Utmb Faculty Senate
Senators present: T. Albrecht; C. Baker; V. Braciale; D. Breitkopf; B. Budelmann (Chair-elect); B. Camune; S. Gerik; A. Hudson Jones; C. Jansen; H. Jordan; M. Kanz; R. Lederman (Chair); H. Li; M. Mcginnis; R. Moore (ex-officio); R. Rahr; C. Stroup-Benham; G. Taglialatela; D. Trevino; P. Watson (ex-officio); M. Winter; C. Wisnewski.
1) Approval of agenda (
2) President’s comments – John D. Stobo
o Research services – UTMB is working with the firm of Brinks & Associates (Jan Feldman) to restructure the department. She has been meeting with representatives here on campus and working with E. J. Pederson. There will no longer be a Vice-President of Research. The department will be dramatically different from the past with an emphasis on primary investigators’ post-award development. Jim Aerie is working on technology transfers to get intellectual property in public domain. The Senate is invited to submit names of individuals they feel Jan should be meeting with for this effort.
o DOM search.
There have been 30 individuals nominated; 10 are internal
candidates. The search firm of Whitt-Keiffer has been hired.
Pres. Stobo is impressed with the quality of
candidates. A group of six individuals
(a sub-set of the search committee) will review candidates
information in June and narrow the list to the top three. They will then be brought to
o Retreat with Dr. Kenneth Shine, new UT System Executive Vice-Chancellor for Health Affairs. The one and one-half day retreat involved:
group on indigent care chaired by the president of
§ Innovative educational programs – how to learn from one another
§ A consulting group from out of state is working on nursing leadership – they are not a medical firm; the intention is to get ideas “out of the box”
§ How we compare with other components – we are the only one with our own hospital. We know the ways to calculate actual costs of indigent care (140-150 million) other components use a formula
3) Chair report – Regina Lederman
o Recommendations to the Regents from the Faculty Advisory Council:
§ Retention of Tenure for Tenured Faculty seeking Part-Time Appointments – each school will write their own policy.
§ Long term 3-year appointments was approved.
§ Peer review for merit increases was approved.
§ Brief leaves will be approved for inter-system collaboration; 2K per institution with 4 per campus is approved.
4) Chair-Elect report – Ulli Budelmann
o You Count Survey – Dr. Budelmann has discovered that pin numbers are not unique to each faculty. Richard Moore will contact Human Resources to verify this information and determine how the company is accountable for the data.
5) Past-Chair Report – Giulio Taglialatela (in the interest of a full agenda, no report).
6) Compact report presentation – Richard Moore (attached)
7) Institutional Educational Evaluation Committee – Rudy Guerrero
o Asking for volunteers for this accreditation body. They review the institution’s strategic plan for SAC’s accreditation. The time commitment is the kickoff in June 2004, then quarterly meetings in 2005 & monthly meetings in 2006. This is a positive chance for a participating role. Charlotte Wisnewski and Susan Gerik volunteered to represent the Senate on the IEEC.
8) Committee reports:
o Academic and Administrative affairs – Mark Winter
§ Needs volunteers for the Computing Standards, On-Line Training, PeopleSoft And Electronic Medical Record Committees (distributed sign up sheet)
o Faculty Quality – Christine Baker
§ Working on the Faculty Satisfaction Survey
§ The Faculty Club is progressing very well; building will begin in September and is scheduled to be complete in January 2005.
o Governance Committee – Daniel Breitkopf
§ Developing Faculty Survey of AAPT processes, will be distributed to Senate members soon.
§ Continuing work on lab cores.
9) AAPT Process – questions raised and discussion
o Major components of the three schools should be similar, but some distinctions should be retained based on uniqueness and differences in each school.
o Should outside letters be a requirement for APT process?
o In the SOM, APT processes vary substantially in different departments. Some departments have no written policies. Chairs make all APT decisions.
o Can someone be promoted solely on teaching?
o Should AAPT and merit review be separate?
§ The Governance Committee will undertake the review, and cite issues and make recommendations to the Senate within two months.
10) Review of Watson/Wyatt Faculty Salary Survey – senators are encouraged to view the tapes and reports for each school available at the Moody Medical Library (the Senate secretary will investigate posting the survey on the Senate web site)
11) Adjournment/Committee meetings