MiSU Faculty Senate Executive Board

Committee on Committees Report

May 1, 2003


On February 27, 2003, the MiSU Faculty Senate Executive Board began its review of duties and lines of communication for all Faculty Senate committees by drafting a survey (attached) which was sent to all Faculty Senate committees. The survey was due back to President Keller on March 13.


Of the sixteen committees, nine completed the survey. Four committees have not met for the entire year. In special meetings (April 3, 10, 24) of the Executive Board, the survey responses were discussed in detail and recommendations were formed. The following narrative is copies from the minutes of those meetings.


April 3:

It was agreed that the duties for all committees should include at least one meeting annually, at which the chair for the coming year will be chosen and at which the committee is to produce its annual report to the Faculty Senate. It was also agreed that the President should contact each committee during fall semester. These and other decisions will eventually be presented to the Constitutional Review Committee so that language can be drafted for the By-Laws according to these recommendations.


The Exec then began reviewing individual committees, generally in the order listed in the By-Laws.


The Academic Hall of Fame Committee has not met. It is hoped they will meet next year. No changes were recommended for the By-Laws.


In the Academic Policies Committee, the Dean of Institutional Planning should be changed to Director of Records. It was also decided that 3 faculty members elected at large should be added to the committee, along with an ex officio Center for Extended Learning Representative served or appointed by the Director of Outreach. It was also agreed that the duties should read something like "To examine specific academic policies, both graduate and undergraduate, as directed by the Senate President. The Senate President will determine whether specific issues need full Senate discussion before being sent to the committee."


It was agreed to ask Gary Leslie and Rick Hedburg whether they see any need for the Athletic Policies Committee to exist. The thinking was that DAC10 may set all the athletic policies so that policies are no longer set locally.


It was agreed to recommend dropping the Budget and Salary Committee, which has not met in two years. The suggestion was that when such a committee might be needed in the future, an ad hoc institutional committee should be appointed which would include three faculty members appointed by the Faculty Senate President.


The Constitutional Review Committee and the Faculty Handbook Committee were considered together. It was agreed the word "annually" should be inserted in the duties of both committees, concerning the review of their respective documents. It was also noted that the Faculty Handbook should refer to the website rather than to replacement pages.


April 10:

It was agreed to recommended changing the membership of the Continuing Education Committee by replacing the Director of Continuing Education with a Representative from Continuing Education served by or appointed by the Outreach Director. Committee duties should also be modified because salaries are determined by a pay scale and not by this committee. Also, committee duties should not include scheduling courses. The committee will be asked to draft a list of duties which should be included.


In discussion of the Curriculum Committee duties, it was noted that the Committee actually doesnt actually do the first two items, examine the curriculum continually for possible improvements, and coordinate undergraduate and graduate curricula. The possibility of regular program review was discussed. Currently, possible elimination is discussed only in connection with budget crunches. Perhaps the faculty should be proactive rather than reactive regarding program terminations. Discussion of this issue will be placed on the next Faculty Senate agenda.


For the Faculty Affairs Committee, it was agreed to delete the duties of work toward the improvement of University activities and organizations, and to plan activities and events which will benefit faculty relationships. In recognition of the true current function of the committee, it was agreed to recommend a name change to the Faculty Elections Committee. The membership would be changed to include one representative from each College and one representative from the Library.


For the Faculty Development and Research Committee, it was agreed to recommend the addition under membership of a statement allowing the committee to add a consultant if desired.


On April 24:

J. Faculty Handbook Committee. No changes for this committee were recommended.


K. Faculty Rights Committee.


L. General Education Committee.


M. Library Committee.


N. Promotion Committee.


Note: A communication of general committee rules, specific committee duties, and by-laws associated with committee activity should be sent to the committee chairs and members in the early fall.


O. Special Review Committee.


P. Student Rights Committee.


Q. Tenure committee



Respectfully submitted,


David McCormack (April 3 and 10)

Paul Markel (April 24)

Faculty Senate Committee Survey


At the January 23, 2003 meeting of the Faculty Senate a motion was passed directing the Faculty Senate Executive Board to "review the entire Faculty Senate committee structure including committee duties and lines of communication." The informal survey below should help us in an initial attempt to determine what is happening in various Faculty Senate Committees. Please complete the form (use the back or attach additional pages as necessary) and return it to me by March 13.


Christopher Keller

MSU Faculty Senate President 2002-2003


  1. Committee name:



  1. Current Committee Chairperson:



  1. Has your committee met this academic year? How often?




  1. Did your Committee meet last year? How often?




  1. Did your committee prepare and submit to the Faculty Senate an annual report for last academic year?














  1. What activities has your committee undertaken so far this academic year either as directed by the Faculty Senate or by the Faculty Senate Bylaws?











  1. Did your committee undertake other work or responsibilities, last year or this, not described above?










  1. What do you see as priorities for your committee next year?











  1. Do you have any suggestions for restructuring of the membership or duties of the committee that you think would be in order? Please refer to the attached Faculty Handbook description of committee duties.



Minot State University Faculty Senate 2002-2003

Executive Board Meeting February 13, 2003

3:30 p.m. Westlie Room


Executive Board Members

Christopher Keller (Faculty Senate President)

Paul Markel (Faculty Senate Vice President)

David McCormack (Faculty Senate Secretary)

Bethany Andreasen (Faculty Senate Parliamentarian)

Richard Barkosky (Immediate Past Faculty Senate President)

Nancy Hall (Vice President of Academic Affairs)

Tom Seymour

Don Burke



1. Approval of the minutes

2. Announcements

3. Review the Agenda

4. Administrative report - Dr. Shaar and Dr. Hall

5. Old Business


6. New Business

a. Report of the Faculty Review Committee

b. Review of Faculty Senate committee structure