is a Professor at the Department of Agricultural Economics. She received her Ph.D. degree from Michigan State University, and her B.S. degree from Tsinghua University,

China. She has served as a visiting or adjunct professor in six universities in the US, Canada, Finland, and China since 1997.

Dr. Wang has primary research and teaching appointments during her tenure as a faculty member. She has published 50 journal articles in top agricultural economics journals worldwide and near 100 conference papers, advised dozens of Ph.D. students some of whom are placed at major research institutes as tenured track faculty members, and actively involved in multidisciplinary research teams funded by grants. Her research focus is on agricultural economic issues in China and Chinese market. She is currently the Co-Editor for the journal China Agricultural Economics Review, and an Editorial Board Member for Agricultural Finance Review and for China Economic Review.

In addition to teaching regular courses, Dr. Wang has innovatively developed new courses at Purdue. One of them is the Maymester Study Abroad in China course, which has been highly regarded by students and her colleagues. Dr. Wang has served on several leadership positions for her profession. She was the Founding Chair of the China Section and the Vice Chair of another Section called Committee of Women Agricultural Economists, both under the American Agricultural Economics Association. She also served as the President of the Chinese Economists Society, a US based professional association with over 1000 members including Nobel Laureates in Economics. She is an active volunteer in the community.

University Senate Document 11-19 23 April 2012

TO: The University Senate FROM: University Senate Nominating Committee SUBJECT: Nominees for University Senate Nominating and Steering Committees REFERENCE: Bylaws of the University Senate DISPOSITION: Election by the University Senate The Nominating Committee proposes the following slates of nominees for service on the University Senate Standing Committees. The faculty members elected are to serve the period of years shown following each name. A. Educational Policy Committee

For the 4 vacancies, the proposed slate of nominees includes Professors: Name Years Department Jennifer Dennis 3 Horticulture & Landscape Arch Teresa Taber Doughty 3 Education Studies Buster Dunsmore 3 Computer Science Craig Miller 3 Computer Graphics Technology

B. Faculty Affairs Committee For the 2 vacancies, the proposed slate of nominees includes Professors: Name Years Department Michael Levine 3 Statistics Yuehwern Yih 3 Industrial Engineering

C. Student Affairs Committee For the 4 vacancies, the proposed slate of nominees includes Professors: Name Years Department April Ginther 3 English John Graveel 3 Agronomy Catherine Scott-Moncrieff 3 Basic Medical Science Lynda Thoman 3 Management

D. University Resources Policy Committee For the 8 vacancies, the proposed slate of nominees includes Professors: Name Years Department Pamela Aaltonen 3 Nursing Michael Fosmire 3 Libraries Darryl Granger 3 Earth and Atmospheric Science John Grutzner 3 Chemistry Bill Hutzel 1 Mechanical Engineering Technology

Steve Johnson 2 Civil Engineering Rosemary Kilmer 1 Visual and Performing Arts Bill Krug 2 Technology, Leadership & Innovation

Approving (via email):

Patricia Bauman Natalie Carroll Michael Fosmire Joan Fulton William McInerney Suzanne Parker J. Paul Robinson Samuel Wagstaff

University Senate Document 11-20

23 April 2012

TO: The University Senate

FROM: University Senate Nominating Committee

SUBJECT: Nominees for Faculty Committees

REFERENCE: Bylaws of the University Senate

DISPOSITION: Election by the University Senate The Nominating Committee proposes the following slates of nominees for service on the University faculty committees listed below. The faculty members elected are to serve for terms as specified:

A. University Grade Appeals Committee Donatella Danielli-Garofalo (MATH) Demetra Evangelou (Eng. Ed) Matthew Stephens (TLI) for terms of service ending 31 May 2015.

B. University Censure and Dismissal Procedures Committee

Regular Members Sylvie Brouder (Agronomy)

Alternate Members

Christian Butzke (FS) Ryan Cabot (An. Sci.) Linda Chezem (YDAE) Monica Cox (Eng. Ed.) Ińigo Sanchez-Llama (Lang. & Cultures) for terms of service ending 31 May 2015. Approving (via email)

Patricia Bauman Natalie Carroll Michael Fosmire Joan Fulton Suzanne Parker J. Paul Robinson Samuel Wagstaff

UNIVERSITY SENATE REPORT

Athletic Affairs CommitteeReport

April 23, 2012

Faculty Oversight of Athletics

2011-2012 ATHLETIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

Darryl Ragland (Committee Chair - University Senate Appointment, Associate Professor of Veterinary Medicine)

Caroline Eberle (Student Representative) Roger L. Blalock (Senior Associate Athletic Director for Sports) – Retired in January Jeffrey T. Bolin (Faculty Athletic Representative, Professor of Biological Sciences and

Associate Vice President for Research) Morgan J. Burke (Athletic Director) Nancy L. Cross (Senior Women’s Administrator Associate A.D. for Marketing &

Development) Melissa Exum (Presidential Liaison, Vice President for Student Affairs) James Foster (Alumni Representative) Jean Fredette (Alumni Representative) Joel Hart (Student Representative) Peter Hirst (Faculty Senate Representative, Associate Professor of Horticulture) Edward G. Howat (Associate Athletic Director for Student Services) Howard Mancing (Faculty Senate Representative, Professor of Foreign Languages and

Literature) Tom Mitchell (ex-officio, Compliance Director) Thomas J. Reiter (Assistant Athletics Director-Sports) Christie L. Sahley (Faculty Athletic Representative, Professor of Biological Sciences and

Director, Purdue Center for Faculty Success Special Advisor to the Provost, Gender Equity)

Joe Seaman (Community Liaison) Darlene Sedlock (University Senate Appointment, Associate Professor Health and

Kinesiology) Jon Story (University Senate Appointment, Professor of Nutritional Physiology) Tom Templin (Student Affairs Liaison, Professor of Curriculum and Instruction) Glenn F. Tompkins (Senior Associate Athletic Director for Business)

NEW ICA STRATEGIC PLAN

APPROVED JANUARY 2009

OUR VISION

A championship-caliber athletics organization that is excellent in all respects and is a consistent member of the “25/85 Club.”

OUR GOALS

•Athletic•Academic

Student-athletes will perform at or above the all-campus cumulative grade point average. All Purdue teams will have a graduation success rate (GSR) equal to or better than sport-specific Division 1-A GSR.

•Fiscal •Equity•Image•Leadership

We will identify, cultivate, and reinforce those student-athletes, coaches, and staff members who are willing to lead by example, who are committed to thorough implementation and who challenge the status quo.

ACADEMIC GOAL PROGRESS

•Priority scheduling has commenced•29 consecutive semesters better than the student body•11/16 teams greater than or equal to Division I counterparts (or greater than 80%) in GSR

•Degree completion program - 2006-present – has resulted in 13 former student-athletes completing their degrees.

•Mini Boiler Gold rush for Fall sports commenced in 2009•Brees Center renovation to be completed in May 2012. The renovation will take the current area from 3,150 square feet to 5,350 square feet.

•Master tutor recruitment campaign under way; presently we have 17 master tutors.

Student-Athlete Academic Profile Contrasted to Student Body

Academic Performance Measures: Spring ’10-11 Fall ’11-12

Cumulative GPA Student-athletes All-campus

3.03 2.97

3.01 2.97

Semester GPA Student-athletes All-campus

2.98 2.85

2.87 2.87

Achievement of Semester GPA of 3.0 or higher Student-athletes All-campus

52.12% (246)

53.44%

46.59% (232)

53.3%

Achievement of Academic Honors Student-athletes Dean’s List and Semester Honors Semester Honors only Dean’s List only All-campus

28.81% (136)

(83) (40) (13)

30.87

26.31% (131)

(85) (32) (14)

30.1%

Achievement of perfect 4.0 Semester GPA Student-athletes All-campus

5.3% (25)

7.07%

5.22% (26)

6.0%

Placement on probation Student-athletes All-campus

4.03% (19)

6.79%

7.23% (36)

7.05%

Dropped from the University Student-athletes All-campus

0.21% (1)

2.23%

0.0% (0) 1.41%

CUMULATIVE GRADE INDEX

LEADERSHIP GOAL PROGRESS

• Leadership Curriculum: continued to implement and design.

• Boilermaker Athletic Council (BAC): changed the culture to be more engaging.

• Continue to meet with more recruits and families, including football, to start the leadership process early.

• Work with incoming freshmen and select teams to complete the Alcohol/Edu program.

• Established IMPACT reading program (Influencing/Mentoring by Purdue Athletes with Danielle and Brian Cardinal Tradition).

Leadership Metrics• 72% (370/516) of student-athletes

are involved in Leadership experience in 2011-12. Compared to 70% (356/511) in 2010-11.

• Community Service is an annual expectation for our teams. The highlight of the year was the Purdue Cancer Challenge. Intercollegiate Athletics had participation from each team that was on campus.

Intercollegiate Athletics - Values

• Positive attitude in all we do

• Business and recruiting integrity

• Mutual respect for all

• Belief in hard work by all

• Teamwork brings results

• Commitment to include yields better performance

• Courage to lead

Intercollegiate Athletics - Commitment

• Support the pursuit of excellence by all

• Attract the very best student-athletes, coaches, and staff and retain the engaged involvement of our former student-athletes

• Attract the support of our Purdue alums and fans

BIER CommitteePresentation to University Senate

April 23, 2012

Down 32% since 2000

Up 6% since 2000

Payment Delays(Repaid in 2008-09)

Spending cutsBelow appropriations

State Personal Income Growth, 1999-2007

Michigan

Ohio

Indiana

Wisconsin

Pennsylvania

Illinois

West Virginia

MissouriKentucky

Iowa

Maine

Minnesota

Oregon

Kansas

Nebraska

New Jersey

Massachusetts

Tennessee

Rhode Island

Vermont

Mississippi

New Hampshire

New York

Alabama

Connecticut

North Carolina

South Carolina

California

Washington

Georgia

Delaware

North Dakota

Louisiana

Maryland

Arkansas

Colorado

South Dakota

Alaska

Hawaii

Oklahoma

Virginia

New Mexico

Texas

Montana

Idaho

Florida

Utah

Arizona

Nevada

Wyoming

Percent Income Growth0 to 45

45 to 60

60 to 100

Slow growing economy restrains revenue◦ Two recessions and two slow recoveries since 1998◦ Decline of manufacturing employment due to shift of jobs

overseas and (especially) productivity growth◦ Indiana responds with spending restraint, not tax increases

Medicaid costs take up more of the budget◦ Higher medical costs and more beneficiaries

Larger share of higher education appropriation goes to Ivy Tech◦ Importance of post-secondary education due to decline in

manufacturing employment Larger share of higher education appropriation

goes to State Student Assistance Commission◦ Tuition aid goes to students instead of institutions

Uses of the $202.2 M

• $ 32.0 M – Scholarships

• $ 31.5 M – Fee Remissions

• $ 23.9 M – Information Technology

• $ 23.8 M – Direct Support for Research

• $ 23.0 M – New Faculty Lines

• $ 14.6 M – Support for Acad. Pgms.

• $ 13.4 M – Repair and Rehabilitation

• $ 9.6 M – Plant Expansion

• $ 9.1 M – Acad. Pgm. Supp. from Differential Fees

• $ 6.7 M – Debt Service

• $ 5.1 M – Faculty Retention & Support

• $ 3.9 M – Library Serials

• $ 2.2 M – Diversity Initiatives

• $ 1.9 M – Engagement

• $ 1.6 M – Advancement

Note: Excludes ARRA funds for applicable years. Excludes internal reallocation of funds.

* Salary and Wages, Benefits, Utilities

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

800.0

900.0

1,000.0

2002‐03 2004‐05 2006‐07 2008‐09 2010‐11(est)

Mill

ion

$

Fiscal Year

General Fund Budget

Cost Increases*

$202.2 M

General Fund Budget Analysis

9/8/11 – State Budget Committee

Main Categories for Increases last decade

General Administration   $ 30M $ 70M 132%

Student Services $ 14M $ 61M 339%

Staff Benefits $ 96M $166M 71%

Fuel, Utilities, Ins. Reg,  $ 17M $  59M 250%$157M              $356M

As comparison,  Colleges have increased ~10 to 40% during the decade.

Area Major Unit FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011

Growth Since FY

2002Academic Areas Science 49,593,806 50,377,871 53,877,156 55,027,491 57,488,846 58,628,199 61,250,965 64,398,924 62,494,352 63,422,015 27.9%Academic Areas Engineering 43,854,782 45,181,127 46,771,969 48,791,904 56,063,439 56,567,573 59,616,538 61,749,556 62,485,232 62,178,157 41.8%Academic Areas Liberal Arts 38,300,497 39,330,302 42,896,975 44,410,666 45,720,065 46,970,276 48,986,055 51,159,998 49,849,442 50,177,949 31.0%Academic Areas Agriculture 34,407,568 31,878,010 33,280,464 34,412,667 35,587,682 35,922,188 37,397,167 38,503,739 38,097,503 38,346,741 11.4%Academic Areas

Academic Reserves/Provost Initiatives 13,410,867 17,519,630 20,495,686 27,272,034 22,355,023 22,248,607 21,219,417 19,449,967 22,776,432 21,586,353 61.0%

Academic Areas Libraries 15,827,579 16,015,836 16,781,806 17,357,715 17,723,922 18,282,476 19,274,272 19,782,538 19,639,944 20,151,944 27.3%Academic Areas Technology 14,442,470 14,270,776 15,829,112 16,284,845 17,212,968 17,524,625 18,425,027 19,383,494 19,516,143 19,929,323 38.0%Academic Areas Management 13,163,575 13,576,582 15,801,143 16,332,752 16,864,477 17,436,123 18,700,817 19,383,967 19,599,745 19,341,790 46.9%Academic Areas

Pharmacy, Nursing and Health Sciences 12,266,280 12,137,349 12,841,410 13,484,174 14,081,424 14,479,865 15,479,671 16,317,559 16,698,407 17,217,839 40.4%

Academic Areas Veterinary Medicine 11,109,097 11,292,304 11,816,489 12,234,968 12,643,696 12,737,102 13,902,011 14,499,404 14,515,834 14,537,634 30.9%Academic Areas Consumer and Family Sciences 7,635,608 7,803,280 8,139,750 8,515,341 8,762,968 8,879,483 9,292,539 9,816,277 9,738,838 9,538,341 24.9%Academic Areas Education 6,755,617 6,953,208 7,165,983 7,640,051 7,886,088 8,137,883 8,564,763 8,702,449 8,894,489 9,012,487 33.4%Academic Areas International Programs 0 1,531,038 1,885,943 2,238,346 2,270,787 2,359,709 2,618,238 2,723,462 2,471,775 2,526,962 0.0%Academic Areas

Office of Continuing Education and Conferences 2,889,117 2,885,684 1,132,785 1,197,354 1,350,971 1,656,111 1,742,610 1,829,528 1,775,762 1,775,762 -38.5%

Academic Areas Research Centers and Discovery Park 0 0 767,279 785,960 5,022,069 5,884,817 8,067,716 8,054,859 6,087,774 6,691,598 0.0%

Support Areas Physical Facilities 42,624,205 42,002,960 43,003,457 44,083,593 45,237,022 44,713,112 46,587,317 48,369,897 48,824,596 48,461,713 13.7%

Support Areas General Administration 29,864,462 39,711,893 41,124,600 53,624,475 46,076,032 54,917,039 57,244,859 62,549,890 75,275,435 69,554,189 132.9%

Support Areas Information Technology 24,826,532 29,081,890 37,909,427 38,254,084 38,852,592 39,013,447 40,342,715 42,535,108 41,657,856 43,568,279 75.5%

Support Areas Student Services 13,905,557 16,635,514 19,118,783 28,755,236 32,405,078 34,233,971 35,793,029 45,017,238 55,042,892 61,101,844 339.4%

Support Areas Technology Reserve 8,094,085 10,801,410 5,637,447 6,298,778 7,202,586 7,297,978 7,038,844 6,856,438 4,206,295 6,085,888 -24.8%

Support Areas University Advancement 6,305,803 10,696,442 10,812,467 11,540,295 11,436,800 12,667,002 13,456,562 13,831,056 13,304,457 14,026,708 122.4%

Support Areas Engagement 0 686,269 845,327 702,251 1,577,923 1,694,597 1,832,179 1,885,268 1,830,438 1,830,438 0.0%Unavoidables/other Staff Benefits 96,506,184

105,028,367

113,849,160

120,408,843

127,855,749

131,776,480

142,457,942

151,313,921

156,585,096

165,653,237 71.7%

Unavoidables/other Fee Remissions 0 28,776,957 33,460,448 36,286,448 39,997,448 40,102,448 41,667,448 35,908,020 40,735,706 45,976,661 0.0%Unavoidables/other

Fuel, Utilities, Regulatory and Insurance 16,906,543 18,985,400 22,094,041 25,276,160 29,824,542 35,733,136 40,775,319 45,794,899 54,512,655 59,257,320 250.5%

Unavoidables/other Debt Service 24,352,649 24,389,597 21,271,920 17,632,498 17,606,980 20,920,977 23,928,533 26,084,329 26,722,911 27,614,524 13.4%Unavoidables/other Meeting future Budget Challenges 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,812,487 0.0%

527,042,883

597,549,696

638,611,027

688,848,929

719,107,177

750,785,224

795,662,553

835,901,785

873,340,009

907,378,183

General Fund Budgets by Department Area for General Administration

Data Compiled from Budget Summaries

Growth Since

Area FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2002President's Operating 1,446,771 1,578,339 1,581,219 1,681,175 1,736,968 1,781,732 2,114,052 2,134,565 2,254,568 2,120,668 46.6%President's Reserves 1 776,618 716,618 11,358,814 21,017,389 10,378,412 9,846,033 4,340,381 5,013,809 5,705,928 4,886,928 529.3%Pending Strategic Plan Allocation 3,500,473 5,000,000 3,000,000 0.0%

Provost Operating 3,584,768 3,413,111 3,797,961 4,684,109 4,520,968 5,400,395 5,696,083 4,806,264 5,418,205 6,162,547 71.9%

EVPT Operating 1,911,557 1,678,270 1,138,411 1,164,669 1,244,018 1,316,950 1,496,963 1,854,638 1,414,043 1,550,076 -18.9%

EVPT Reserves 2 693,500 10,299,000 954,000 954,000 941,000 2,372,577 5,672,264 4,900,121 7,542,841 3,165,876 356.5%

VP EC5 851,539 851,578 907,010 969,758 1,004,184 1,077,348 1,125,492 1,156,813 784,270 869,270 2.1%VP Governmental Relations 327,841 382,312 395,995 404,979 413,755 423,405 439,715 271,749 398,199 398,199 21.5%

VP Research 3 2,673,610 2,842,304 2,217,275 2,253,704 3,926,540 4,407,096 6,526,845 6,419,936 13,599,590 12,849,014 380.6%

VP HR 6 4,022,438 0.0%

Business Services 4 13,980,132 13,577,769 13,833,097 14,006,296 14,397,771 19,786,857 21,438,827 23,267,906 23,684,206 20,875,493 49.3%

Graduate School 1,371,513 1,629,820 1,864,312 2,009,584 2,363,637 2,396,329 2,457,617 2,563,860 2,866,318 2,934,963 114.0%PMU/Hall of Music/BCC Subsidy 846,929 874,738 1,262,096 2,507,687 3,002,309 3,557,988 3,165,380 3,277,102 3,303,102 3,316,102 291.5%

Central - Other 1,399,684 1,868,034 1,814,410 1,971,125 2,146,470 2,550,329 2,771,240 3,382,653 3,304,165 3,402,615 143.1%Total General Administration 29,864,462 39,711,893 41,124,600 53,624,475 46,076,032 54,917,039 57,244,859 62,549,890 75,275,435 69,554,189 132.9%

1 President's Reserves - Strategic Plan funding flowing through President's Reserve accounts for large fluctuations in amount.

2 EVPT Reserves - FY 2003 Operating funds for ITaP funds flowing through EVPT Reserves. In FY 2010, $1.1 M was moved to the OnePurdue Reserve from the Tech Reserve. In FY 2011,$2.0 M was moved to the Tech

Reserve from the OnePurdue reserve and Administrative Computing reserve.3 VP Research - FY 2006 state appropriation for research from President and FY 2008 general fund allocation of $2 million for research support. Increase in FY 2010 due to reallocation of Research Incentive Reserve from Provost, Strategic Plan Funding, and existing budgeted funds transferring between VPR and Discovery Park.4 Business Services - FY 2007 Business Managers were reorganized from Schools and Colleges to Business Services ($5.0M). FY 2011 reduced by HR unit ($4.0M) and includes Office of Investments.5 Vice President for Ethics and Complience, previously Vice President for Human Relations.6 Vice President for Human Resources, previously reported in Business Services.

Trends in Administrative Growth at Purdue University

Case Study: Information Technology • Headcounts • Budget • Context

Trends in Administrative Growth at Purdue University as Reported to IPEDS January of 2011

Presentation by Rab Mukerjea, Executive Director of Strategic Planning & Assessment to BIER committee 12 December 2012 entitled “Workforce Growth Analysis 2001-2010” “Change in Workforce.pdf” 7 Feb 2012 Strategic Planning & Assessment

Data provided by Borgonah and McCartney, 6 April 2012 Does not include the amount budgeted for Information Technology at the college-level Rough estimate of $25,000,000. Total IT budget at Purdue estimated ~ $ 90 M

-

10,000,000

20,000,000

30,000,000

40,000,000

50,000,000

60,000,000

70,000,000

80,000,000

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Information Technology Budget Allocation

General Fund

Recharge

Other

Total

$70.6 M* 2011-2012

(does not include college-level IT budget)

~89% increase in the General Fund budget 2002-2012

Summary and Context • Information Technology Budget increased roughly

89% over the past 10 years • IT ‘Administrative Staff’ increased 108% from 2001 –

2010 • Purdue has been highly strategic and successful with

resources developed in Information Technology – Research Awards: In 2011 of the $401 M in total research

awards, $182 M (45%) were leveraged with high performance computing

– Purdue ranked as the #3 Top Research Computing Academic Institution; #1 in the Big 10

– Developed Innovative Classroom Technologies • Hotseat; Jetpack, Course Signals

Purdue has been strategic and successful with resources developed in Information Technology

Example: Research Awards

Data provided by Borgonah and McCartney, 6 April 2012 Does not include ‘College-IT’ - Rough estimate of $25 M One data point: College of Agriculture Budget is $1.1 M (Pat Smoker)

Information Technology at Purdue Strategic Cost Analysis

FOUNDATIONS OF EXCELLENCE:A ROADMAP FOR EXCELLENT BEGINNINGS

A. Dale Whittaker

Vice Provost for Undergraduate Academic AffairsApril 23, 2012

UNIVERSITY SENATE

VISION

We have high expectations for our University and our

students. To accomplish our strategic plan goals, we

must remove institutional barriers that may hinder our

students’ ability to achieve these goals. In turn, students

must be responsible for engaging in the programs that

will help them succeed.

2

PROCESS

9 Dimension Committees200+ participants200+ hours

Executive Summary

120 retreat participants

SEP. 2011 JAN. 2012 MAR. 2012

3

PhilosophyOrganization

LearningFaculty

TransitionsAll Students

DiversityRoles & Purpose

Improvement

314Faculty/Staff

Survey Responses

2,200Student Survey

Responses

618Items in the

Evidence Library

9Reports

50+ Recommendations

1 Recommendation

11Responsibilities

HOW OUR STUDENTS DEVELOP EXCELLENCEFOUNDATIONS OF EXCELLENCE

• Focus on the first year

• Integrated, intentional experience

• Findings

− No first-year philosophy, disconnected programs− 70% graduate− 40% in 4 years− 60% in first major

4

TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION

A single point of leadership should be designated for undergraduate student success that has responsibility and accountability to coordinate and integrate curricular and co-

curricular efforts in order to provide an intentional, cohesive first-year experience that results in success.

5

THREE THEMES

Specialized and heightened focus on the experiences of first-year studentsTHEME 1

THEME 2 Coordination of curricular, co-curricular, and academic success efforts for first-year students

THEME 3Focus on an environment of improvement based on innovative evidence-based decision-making and scholarship

6

THEME 1 – RESPONSIBILITIES

• Support the implementation and expansion of the core curriculum to improve portability of courses across majors.

• Ensure that every student has a consistent and coordinated first-year orientation course and the opportunity for a coordinated seminar experience.

• Expand admit-to-university opportunities.

SPECIALIZED AND HEIGHTENED FOCUS ON THE EXPERIENCES OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS

7

THEME 2 – RESPONSIBILITIES

• Coordinate undergraduate academic success programs.

• Coordinate undergraduate academic advising in the first year.

• Ensure appropriate availability of course spaces that allow students to make progress toward degree completion.

• Develop programs targeted at removing disparities in success among identified groups of students.

• Oversee the streamlining of communication to first-year students.

COORDINATION OF CURRICULAR, CO-CURRICULAR, AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS EFFORTS

8

THEME 3 – RESPONSIBILITIES

• Encourage professional development opportunities for all instructors and staff that interact with first-year students.

• Establish a coordinated effort to collect and disseminate information on best practices, data useful for faculty instructing first-year students, and assessment to enhance program efforts.

• Commit to advancing and rewarding research on teaching and learning.

FOCUS ON AN ENVIRONMENT OF IMPROVEMENT BASED ON INNOVATIVE EVIDENCE-BASED DECISION-MAKING AND SCHOLARSHIP

9

THANK YOU

10

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 1  

Purdue University’s Foundations of Excellence: A Roadmap for Excellent Beginnings

Executive Summary

We have high expectations for our University and our students. To accomplish our strategic plan goals, we must remove institutional barriers that may hinder our students’ ability to achieve these goals.

In turn, students must be responsible for engaging in the programs that will help them succeed.

BACKGROUND Purdue University has a unique culture of strong college-level leadership related to curriculum, advising, and course offerings in addition to highly regarded support programs for first-year students. Historically, these curricular and co-curricular efforts have been decentralized,1 resulting in an environment in which students must navigate a fragmented academic, housing, and student affairs landscape. For instance, many first-year academic programs are aligned under the Office of the Provost, yet are dispersed and disconnected. It is also noteworthy that Housing and Food Services is aligned under the Office of the Vice President for Business and Finance, Treasurer. This organizational complexity, with regard to the first year, creates challenges for both students and the University. Additionally, the vast majority of new students are admitted directly to one of Purdue’s 283 highly individualized bachelor’s degree programs when they enter the University (91% vs. 9% who are admitted to the Undergraduate Studies Program). Upon matriculation to Purdue, 63.1% of students are quite certain of their choice of major and graduate with a bachelor’s degree for that program of study. However, students who are less sure of their path or who decide to change their major opt to explore different programs of study. At Purdue, 11% of our students change their major (CODO – Change of Degree Objective) within their first year of college, and overall, 36.9% of our students will CODO at least once in their academic career at Purdue. Students who CODO take an additional half-year to graduate from Purdue, and on average, take 7.5 more course credits than students who graduate from their initial entry college. This has

                                                                                                                         1 At Purdue, curricular efforts refer to those that support and enhance foundational courses and provide stronger coordination of first-year programs and academic programs. Co-curricular efforts refer to student success and development programs that provide intentional activities beyond the classroom and contribute to overall learning outcomes.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 2  

contributed to Purdue’s average time to degree being 4.27 years and our four-year baccalaureate completion rate standing at only 40%.2 During this academic year, Purdue has engaged in an intentional, extensive, reflective, and systemic review of the experience of first-year students via the Foundations of Excellence process. While Purdue’s first-to-second-year retention rate has improved significantly over the past few years (from 85% in 2007 to 90% in 2011), Foundations of Excellence looks well beyond the narrow focus on retention. Rather, it is a “comprehensive, externally guided self-study and improvement process for the first year” facilitated by the John N. Gardner Institute for Excellence in Undergraduate Education.3 Through this course of action, we have evaluated the first-year experience at Purdue with respect to the goals of enhancing learning, creating a solid foundation for personal and professional development, and building connections between entering students and the institution. Currently, the undergraduate experience at Purdue begins with the high-quality curricular efforts found in our academic colleges, specifically student interaction with faculty in the classroom and program-level advising. Of equal importance is the participation and dedication of housing and student affairs in providing robust co-curricular efforts that lead to successful creation, implementation, and maintenance of an excellent and cohesive first-year experience. Thus, the leadership of the four campus units with the highest level of interaction with first-year students—Student Affairs, Housing and Food Services, Diversity and Inclusion, and Undergraduate Academic Affairs—have come together to sponsor this vital undertaking at Purdue. While these four units are principally responsible for coordinating the recommendations set forth in this report, the academic units’ continued ownership and delivery of the specific actions is crucial. A broad group of representatives from across the campus community contributed to the findings and recommendations contained in this report. Starting in August 2011 a task force of more than 200 Purdue faculty, staff, and students studied methods to align Purdue’s resources to enhance the first-year experience. Participants spent thousands of hours studying, researching, collecting data, collaborating, deliberating, and reporting on the first-year experience at Purdue. A steering committee of 34 University leaders guided discussions around nine aspirational standards for excellence in the first year known as “Foundational Dimensions”: Philosophy, Organization, Learning, Faculty, Transitions, All Students, Diversity, Roles & Purposes, and Improvement.4 Dimension Committees were charged with evaluating and rating specific performance indicators, as well as producing a formal report. More than 50 recommendations and action items were submitted. The reports and recommendations were closely examined, evaluated,

                                                                                                                         2 The six-year graduation rate for the 2004 cohort of Purdue students was 70.4%, with an additional 7.4% of students who left Purdue completing a degree at a different institution. 3 “Foundations of Excellence Overview,” accessed February 27, 2012, http://www.fyfoundations.org/overview.aspx. 4 “Foundations of Excellence Foundational Dimensions® Four-Year College Version,” accessed February 29, 2012, http://www.fyfoundations.org/4year.aspx.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 3  

revised, and synthesized by the Steering Committee to generate the findings, recommendation, and responsibilities included herein. This report lays the groundwork for a new campus culture focused on excellent, intentional, and integrated curricular and co-curricular efforts for all students, according to their specific needs, so that they can achieve academic and personal success. In addition, it provides a blueprint for coordinating assessment and dissemination of findings to foster continuous improvement among the University’s overall student success efforts. The results of the Foundations of Excellence deliberative process provide a broad framework for the first-year experience at Purdue. The task force’s recommendations closely align with Purdue’s strategic plan to “promote excellence in learning experiences and outcomes, fostering intellectual, professional, and personal development to prepare learners for life and careers in a dynamic, global society.”5

                                                                                                                         5 President France A. Córdova, introduction to “2008-2014 New Synergies Strategic Plan” (Purdue University, 2008), 1.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 4  

FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATION, AND RESPONSIBILITIES The task force’s recommendation is that a single point of leadership be designated for undergraduate student success that has responsibility and accountability to coordinate and integrate curricular and co-curricular efforts in order to provide an intentional, cohesive first-year experience that results in success. This organization will report to the Provost and will be charged with coordinating responsibilities in three thematic areas, which are listed below and described in greater detail in the balance of this report.

1) Specialized and heightened focus on the experiences of first-year students 2) Coordination of curricular, co-curricular, and academic success efforts for first-

year students 3) Focus on an environment of improvement based on innovative evidence-based

decision-making and scholarship We acknowledge that this is a fundamental change to Purdue’s organizational structure. The benefit of this change is that Purdue will have an intentionally developed, coordinated, University-wide strategy that encourages students to pursue excellence and supports them in their endeavors. Thus, academic and support units will be invited to fully and collaboratively participate in the first-year experience. Consistent with the three themes, we have developed the following proposed philosophy statement as part of the Foundations of Excellence process to guide Purdue as it creates and implements the undergraduate student experience.

At Purdue we believe every student’s first-year experience should build a solid foundation for a successful life through learning experiences and support services both in and out of the classroom. We believe that beginning in the first year, students acquire the knowledge and skills to succeed academically, build confidence and resilience to accept and embrace challenges, and develop personal and academic identities. We believe that students should be welcomed into and expected to participate in a vibrant and intellectually challenging community in which all members feel a sense of belonging. We believe that becoming interdependent, critical thinkers with the ability to locate, assess, and apply knowledge resources will help students develop into productive global citizens.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 5  

As a campus community we hold our University accountable for providing experiences, support services, access to faculty and staff, and a safe learning environment whereby students can achieve these goals.6

                                                                                                                         6 Modification of Proposed Philosophy Statement, “Philosophy Dimension Report” (Purdue University, 2012).

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 6  

Theme 1: Specialized and Heightened Focus on the Experience of First-Year Students First-year college students face numerous challenges associated with their transition to college. There are adjustments with regard to academic expectations, learning a new system and environment, career refinement and development, and negotiation of interpersonal relationships with faculty, staff, roommates, new peers, and family members. This high level of adjustment warrants a significant and meaningful effort on the part of Purdue to provide appropriate support, guidance, and information. In particular, an Undergraduate Outcomes-Based Core Curriculum (approved by the University Senate on February 20, 20127) will provide students with a similar general education experience, and in doing so will achieve a set of common learning outcomes required of all graduates. The Undergraduate Curriculum Council (UCC), a faculty committee that reports to the Educational Policy Committee, was also established as a central coordinating entity to approve foundational courses that meet particular outcomes and to oversee other policies related to the curriculum. Responsibilities

1. Support the implementation and expansion of the core curriculum to improve portability of courses across majors.

• The Foundations of Excellence Steering Committee views a core curriculum with a high degree of portability as essential to effectively enhance undergraduate student success throughout all other recommendations in this report.

• Coordinate academic success programs (such as Purdue Promise, Academic Success Center, Learning Communities, HORIZONS, Science Bound, supplemental instruction, college-level programs, and tutoring) with foundational courses and advise the Provost’s Office on allocation of appropriate resources.

2. Ensure that every student has a consistent and coordinated first-year

orientation course and the opportunity for a coordinated seminar experience. • A first-year orientation (or transition) course provides an opportunity for

Purdue to build a foundation for undergraduate student success by conveying important institutional values and expectations to all first-year students. Every program that admits first-year students should offer such a course.

                                                                                                                         7 “Purdue University Senate Document 11-7,” accessed February 27, 2012, http://www.purdue.edu/faculty/download.cfm?file=ABA2681D-0B76-A0C7-3AC3FCDD2EB9B916.pdf&name=Senate%20Document%2011-7%20Core%20Curriculum%20Amended%20and%20Approved.pdf.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 7  

• An orientation course could take several forms (traditional first-year seminar, discovery seminar, research seminar, etc.), but would be a combination of topics determined by Purdue to be appropriate to facilitate first-year student success and establish core principles (e.g., academic expectations, academic integrity, student rights and responsibilities, diversity awareness, information literacy, common reading, career clarification and/or exploration, skills, interests, personalities, learning preferences, and campus resources), coupled with unit-appropriate content. Topics would be developed with input from all academic and student success areas and reviewed on a continuing basis in order to remain relevant.

• A discovery seminar is an authentic, faculty-led seminar that exposes students to various disciplines across the campus. It allows faculty to introduce students to the concepts and methods of their discipline as applied to faculty members’ current research interests. Such a course will be most successful if led in each case by an instructional team of appropriate faculty and staff members.

• Course content should be sufficiently common across all majors so that a change in major would not require a student to take an additional seminar. This effort should be guided by a faculty-led committee, and specifically connect to the aforementioned core curriculum.

3. Expand admit-to-university opportunities.

• The experiences and understandings of first-year students are that many are unaware of their options. Moreover, many talented students have yet to narrow their scope to a single major. While some first-year courses easily transfer to other majors, other first-year courses have limited portability, leading to increased time to degree. Thus, given the uncertainty among our students, it is incumbent on the University to provide the opportunity for students to discover their career interests.

• We recommend a hybrid model of admission by which a significantly larger number of students is admitted to a University-level program in the first year and organized in thematic areas to provide opportunity for exploration.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 8  

Theme 2: Coordination of Curricular, Co-Curricular, and Academic Success Efforts for First-Year Students The decentralized nature of support programs, advising, and overall practices for working with first-year students has led to a lack of a unified message and experience for first-year students. The disparity of programs, course offerings, support (such as tutoring or supplemental instruction), and advising experiences can lead to competing goals, resulting in confusion and frustration for students. Additionally, specific needs differ among student groups. This distributed model can lead to an uneven experience for students concerning advising, orientation-type courses, and success programs across campus. Responsibilities

1. Coordinate undergraduate academic success programs. • Bring together the various undergraduate academic success

organizations that exist at the University level. Coordinate and synchronize their efforts across the entire University, based on specific needs of different student groups.

• Coordinate the activities of decentralized programs at the unit level (colleges/schools/departments) that affect student success.

• A primary function should be to involve faculty and staff from across the University (in both undergraduate academic and support programs) toward the common goal of student success.

• A committee comprised of campus partners and leaders (e.g., Associate Deans for Undergraduate Education and leadership representatives from Housing and Food Services, Student Affairs, Diversity and Inclusion, and Academic Advising) should be created to advise the Provost, establish policy, and develop guidelines for initiatives and programs.

2. Coordinate undergraduate academic advising in the first year. • Coordinate undergraduate academic advising in the first year, which

should be guided by policies established by the University and provided through a staff of professional advisors who would have a manageable and appropriate advisee load in accordance with professional norms.

• In addition, college/school advisors will provide a similar set of advising opportunities, guided by the same professional norms, to students admitted directly to academic programs.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 9  

3. Ensure appropriate availability of course spaces that allow students to make progress toward degree completion.

• Offering more sections appears to be a simple solution, but it would not resolve dilemmas that arise from the large number and specificity of the varied programs of study, and the resulting abundance of course offerings.

• Formally establish a process that ensures that undergraduate course space needs are identified well in advance, offered in a timely fashion, and distributed in such a way that students, particularly in the first year, are able to make satisfactory academic progress.

• It will be especially important to provide space in foundational courses as approved by the Undergraduate Curriculum Council (UCC).

4. Develop programs targeted at removing disparities in success among

identified groups of students. • Provide the appropriate amount of information and options to students

through support programs that value and resonate with students’ unique senses of identity.

• Coordinate, acknowledge, and plan for up-front niche or specialized initiatives to meet the specific needs of targeted populations.

• Coordinate collaboration among colleges and schools, Housing and Food Services, Student Affairs, and Diversity and Inclusion, among others, to target programs at removing disparities.

5. Oversee the streamlining of communication to first-year students. • After an exhaustive review of campus communications to prospective

and admitted students (publications, mailers, brochures, websites, etc.), it was determined that, beyond Admissions, there is little University-wide coordination of these efforts.

• Support and collaborate with colleges, schools, and departments in order to enroll admitted students, based on specific needs of different groups.

• Coordinate communications common to all students (e.g., orientation programs, housing, dining, student health, technology/computing, financial aid/bursar, and academic advising/registration), based on specific needs of different groups.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 10  

Theme 3: Focus on an Environment of Improvement Based on Innovative Evidence-based Decision-making and Scholarship We believe that the recommendations above will result in significant improvement of the first-year experience of Purdue students. As a matter of course, and consistent with Purdue’s extensive research focus, all implemented recommendations must be closely monitored and carefully evaluated. A particular emphasis should be placed on the assessment of diversity and inclusion and the examination of the success of specific groups including students from underrepresented groups, international students, honors students, and athletes, among others. These efforts should be guided by the Provost’s Office, which would also direct needed offerings and determine supportive funding. The formal process should include participation by representatives from all stages of the process, including the Office of Enrollment Management, the college/school Associate Deans, and the Office of the Registrar. The process should monitor the outcome of meeting student course needs and use that information, in conjunction with other data, as a feedback loop into future enrollment management and programmatic funding decisions. Responsibilities

1. Encourage professional development opportunities for all instructors and staff that interact with first-year students.

• Establish programs in which instructors and staff are encouraged and rewarded for trying new methods and experimenting with pedagogical techniques, creating a culture of innovation across all aspects of the University. This effort should include the continued discovery of best practices and more efficient ways to help students adjust to Purdue and to the academic culture.

• Provide new ways of helping instructors and staff adapt to the growing diversity of the student body and provide training and information to better meet the specific needs of different student populations.

• Provide means to help instructors and staff enhance the overall quality of instruction to first-year students.

2. Establish a coordinated effort to collect and disseminate information on best practices, data useful for faculty instructing first-year students, and assessment to enhance program efforts.

• This information can help guide internal decisions as well as contribute to peer-reviewed literature about teaching, learning, and student success efforts.

• Establish a set of research studies on the first-year experience and student success and provide assessment for decentralized programs. The research series should be carried out on a regular basis and coordinated with existing assessment offices and interested faculty.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 11  

• Coordinate a central team for assessment that will provide support and data for all units.

• Disseminate assessment results through a four-pronged approach, consisting of a web-based repository, an annual print publication, a subscriber-based email distribution, and access to course-level data.

3. Commit to advancing and rewarding research on teaching and learning.

• Purposefully blend improvements in student learning with support for the scholarship of teaching and learning in order to elevate the experience of students at Purdue and establish Purdue as being in the vanguard of superior educational practice and research.

• This commitment will provide opportunities for extramural funding that should be aggressively pursued. It also has the potential for large-scale exportation of our successes to the global academic community.

3/7/12 10:45 AM mks

Preliminary Report Executive Summary 12  

CONCLUSION It is clear that the campus community is deeply committed to the goals of Purdue’s strategic plan, including the success of our undergraduate students. Just as our strategic plan provides a roadmap for the future of our University, the Foundations of Excellence Steering Committee believes that the recommendation and responsibilities in this report pave the way for a new campus culture. By building on Purdue’s existing strengths we will transform our culture into one that views undergraduate experiences holistically, fully integrating excellent programs. In this campus environment, we will form intentional links between student learning both in and out of the classroom, provide the opportunity for students to develop their competency, and help them achieve confidence through practice. By addressing the unique needs of a diverse campus community, we will enhance learning, create a solid foundation for personal and professional development, and build connections between entering students and the institution. As a result, our students can achieve academic and personal success and become contributing members of society.

MEMORIAL RESOLUTION

JAMES W. BARANY

Professor Emeritus of Industrial Engineering

1930 – 2011

Dr. James W. Barany, professor emeritus of industrial engineering, passed away on November 7, 2011, at the age of 81. Dr. Barany’s career at Purdue spanned 54 years, and he served as associate head of the School of Industrial Engineering from 1970 to 2005. After moving to a half-time appointment in 2005, Dr. Barany served as interim associate head of the School until his official retirement in May 2010. Even after retiring, Dr. Barany continued to teach courses, to advise students, and to hold various leadership positions in the School and in the international industrial engineering profession. As of May 2011, Dr. Barany had advised over 90 percent of all undergraduates and graduate students who had received a de-gree from the School since its formal establishment as a separate academic unit in 1958. For all these alumni, Dr. Barany was—and will remain—the personification of the Purdue School of Industrial Engi-neering.

A native of South Bend, Indiana, Dr. Barany graduated from Notre Dame University in 1953 with a B.S. degree in mechanical engineering. While attending Notre Dame, he worked for Studebaker Corporation and was a member of the United Auto Workers (UAW). During the period 1954–1955, he served in the US Army as a combat engineer stationed in South Korea. After completion of his military service, he entered the graduate program in industrial engineering at Purdue, receiving an M.S. degree in 1956 and a Ph.D. in 1961. He started his teaching career as an instructor at Purdue in 1958, shortly after the first class of students was admitted to the newly established Department of Industrial Engineering. Dr. Barany was promoted to associate professor in 1963, and he was promoted to full professor in 1969. For six dec-ades, his service as a teacher, academic adviser, and professional mentor had a major impact on the ca-reers of thousands of industrial engineering graduates of Purdue; and in some instances, that impact was sustained over two generations.

Beyond his work as an adviser and mentor of students, Dr. Barany created and led the annual Industrial Engineering Work Simplification Seminars (1966–2000) and the ATT Graduate Summer Program for manufacturing and systems engineers (1965–1999). He was also a Founding Fellow of the Purdue Uni-versity Teaching Academy. In 1998 the State of Indiana recognized Dr. Barany’s professional achieve-ments by conferring on him its highest honor, the Sagamore of the Wabash Award. He received the Dis-tinguished Hoosier Award in 2005.

Dr. Barany’s service to the Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE) is remarkable not only for its broad scope but also for its extraordinary duration. He served as the faculty advisor to the Purdue Chapter of IIE continuously from 1963 to 2011 except for the three-year period 1969–1972, during which time he served as the IIE National Director of Student Conferences and Awards. Under his guidance, the Purdue IIE Chapter developed into one of the most active professional societies not only on the Purdue campus but also in the worldwide IIE organization. Because of Dr. Barany’s leadership, the Purdue IIE Chapter has received IIE’s Chapter Award of Excellence every year since the inception of that award in 1975. Moreover, the Purdue IIE Chapter received the Best Student Organization Award from the Purdue Engi-neering Student Council in 1981, 1982, 1992, and 1993. Dr. Barany was elected a Fellow of IIE in 1982, and in 1989 he received IIE’s Albert G. Holzman Distinguished Educator Award. In 2007, Dr. Barany

received the Frank and Lillian Gilbreth Industrial Engineering Award from IIE. The highest and most esteemed honor bestowed by IIE, this award recognizes individuals who have distinguished themselves through contributions of the highest caliber to the welfare of mankind in the field of industrial engineer-ing.

In 2012 the IIE Board of Trustees renamed the organization’s Student Award for Excellence in honor of Dr. Barany and issued the following statement:

We recognize how dedicated Jim was to students as well as to IIE. We feel it is only fit-ting to help keep his name and memory alive by annually awarding the James W. Barany Student Award for Excellence. The award will be presented each year at the IIE Annual Conference.

Jim was a true friend to the industrial engineering community and to the Institute of In-dustrial Engineers. We are honored to have known him!

Dr. Barany avidly collected and restored Studebaker automobiles. He also enjoyed working on his farm in West Lafayette. He is survived by his daughter, Cynthia Ann Getty, and his devoted longtime compan-ion, Katherine M. Markee. He is greatly missed by his family, friends, colleagues, and former students.

James R. Wilson Alumnus (M.S. 1977, Ph.D. 1979) and Former Faculty Member Purdue University School of Industrial Engineering

Albert W. Overhauser 1925‐2011 

(by Gabriele F. Giuliani) 

Albert Warner Overhauser, the Stuart Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Physics at Purdue 

University passed away on December 10, 2011 in West Lafayette, Indiana, felled by a sudden 

cardiac arrest. Only the day before he had as customary manned his departmental office of 

thirty eight years, retirement notwithstanding. One of the last of a great generation of 

American physicists to command a broad range of interests, over the span of his long career 

Overhauser contributed a wealth of highly innovative and fundamental ideas that have made 

and continue to make a significant impact on science and technology. 

Overhauser was born in San Diego, California, on August 17, 1925, the son of a US Navy aviation 

technician. A precocious musical talent, having seen a career in the music business nipped in 

the bud by familial diktat, he entered The University of California, Berkeley, where in 1948 he 

received his Magna Cum Laude Bachelor of Science in Physics and in Mathematics, not without 

a forming interlude as a radar technical specialist in the US Navy Reserve during the Pacific war 

years.  While his young walk across the new Golden Gate Bridge on opening day had stoked 

early interests in civil engineering, once finished mending circuits and descended from his last 

mast at sea, it were Berkeley’s “most wonderful professors” of the time who lit the passion for 

Physics that was to remain with him for the rest of his life. That condensed matter Physics was 

to be his main playground was however entirely due to serendipity, for Overhauser’s original 

aspirations to earn a Ph.D. in nuclear Physics at Berkeley were dashed when his advisor, 

Giancarlo Wick decided to leave the university as a consequence of the notorious loyalty oath 

fiasco. It was thus that he became one of the earliest students of Charles Kittel’s who was at the 

time in the process of moving to Berkeley from Bell Laboratories.  During one of his visits Kittel 

assigned to Overhauser his thesis subject: a thorough study of the possible spin relaxation 

mechanisms in metals.  Astonishingly the task was successfully completed upon Kittel’s return a 

few months later and Overhauser earned his Ph.D. in 1951, merely three years after his 

graduation. 

From 1951 to 1953 Overhauser’s academic career continued as a research associate at the 

University of Illinois, Urbana‐Champaign, and then as faculty member at Cornell University 

where he remained until 1958. It was then that Overhauser was recruited to be a key scientist 

and eventually the director of the Physical Sciences Laboratory of the Ford Motor Company.  At 

Ford Overhauser alternated research on modern theoretical topics with successful forays in 

optimization and industrial design. Finally in 1973 he left Ford for the more academic and 

quaint setting of Purdue University. This was however not to be his last academic career step 

for, to his surprise, he was casually informed one year later that he had in fact earned his 

tenure at Purdue and thus named the Stuart Distinguished Professor of Physics.  

Overhauser original thesis work was only the beginning of a series of fundamental and uniquely 

creative contributions to Physics that have characterized his career; many of his publications, all 

characterized by his signature clarity and simplicity, are classics. 

Perhaps his most famous and important discovery is that of the effect that bears his name: this 

stroke of genius occurred to him in 1953 while he was still a young research associate at 

Urbana, at the time and quite appropriately a hotbed of magnetic resonance. It was while 

considering the problem of a spin system out of equilibrium that Overhauser devised the 

astonishing paradigm that underlies the Overhauser effect. His idea was to polarize the nuclear 

spins by the indirect way of pumping and saturating the conduction electrons spin resonance. 

The effect was spectacular in that the achieved nuclear polarization was thousands of times 

larger than one could have naively expected from the strength of the Fermi nuclear coupling 

constant. Exemplifying a notable feature of his style, the theory was based on a physically and 

mathematically simple model. This was to be only the first example of the subtlety and 

incisiveness of his Occam razor. In spite of some initial skepticism the dynamical Overhauser 

effect (DOE) was quickly experimentally established by Charles P. Slichter and his student 

Richard E. Norberg also at Urbana. More recently the mechanism of the DOE has been shown 

by Ionel Solomon at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, to work also between the spins of two nuclear species in ordinary liquids. This effect takes the name of 

nuclear Overhauser effect (NOE).  As it turns out both DOE and NOE have proven invaluable 

mechanisms to develop ever more powerful nuclear magnetic resonance techniques which are 

currently used to imaging and determining the structure of proteins and in general biological 

macromolecules in solution. Countless books have been written on the subject. 

Overhauser’s most important contribution while at Cornell was the development, together with 

his student Bertram G. Dick, of the “shell model” for the dynamics of bound electrons, a 

veritable theoretical breakthrough which allowed a tenfold improvement in the 

parameterization and the quantitative understanding of lattice dynamics in semiconductors. 

The theory proved successful in a vast variety of non metallic systems and is still employed 

today in conjunction with modern ab initio and molecular dynamics techniques, the original 

paper representing a massively cited reference. 

While at Ford Overhauser contributed in 1960 some of the pioneering work in the many‐body 

theory of the electron gas by introducing the modern concepts of spin‐ and charge‐density‐

waves (SDW and CDW), which represent spontaneously broken symmetry states in an 

otherwise uniform and isotropic interacting electron system.  Both were immediately observed 

in Cr. That the ground states of some of the alkali metals would one day reveal a CDW type of 

ground state is a theme to which Overhauser often returned later in his career. In the same 

period he also produced what is referred to as the Hartree‐Fock (HF) instability theorem which 

shows how the popular Slater determinant of plane waves, while being a solution of the HF 

equations, is not a stable ground state in this approximation. 

Finally a fundamental and extremely imaginative contribution was the successful conception 

and realization of a unique experiment, one in which the intriguing interplay of both quantum 

mechanics and gravitation is vividly probed. This elegant and technically challenging work, 

commonly referred to as the COW experiment, was carried out in collaboration with Roberto 

Colella (Purdue) and Samuel A. Werner (then also at Ford). It consists in the observation of the 

effect of a tiny change in the gravitational potential of a neutron beam on its self interference 

pattern, an effect that in modern terminology can be described in terms of a gravitationally 

induced Berry phase. The feat was achieved by carving a unique neutron interferometer out of 

a Si single crystal. Overhauser not only contributed the theoretical conception but also actively 

took part in the experimental realization to the point that even parts of his home pool table 

made their way into the apparatus. 

For the variety, relevance and creativity of his contributions Overhauser was bestowed membership in the National Academy of Science as well as in many others, he was presented with numerous honorary degrees, and was the winner of a number of prestigious awards including the 1975 Oliver E. Buckley Prize of the American Physical Society, the 2009 Russell Varian Prize by the European Magnetic Resonance Congress and the 1994 National Medal of Science.  Alongside his research work Overhauser was widely known as a superb teacher and advisor. His lectures were always followed by enthralled students and colleagues. In particular anecdotes abound about his legendary condensed matter and statistical mechanics lecture notes and creative homework sets. Besides all, throughout his long career Overhauser was a most valuable colleague and advisor to countless students. At Purdue his expert advice on quantum mechanics was sought by a crowd of science and engineering students and faculty, his door being always welcomingly open to all as it was just the day before his passing.  While many of us lost a most distinguished colleague, a teacher and a friend, the intellectual 

reverberations and practical relevance of Overhauser’s fertile mind still shine. 

CALENDAR OF STATUS OF LEGISLATION

SENATE DOCUMENT

TITLE

ORIGIN

SENATE

10-14* Medical Amnesty or PurdueCares

Student Affairs Committee

Approved 12 September 2011

11-2* Endorsement of COACHE Survey Purdue Faculty

Faculty Affairs Committee

Approved 24 October 2011

11-4* Undergraduate Admissions Policy

Educational Policy Committee

Approved 21 November 2011

11-6* Senate Reapportionment Steering Committee Approved 21 November 2011

11-1* Revised Research Faculty Policy

Faculty Affairs Committee

Approved 23 January 2012

11-3* University Open Access Policy

University Resources Policy Committee

Approved 23 January 2012

11-7* Undergraduate Core Curriculum

Educational Policy Committee

Approved 20 February 2012

11-9* Reaffirmation of Campus Policies for Appreciating Cultural Diversity and for Free Speech with Respectful Dialogue

University Senate Approved 23 February 2012

11-8* Nominees for Vice-Chair of the Senate

Nominating Committee

Approved 19 March 2012

10-6* Grief Absence Policy for Students (GAPS)

Student Affairs Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

11-14* Endorsement of the University Honors College

University Resources Policy Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

11-10* Honors College Governance Committee

Educational Policy Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

11-11* Faculty Representation on the Board of Trustees

Faculty Affairs Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

11-12* Graduate Student Appreciation Week

Purdue Graduate Student Government

Approved 19 March 2012

11-15* Committee for Sustainability Planning and Assessment

University Resources Policy Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

11-13* Changes to the Senate Bylaws to Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Senate

Professor Joan Fulton Approved 23 April 2012

11-16* Update to Executive Memorandum C-26.

Professor James Lehnert

Approved 23 April 2012

11-17* Changes to the Senate Bylaws to Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Senate Part 2

Professors Natalie Carroll and Joan Fulton

Approved 23 April 2012

11-18* Senate Nominating and Steering Committee Nominees

Nominating Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

11-19* Senate Standing Committee Nominees

Nominating Committee

Approved 23 April 2012

*Approved

1

Purdue University Senate

Faculty Affairs Committee

Annual Report

2011-2012

The Faculty Affairs Committee (FAC) held seven regular meetings, and two special

meetings during the 2011-2012 academic year. This report is a chronological summary

highlighting the business conducted by the FAC during this period.

2011-2012 FAC Members:

Walid G. Aref (walid@cs.purdue.edu)

Alan M. Beck (abeck@purdue.edu)

J. Stuart Bolton, Vice Chair (bolton@purdue.edu)

Janusz Duzinkiewicz (jduzinkiewicz@pnc.edu)

Nancy E. Edwards (edwardsn@purdue.edu)

Levon T. Esters (lesters@purdue.edu)

Peter M. Hirst (hirst@purdue.edu)

David L. Kemmerer (kemmerer@purdue.edu)

Michael Levine (mlevines@purdue.edu)

Zygmunt Pizlo (zpizlo@purdue.edu)

Phillip T. Rawles (ptrawles@purdue.edu)

Charlene Sullivan, Vice Chair (sullivaa@purdue.edu)

Elizabeth J. Taparowsky (taparows@purdue.edu)

David J. Williams, Chair (djw@purdue.edu)

2011-2012 FAC Advisors:

Alysa C. Rollock, VP for Ethics and Compliance (acrollock@purdue.edu)

Mark J.T. Smith, Dean of Graduate School (mjts@purdue.edu)

2011-2012 FAC Guests:

Beverly Davenport Sypher, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs (bdsypher@purdue.edu)

Peter E. Dunn, Assoc. VP for Research (pedunn@purdue.edu)

2011-2012 FAC Secretary:

Krista O. Kelley (kokelley@purdue.edu)

Decadal Funding Plan Steering Committee: Professor David Williams, Chair, served

as a member of the Decadal Funding Plan Steering Committee, and co-chair of the Blue

Ribbon Healthcare Subcommittee.

Presidential Search: Professor David Williams served as vice chair, and Professors

Alan Beck and Charlene Sullivan were members of the Special Advisory Committee to

the Presidential Search Committee of the Board of Trustees.

2

Research Misconduct: Professor Williams, as Chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee,

and in accordance with the mandate of Executive Memorandum C-22, worked with the

Provost and the Deans of the Colleges involved to form Investigation Committees for two

cases of alleged research misconduct.

Advisory Committee: Professors Alan Beck, J. Stuart Bolton, Phillip Rawles, Charlene

Sullivan, and David Williams served on the University Senate’s Advisory Committee.

Grade Appeals Committee: Professor Peter M. Hirst served as chair of the Grade

Appeals Committee.

Faculty Survey: As a carryover from the previous year, the Faculty Affairs Committee

continued to discuss the question of surveys of the Purdue faculty and policies that relate

to such surveys. The last faculty survey was conducted in 2006 and its results were

reported in June 2007.

The lack of a report from the Faculty Informetrics Committee regarding their plans for

conducting a Faculty Survey led to a comment from Beverly Davenport Sypher, Vice

Provost for Faculty Affairs, indicating the University has joined a national academic

survey group, the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education, or COACHE,

to conduct a survey of Purdue Faculty. The benefit of joining this group is that Purdue

information would be released together with similar information obtained from peer

institutions. There is overlap between the content of this survey and the survey that was

conducted by Faculty Informetrics five years ago. Professor Charlene Sullivan reviewed

the COACHE Website/survey questions and concluded this survey would fulfill our

needs. The Faculty Affairs Committee voted unanimously at its October meeting to

forego our survey and endorse the COACHE survey.

Professor Williams introduced University Senate Document 11-2, Endorsement of

COACHE Survey of Purdue Faculty, at the October 17 University Senate meeting and it

was approved by voice vote.

The COACHE survey was sent to faculty in November, 2011, and results were to be

available in spring 2012.

Proposed Revisions to Research Faculty Guidelines: Work continued on the proposed

revisions to Research Faculty Guidelines. Professor Williams provided the FAC an

overview of the history and current situation of the 31 research faculty at Purdue

University.

Associate Vice President for Research Marietta Harrison distributed a handout that

contained a detailed profile of Purdue’s Research Faculty, listing their departmental

affiliations, appointments and % effort. She also presented the FAC with sections of her

documents that were revised over the summer after she met with Professors Bolton,

Sullivan, and Williams, with the goal of better defining how the salaries of Research

Faculty may be partially supported using monies from the General Fund. After

considerable discussion the revisions were acceptable to the FAC. However, the

committee also wanted the document to include more specific language addressing:

3

The minimum percentage (5%) that must be paid from other funds in order for

research faculty to have time allotted for other activities - most importantly, the

preparation of grants.

The maximum percentage (25%) that could be allowed to be contributed to the

salaries of Research Faculty from the general fund without review by the VPR.

The length of time that Research Faculty could be supported using general fund

monies (3 years?).

A Special Meeting of the Faculty Affairs Committee was held on September 19, 2011 to

continue the discussion of the proposed revisions to Research Faculty Guidelines and to

vote on University Senate Document 11-1, Research Faculty Policy and Change in

Guidelines for Research Faculty. In a voice vote, the voting members of the committee,

with one exception, were in favor of endorsing the document.

Professor Williams introduced University Senate Document 11-1 for information at

the November 21, 2011 University Senate meeting and it was approved by an

overwhelming voice vote at the January 23, 2012 University Senate meeting.

Annual Review for Graduate Students: Dean Mark J.T. Smith informed the FAC that a

policy requesting an annual review for graduate students is to be implemented soon. Its

goal is to improve graduate student graduation rates and provide regular feedback to

them. It will also be a way of standardizing the way feedback is provided to graduate

students across Purdue. An exit survey for graduate students will also be implemented as

part of the new policy. Brief discussion on how to get the follow-up feedback from the

former graduate students after their graduation followed.

IPFW Resolution on Proportional Representation: After reconsideration, the Faculty

Affairs Committee determined that the IPFW Faculty Senate resolution for Proportional

representation of the Regional Campuses at the University Senate is inconsistent with the

University Senate Bylaws. The reasoning is given below. The Faculty Affairs

Committee voted at its 29 August 2011 meeting to communicate this conclusion in a

letter to Robert Barrett, Presiding Officer of the IPFW Senate and University Senator

representing IPFW.

The 2010 IPFW Faculty Senate proposal (first attachment) for proportional system-

wide faculty representation on the University Senate points to the need and desire for

greater coordination among Purdue campuses. Purdue describes itself, in one document

as “a coeducational, state-assisted system in Indiana.” (Facts Online,

http://www.purdue.edu/facts/). An official policy on governance, “Formulation and

Issuance of Purdue University System-Wide Policies (III.1.1),” states:

Purdue University formally approves, issues, and maintains in a

consistent format, official Purdue University System-Wide Policies in a

central policy library. Purdue University requires individuals engaged in

developing and maintaining Purdue University System-Wide Policies to

follow the requirements outlined in this document for drafting,

approving, revising, and withdrawing Purdue University System-Wide

Policies.

4

http://www.purdue.edu/policies/pages/governance/iii_1_1.shtml

Most importantly, all graduating students receive a Purdue degree, regardless of campus

attended. A fundamental cohesion in the education delivered is assumed and necessary.

IPFW’s proposal would seem to strengthen such coherence.

The proposal, however, is incompatible in its existing structure. Governing

documents designate the University Senate as “the legislative body of the faculty at the

West Lafayette campus.” The original, founding document for the University Senate, the

pre-online “University Code” stipulates (second attachment),

The University Senate is the governing body of the West Lafayette and

North Central faculty and it exercises the legislative and policy-making

powers assigned to that faculty subject only to review and check by the

faculty by established procedures (Section D 6.00).

University Code, 1964, rev. 9/91 Section D 2.00

Section D 3 a.3 also called for,

Three members elected by and representing the faculties of the regional

campuses, one each from Calumet, Fort Wayne and Indianapolis.

This arrangement remained valid until the North Central campus received autonomy at

which time its representation fell from 4 to 1 with the 3 former PNC seats being

distributed to faculty in West Lafayette. This was made official by University Senate

Document 06.2 (third attachment):

The Faculty Affairs Committee (FAC) recommends that the 3 vacant

senate seats from the North Central Campus be apportioned among the

faculty units. This will increase the number of seats from 92 to 95 in the

bylaws, Article II, section 2.00, b) 5).

The measure was passed. The Bylaws of the University Senate (fourth attachment) were

thus modified and remain in that form to this day, including the statement:

Sections A and D of the University Code, Part II, show the delegation of

powers to the faculties and the designation of the University Senate as

the legislative body of the faculty at the West Lafayette campus.

Senate Document 06.2 and Bylaws of the University Senate, Article I1.00

And the University Senate includes:

Four members elected by and representing the faculties of the regional

campuses, one each from Calumet, Fort Wayne, North Central and

Indianapolis.

Bylaws of the University Senate, Article II 2.b.4

5

Thus, “University Senate” has become a misnomer. Each campus in the Purdue system

has its own separate Faculty Senate; the one for West Lafayette is known as “University

Senate.” Proportional representation for the regional campuses in this “University

Senate” would not be appropriate.

Yet, the Fort Wayne resolution does have merit. There is a division of powers that is

currently unbalanced. The Executive Policy Review Group (EPRG) coordinates

administrative policies throughout the Purdue System. The Faculty, however, is

empowered to determine academic policies and plays an important advisory role in other

matters. System-wide coordination of academic policies is desirable especially since

students at all Purdue campuses offered a Purdue degree. Presumably a Purdue degree

requires a Purdue education. What body should be the hub of Purdue’s academic

systems, analogous to the administrative hub provided by the EPRG? As currently

organized, four or five essentially independent Senates cannot meet the task smoothly

and effectively.

The confusion leading to the IPFW Resolution for Proportional Representative points

to the need to update the University Code.

Contributed by Professor Janusz Duzinkiewicz.

Staff Evaluation Policy: Mr. Adedayo Adeniyi, Director of Leadership and

Organizational Development Staff in Human Resources, introduced the new staff

evaluation policy to the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Input was solicited from deans, APSAC and CSSAC to formulate the policy. Mr.

Adeniyi further explained that under the new policy, performance evaluations must meet

a minimum of five provisions including (1) having mutually understood objectives, (2)

critical responsibilities, (3) key developmental goals, (4) skill/career interest, and (5)

employee comments.

Existing performance evaluation forms may still be used, although Mr. Adeniyi

encouraged that supervisors work with Human Resources to make sure the forms are in

compliance. Benefits department will keep data for merit increases; there is a tool in SAP

for this.

Mr. Adeniyi said there are narrative and scale options in SAP. Human Resources

forms can be used, but departments are allowed to keep their own forms.

Alysa C. Rollock, Vice President for Ethics and Compliance, commented that this

policy has been in the works for more than a year. The University Policy Committee,

APSAC, and CSSAC are very receptive to this. The EPRG has also reviewed; this is a

system wide policy.

Promotion and Tenure Task Force: The Promotion and Tenure Task Force launched

in November and includes FAC member Professor Levon Esters. This group is charged

with bringing a proposal to the Faculty Affairs Committee.

On-line Course Evaluation System: Considerable interest and discussion was centered

on campus-wide concerns with the current state of the on-line course evaluation system.

Professor Charlene Sullivan (Vice Chair) circulated a handout to the FAC prepared by

6

Professor Lynda Thoman regarding Purdue’s on-line course evaluation system. Professor

Sullivan expressed concern that the process is reinforcing negative behavior and felt it

should be studied by the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Vice Provost for Undergraduate Student Affairs Dale Whittaker and Assistant

Director for the Center for Instructional Excellence David Nelson attended the January

FAC meeting and addressed the committee about the issues.

Professor Sullivan agreed to chair a subcommittee to study the issue and make

recommendations to the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Core Curriculum and University Senate Document 11-7: Professors Teri Reed-

Rhoads, Teresa Taber Doughty, A. Paul Schwab, and Dale Whittaker met with the FAC

to discuss and clarify questions about the core curriculum document that had been

brought to the FAC from a variety of sources on campus. This meeting was very

informative and productive.

Faculty Censure and Dismissal Proceedings: Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs Beverly

Davenport Sypher introduced a faculty termination case and invited the Faculty Affairs

Committee’s comments and advice. University counsel was on hand to discuss the likely

causes for termination as “improper conduct injurious to the welfare of the University”

and “other actions inconsistent with the responsibilities of a member of the academic

community” as defined in Executive Memorandum B-48 and the Conflict of Commitment

Policy. The President’s designee in this case was also available to answer questions. The

committee discussed the procedural guidelines spelled out in B-48 and the implications

for the Faculty Committee on Censure and Dismissal Proceedings which reports to the

FAC.

Following a series of questions, members of the Faculty Affairs Committee offered

comments, reactions and advice to the Purdue administration and legal counsel.

Request to the Trustees to Advocate for a Faculty Member on the Purdue Board of

Trustees and University Senate Document 11-11: Professor Joan Fulton discussed

University Senate Document 11-11 with the Faculty Affairs Committee and reviewed the

history of this subject.

After extensive discussion the FAC voted to endorse University Senate Document 11-

11, and Professor Williams introduced it at the March 19, 2012 University Senate

meeting, and it was unanimously endorsed at the April 23, 2012 Senate meeting.

Future Status of Faculty Informetrics Committee: From previous discussion it was

suggested this committee could be reconstituted (and renamed) to consider the outcome

of the COACHE survey and to offer advice with respect to the distribution of results. It

was suggested that this subcommittee might interact directly with the Office of

Institutional Research, the Office of the Provost and of the Office of Ethics and

Compliance who jointly sponsored the survey. It was finally suggested that this

subcommittee could be charged to monitor all faculty and University surveys.

Hearing Panel Convened: Professor Williams, as Chair of the FAC, and in accordance

with Executive Memorandum B-48, convened the members and alternates of the Faculty

7

Censure and Dismissal Proceedings Committee to determine 12 individuals and an

alternate who could serve on a Hearing Panel in a faculty termination case, and had them

elect a Chair.

2011-2012 Faculty Affairs Committee: Professor David J. Williams was elected Vice

Chair of the University Senate for 2012-2013 and relinquished his membership on the

Faculty Affairs Committee. Professor Charlene Sullivan was elected Chair of the Faculty

Affairs Committee for 2012-2013. Incoming new members of the FAC are Professors

Donald D. Buskirk (Industrial Technology), Carlos M. Corvalan (Food Science), David

A. Sanders (Biological Sciences), and Yuehwern Yih (Industrial Engineering). Outgoing

members are Professors Nancy E. Edwards (Nursing), Peter Hirst (Horticulture and

Landscape Architecture), Elizabeth Taparowsky (Biological Sciences), and Zygmunt

Pizlo (Psychological Sciences).

Respectfully submitted by,

David J. Williams

Chair

Faculty Affairs Committee

Purdue University Senate

May 16, 2012

Purdue University Senate

University Resources Policy Committee

Annual Report

2011-2012

The University Resources Policy Committee (URPC) held seven regular meetings and

one special meeting during the 2011-2012 academic year. This report summarizes the

activities of the committee and highlights the senate business that the committee

managed.

2011-2012 URPC Members:

Wei Cui (cui@purdue.edu)

Michael Fosmire (Fosmire@purdue.edu)

Geraldine Friedman (friedman@purdue.edu)

John Grutzner (grutzner@purdue.edu)

William Hoover (whoover@purdue.edu)

Richard Johnson-Sheehan (rjohnso@purdue.edu)

Eric Kvam (kvam@purdue.edu)

Morris Levy (levy0@purdue.edu)

Douglas Nelson (nelsond@purdue.edu)

Paul Schwab (pschwab@purdue.edu)

Louis Sherman (lsherman@purdue.edu)

Keith Stantz (kstantz@purdue.edu)

Marion Trout (troutm@purdue.edu)

2011-2012 Advisors

Alphonso Diaz (aldiaz@purdue.edu)

Connie Lapinskas (clapinsk@purdue.edu)

Robert McMains (rmcmains@purdue.edu)

Ken Sandel (sandel@purdue.edu)

2011-2012 Guests Richard Buckius, Vice President for Research

Kaila Butcher, Undergraduate Student

Ian Champ, Undergraduate Student

Larry DeBoer, AGEC and BIER

Frank Dooley, AGEC

Donna Ferullo, Libraries

Mary Katherine Gaisbauer, Comptroller

Michael Gulich, Director of University Sustainability

Marietta Harrison, Associate Vice President for Research

Ashley Holmes, Undergraduate Student

Pam Horn, Dean of Admissions and Vice Provost for Enrollment Management

Mark Kebert, Risk Management

Beth McNeil, Libraries

James Mullins, Dean of Libraries

Philip O’Keeffe, Director of Procurement

Patricia Peng, Undergraduate Student

Bob Olson, Senior Director for Energy Engineering

David Rosenthal, Purdue Student Government

Dan Schuster, Physical Facilities

Charles Watkinson, University Press

Kaley Weber, Undergraduate Student

Dale Whittaker, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Academic Affairs

The following issues were discussed:

Change in Travel Policy for Those Visiting Countries on US State Department

Travel Warning List The travel form entitiled, “Employee Acknowledgment of Risks in Traveling to

Countries on the State Department’s Travel Warning List,” was modified by the

Comptroller’s Office to clarify its intent. Professors Schwab and Levy had worked during

the summer to facilitate these changes, and the committee discussed the changes.

Purdue Libraries Open Access Policy The University Libraries Committee drafted a resolution supporting the establishment of

an open access policy for Purdue. Dean Mullins presented the document with supporting

information from other guests. The discussion gave rise to Senate Document 11-3.

Changes to the Policy for Purdue Research Faculty The policy for research faculty was being changed to allow research faculty to be paid on

university funds, which previously was not allowed. Dr. Buckius reported that the change

was necessitated by an audit by National Science Foundation resulting in Purdue having

to pay back funds to NSF because research faculty were conducting NSF activities when

being paid on NSF funds. The changes were implemented in Senate Document 11-1.

Introducing the New Director of Procurement, Philip O’Keeffe Purdue recently hired a new Director of Procurement, Philip O’Keeffe. Mr. O’Keeffe had

spent the summer acquainting himself with the Purdue system, and he addressed URPC

to discuss upcoming changes.

University Honors College: Interim Dean Dennis Savaiano Dean Savaiano addressed URPC about the proposed honors college. The purpose of his

visit was to provide information to the members and allow the members to give feedback.

Dr. Savaiano proved to be an excellent listener and well as a good facilitator of the

discussion. The URPC membership was generally supportive of the concept, but some

concern about the details remained. URPC eventually passed a resolution supporting the

Honors College; this resolution became Senate Document 11-14.

Enrollment Management: Vice Provost Pam Horn Pam Horn was invited to URPC because of the very important role that enrollment

management plays in the funding of the university. Dean Horn presented volumes of data

concerning trends in admission; changes policy; balance between in-state, out-of-state,

and international students; enrollment caps for various colleges; and trends in student

profiles. The distribution of underrepresented minorities also was discussed as well as the

importance of student retention and graduation rates.

Three Semester Academic Year: Dale Whittaker Vice Provost for Undergraduate Academic Affairs, Dale Whittaker, was the guest of

URPC. Dr. Whittaker explained the current gap in the number of credits being taken in

summer (25,000) versus spring and fall (420,000). University facilities could be used far

more efficiently and revenues from enrollment would be immediately increased if

students were encouraged to enroll for more credits in summer. Challenges would include

paying faculty through the summer to teach, maintaining facilities that are currently

serviced in summer, and adjusting the length of all semesters to accommodate the new

structure.

Sustainability on Campus: Ian Champ and Bob McMains Ian Champ of the Purdue Student Sustainability Council presented student concerns

about the sustainability of Purdue’s current and proposed energy plans. The PSG has

drafted a motion calling for more proactive approaches to sustainability on campus. Bob

McMains and Al Diaz responded to these concerns, and the result was a highly

constructive discussion. The students were encouraged to submit a motion to URPC,

which they did. The motion eventually passed URPC and became Senate Document 11-

15 that creates a sustainability committee that reports to URPC.

Campus Energy Master Plan Vice President McMains presented the details of the Campus Energy Master Plan with

assistance from Dan Schuster, Bob Olson, and Michael Gulich. They described the

details of the upcoming plans to make energy at Purdue more sustainable. Innovations

include metering all buildings, new strategies for chilled water, more efficient building

construction, new boilers including one that burns natural gas, and a directed plan for true

sustainability.

BIER Committee Update: Larry DeBoer and Lou Sherman Larry DeBoer, chair of BIER, and URPC/BIER liaison Lou Sherman updated the

committee on their activities for the year. Building on last year’s momentum, BIER

continued to pursue the growth in administrative staffing and budget. Dr. DeBoer

outlined the challenges in the state budget and appropriations that have led to decreased

state contributions to Purdue. That will not be changing soon. The overall administrative

budgets and staff have increased significantly over the recent years, with by far the

biggest growth being seen in the Office for the Vice President for Research. The VPR

received an increase of $8 million in his budget compared to the coming 2% cuts being

directed to departments this year.

Campus Master Planning: Ken Sandel Mr. Sandel delivered a fascinating and informative overview of the campus development

dating back to the 1960s to provide perspective of where we were and where we intend to

be quite soon. The campus simply can no longer afford to sprawl because of energy,

budget, and traffic restrictions. Construction in the future will be focused on the central

campus. On-campus transportation in the future will be simple, integrated with a

perimeter parkway.

2012/2013 URPC

Dr. Johnson-Sheehan is URPC chair for 2012/2013 with Michael Fosmire as vice chair.

New members of the committee are Pamela Aaltonen, Darryl Granger, William Hutzel,

Steven Johnson, Rosemary Kilmer, and William Krug.

Respectfully submitted by

A. Paul Schwab

Chair, URPC

May 25, 2012

University Senate Student Affairs Committee Annual Report

2011-2012

The Student Affairs Committee (SAC) met 6 times during the 2011-2012 academic year: August 22, 2011; October 17, 2011; November 28; January 30, 2012; February 27, 2012; and March 26, 2012. Members of the Committee: Thomas W. Atkinson Graduate School 2013 Zarjon Baha Building Construction Management Technology 2012 Laura Blackburn Undergraduate Student 2012 Danita M. Brown Dean of Students 2013 Paul Dixon Foreign Languages & Literature 2012 Melissa E. Exum Vice President for Student Affairs 2013 Monica Harvey Undergraduate Student 2012 Sally A. Hastings History 2013 Patricia Hester Animal Sciences 2014 Chad T. Jafvert Civil Engineering 2013 Steven Kimble Graduate Student 2012 Stephen F. Konieczny Biological Sciences 2012 Trevvor Long Undergraduate Student 2012 Mary Nakhleh Chemistry 2012 James G. Ogg Earth and Atmospheric Sciences 2014 Sandra S. Rossie Biochemistry 2013 Nathan Shrock Undergraduate Student 2012 Thomas Templin Health & Kinesiology 2014 Lynda J. Thoman Management 2015 Li Zhang Visual and Performing Arts 2013 University Senate Document 10-14 Medical Amnesty or PurdueCares was presented to the Senate for action at the September 12, 2011 meeting of the University Senate and was approved. A revision University Senate Document 10-6, Grief Absence Policy for Students (GAPS), was approved by the Senate at the Senate meeting on April 23, 2012. The purpose of the revision was merely to change the scope to the West Lafayette campus only, leaving the other campuses to develop their own policies. Professor Lynda Thoman represented SAC on the Special Admissions Review Committee. 2011-2012 SAC: Professor Sally A. Hastings agreed to continue as Chair of the Student Affairs Committee for 2011-2012. New members for 2011-2012 are Professors April Ginther (English), John Graveel (Agronomy), and Catherine Scott-Moncrieff (Basic Medical Science). Professor Lynda J. Thoman (Management) continues for another term. Respectfully submitted by, Sally A. Hastings, Chair Student Affairs Committee Purdue University Senate May 1, 2012 

University Senate Educational Policy Committee Annual Report

2011-2012

The Educational Policy Committee (EPC) met 8 times during the 2011-2012 academic year with regular meetings: August 31, 2011; September 19, 2011; October 31, 2011; November 28, 2011; January 30, 2012; February 27, 2012; and March 26, 2012; and April 30, 2012. In addition, 2 Special Meetings were held; February 9, 2012; and February 16, 2012.

Members of the Committee:

Danita M. Brown Dean of Students Office 2013 James R. Daniel Nutrition Science 2013 Frank J. Dooley Agriculture Economics 2013 Peggy A. Ertmer Curriculum & Instruction 2013 Joan R. Fulton Agriculture Economics 2013 Chong Gu Statistics 2012 Katherine Horton Undergraduate Student 2012 Christine A. Hrycyna Chemistry 2014 Harold P. Kirkwood Library Science 2013 *Robert A. Kubat Registrar 2012 Martin A. Lopez-de-Bertodano Nuclear Engineering 2013 Craig Miller Technology Lindsey Payne Graduate Student 2012 Teri Reed-Rhoads Engineering Education 2014 Thomas H. Siegmund Mechanical Engineering 2013 Glenn G. Sparks Communication 2013 Matthew Swiontek Undergraduate Student 2012 *A. Dale Whittaker Vice Provost for Undergraduate Academic Affairs 2013 * Indicates Advisor Indicates Chairperson Additional Advisors or Committee Chairs who regularly attend EPC meetings; Lesa Beals Registrar's Office JoAnn Miller Liberal Arts, Chair of Academic Organization Anneliese Kay Head Advisor's Committee, PACADA Michele Summers Technology, Chair of Academic Progress and Records Guests who attended one or more meetings of the EPC; Pam Horne, Dean of Admissions Marne Helgsen, Center for Instructional Excellence Tim Sands, Provost Teresa Taber Doughty, Chair of Core Curriculum Committee Dennis Savaiano, Interim Dean of Honors Lynn Horngren, Head Advisors Committee EPC Committees and Chairs;

Academic Organization, JoAnn Miller Academic Progress and Records, Michele Summers Committee for Student Excellence, Chair vacant Scholastic Delinquencies and Readmissions, Danita Brown Additional Committees where EPC is represented; Core Curriculum Committee, Christine A. Hrycyna with Bob Kubat as back-up Undergraduate Governance Committee, Teri Reed-Rhoads Honors College Committee, Teri Reed-Rhoads Foundations of Excellence Committee, Frank J. Dooley Special Admissions Review Committee, Joan Fulton Advising Taskforce, Bob Kubat and Lesa Beals University Senate Document 11-4 Undergraduate Admissions Policy was presented to the Senate for discussion at the October 24, 2011 meeting and for action at the November 21, 2011 meeting of the University Senate where it was approved. University Senate Document 11-7 Undergraduate Core Curriculum Policy was presented to the Senate for discussion at the January 23, 2012 meeting and for action at the February 20, 2012 meeting of the University Senate where it was approved. University Senate Document 11-10 Honors College Governance Committee Policy was presented to the Senate for discussion at the March 19, 2012 meeting and for action at the April 23, 2012 meeting of the University Senate where it was approved. 2012-2013 EPC: Professor Teri Reed-Rhoads agreed to continue as Chair of the Educational Policy Committee for 2012-2013. New members for 2012-2013 are Professors Jennifer Dennis (Horticulture & Landscape Architecture) and Teresa Taber Doughty (Educational Studies). Outgoing members are Professors Joan Fulton (Agricultural Economics), Ronald J. Glotzbach (Computer Graphics Technology), and Chong Gu (Statistics). Respectfully submitted by, Teri Reed-Rhoads, Chair Educational Policy Committee Purdue University Senate August 30, 2012