If you are a senator, can you please give us a red red check? Green check? Okay. It looks like we have a quorum. So we're ready to start. The record. That was 56. 56. Okay. So we're set to go now. Just you have to uncheck your green check. Joe, do you know this? Will be managing that. Thanks. Okay, great. Alright, so we have a quorum and we're going to go ahead and start our meeting. Alright? So the first thing that we need to do is adopt the agenda. Is there any discussion of the agenda? If so, raise your hand. Seeing none. Can I have a motion to adopt the agenda? I think we'll use this. Okay. I see a second as well. So seeing no further discussion. Ready for the motion, remember to use your green checks. All in favor of the accepting the agenda. Any accountants still? And the agenda does does anybody against put a red we've got a quorum, So we're good. Okay. Alright. The agenda passes. It's been approved. Okay. Next, the approval of the minutes from December 5, 2020. Can I have a John Morgan? I would like to call a could I call on Senator Morgan? And Senator Morgan, can you please adjust your name so that it says center? Yeah. Let me try that. Yeah. Thank you. I was skimming through the minutes and I noticed that there are a few typographical errors that occurred with the automatic transcription from the audio. And I guess we could go ahead and approve the minutes, but I if I send you any corrections, I hope they can be implemented. Their minor. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Any other discussion? Then? If then all in favor please give us a green green check. Okay? And we have whenever on page alright, then the minutes are passed. Okay. So now we're moving on and we have remarks from Provost Carlson. And if Provost Carlson is here, can you raise your hand in the as one of the reactions that'll bring it right up to the top. Yeah, I did. Okay. It's me. It's my screen. Okay, Great. So we'd like to welcome Provost Carlson in her first remarks to the Faculty Senate in 2023. And so I'll let you take it away. Hi everybody. Welcome to the Spring semester are happy first day of class. I hope if you taught today it went well. I thought I would just give a couple of updates. First thing for this spring, I'm establishing some open our time for one-on-one meetings with the campus community. Those will be on Fridays, 10-12, once a month. For now, if we have a high demand, we could increase that. The first ones on February 24th, these will be held in for bond and there'll be a sign-up link posted with dates and times on the Provost website. So this is really just an opportunity for me. If you have something that you want to chat with me about to just come by and say, hi, I have a conversation and get to know all of you and campus better. Second thing I just wanted to share with you that I have started reading the P&T cases. It's a preliminary read through. I know the university committee is working really hard and it's still doing their work. But if I wait until they have completed their work, I just won't have literally enough time to read them all as carefully as I want to. I started my preliminary reading, of course, I'll go back once I have recommendations in hand. I guess what I wanted to share with you-all was just my gratitude for how thorough those cases are. The fairness that is clearly exhibited as as it's moved as a case has moved through their process, particularly call out the COVID impact statement. I think that that is so important that we understand COVID is going to have such a long tail of consequences. And so I thought that was, I was really thrilled to see how that included in the packet and how thoroughly candidates for promotion and tenure described their experiences. So I just wanted to thank everybody in the department college, senate committees for their work. I think this is among the most important work that we do. I also wanted to share with you a note from Matt Robinson, who is heading up the Carnegie Foundation reclassification for community engagement. University will begin as application process for that reclassification was awarded the designation in 2017. And it's a great opportunity for us actually through the application process to report the incredible community engagement efforts of the university and as members. The classification as an elective and voluntary classification that involves data collection and documentation of important aspects of institutional mission. And data, identifies commitments and requires substantial effort on our part. But I think is incredibly important. It really resonates with our mission in terms of impact as a university. So Matt Robinson, who serves currently as the Deputy Director of the Community Engagement Initiative, is chairing a steering committee that is consists of faculty, staff, students, and community partners to prepare the application. Really big lift. He will be reaching out to you. The application is due in April 2025. The fact that he has already started thinking about it and assembling a group to work on it gives you a sense of how much work. Once that's submitted, a decision should be rendered in January 26. If you have a question about the process or want to be more involved, please feel free to contact Matt. He is, I think on the screen today in his capacity as a senator. And there will be a story forthcoming and you daily with more details as well. So thanks for your support for this important university initiative. What I'd like to do with my remaining time is as George Irvine to give the faculty senate and update on winter session. We've just concluded it. And thanks to all of your great efforts, I asked him to share what happened in that time and to look forward to summer. And then I know the Faculty Senate was also involved in approving, moving forward and badging and asked him to give you an update on where we stand from that i'll I'll give my time to George for the remaining. That's great. Thanks. Provost carlson. Hi everyone. I'm George Urban. I'm the Associate Vice Provost for Professional and Continuing Studies and online initiatives. And for those of you who might haven't met, hi, It's nice to meet you. For those of you whom I know, it's nice to see you again. I'm going to share my screen and run through some slides quickly to update you about. Well, let's go with digital badging first. Okay. So I last spoke with you in May of last year in regards to the digital badging initiative here at the University of Delaware for non-credit. The purpose today is to update you on our work since then. And to tell you about phase one of the pilot project which we implemented in the fall. It's been a success. And now we're ensuring a successful rollout to UD units for using the new UD digital badges. So if in case you're not aware of what is a digital badge. The last point is really the key one. It serves as both a recognition of knowledge gains and digital proof of such gain. Rather than issuing a paper-based certificate of completion, we can now issue a digital badge, which does both of those things. Employers like it, students like it. We like it because we can also see how they're sharing it. In social media. Companies are issuing, and universities are issuing digital badges. And now here's an example of the universities that have been using it that we've talked to some of them to make sure we start this process the right way instead of making mistakes that they made. So our friends at Chapel Hill were particularly useful and giving us advice. And then at records as well. Here's the use cases for a digital badge, we use them now and professional continuing studies, that's where the pilot has been located. But then there are other non-credit issuers on campus, both programs approved by faculty senate and those for staff and faculty such as HR or C tau for the library. Here's images I wanted to share with you of the first to ever University of Delaware and digital badges that we issued in the fall. One was for project management and one was for our non-credit clinical trials management. We issued 47 of them, 43 of the recipients engaged with the badge, which means they click through and 22 have shared it on LinkedIn. This has kind of a good social media marketing impact for UT's branding when participants share it. This is what we've been up to for the start of the project. You can see we worked a lot on figuring out the right vendor. We went with a credible, which is one of the badging platforms. We've talked to peer universities. I've mentioned that phase one of the pilot is complete. And now we're entering phase two, which is in the spring issuing badges for PCS non-credit. The rest of our non-credit certificate programs. I've also formed a badge and governance committee just last month to help us figure out the minimum quality standards and the best way for other units on campus to issue these badges. Here's where we're at. As I said, we get the badge and governance committee phase 2s. And then we're going to look back and survey recipients from phase one in the fall. We also have to share this with you DIT for the funding considerations of an enterprise wide license with a credible. And then the badge and governance committee is up and running and giving us very good feedback. Here's the committee, two faculty members. I'd like to thank Dr. John earnest, chair of English, and Dr. Amanda blue from Business Administration for serving on the Committee. Then we have five folks from a very experienced and relevant units, UD to round out the committee were establishing the guidelines, establishing an application for other parts of UD to apply to issue a digital badge. And then the goal really is to uphold the quality and integrity of UDL, digital credentials, non-credit credentials per year guidance. Here are images of the next set of badges that will be issuing in the spring. So these are PCS, non-credit programs from Drone School, drone ground scroll to birth companion with health sciences, cybersecurity defense. So you can see the range of badges that we're issuing. And then other users in the future may include the UDF athletics blue program, the library see tall, etc. So that's the badging. And if it's okay with you, I'll move ahead with the special sessions. So first off, thanks for the great results from the growing, growing the winter session in 2023. I'll walk through why we have reason to be thankful. In October, the provost forms a special sessions growth team comprised of blue Rossi, myself, the registrar, Amanda steel Middleton, call cab Rashid from the budget office of either hanging or PCS. And Michelle Parnell and Leanne desperate. This is a cross-functional team charged with growing enrollments and courses and offerings in our special sessions. Here's our initial focus. This is what we wanted to get across to students. Students can meet general education requirements using special session courses. They can take classes here at stake, instead of taking them elsewhere and transferring the credit here. This helps them get ahead and be assured of equality offering. It also allows students to retake a class and a special session and then meet the demand for courses in largest majors. So what did we do? We figured out the 59 high demands special session courses. We came up with a promotion campaign of getting ahead or catching up, which we shared with students. We shared real-time enrollment data with departments so you could respond to student demand. And we created a special sessions financial calculator to figure out the breakeven point for session sections. In the special session. Here, those 59 high-demand courses, we took a look at the most transferred courses. The most popular Gen Ed courses, the courses that have been offered online historically and special sessions. The courses with the highest DFW rate, and the courses from the largest undergraduate majors. Most of them, as you can see, are in the 100.200 level, although there are a few 300 levels as well. The good news is you already provided 90% of these courses in winter 2023. So the system is working pretty well at the department level to figure out which courses are most in demand. Here's the webpage we created, the special sessions. Here's the referrals where they came from to the website. And this is helpful for marketing purposes. You can see the Facebook posting drove 194 clicks to the website. And then from the website, where did they go? The good news is they checked out courses, they looked for courses, or are they signed up for courses, the web rich, or they went and learn more about study abroad. So the website works to get the word out and to help students get to where they needed to go to add courses for winter 2023. Here's some key results and then I'll show you some graphs. Alright, here's the good news. We grew the student count by 9.7% versus winter 2022, where you go. 90% of the high-demand courses were offered. That's great. We saw a huge increase in study and students studying abroad. So they felt more comfortable and secure studying abroad. 60% of the enrollments are non-residents, students, 40 resonant. The fill rate for online sections, interestingly enough, was higher by 20 percentage points than the in-person feel great. Here's the graph of the enrollments. Enrollment by course enrollments, not by unique students. So it was an 18% growth in course enrollments from winter 22, 23. But note the capacity. We definitely increase seat count, so we've got capacity to fill, and that's really good for us to know. We encourage more students to take classes here. Here's the modality of those enrollments and note the huge difference in the yellow bar that's online sections. So pre-pandemic, we had more in-person post-pandemic. If we are in that now I think we definitely have more online and the students preferred online sections. We increased course count by 3%. So we increased course count by 3%. We increased course cat by remarkably greater percent. So we're adding more seats to existing courses. This is the I'll just move my little box here, excuse me. This is the breakdown of graduate. We're just under 17% of the course. And then Undergraduate, of course, made up the lion share of 83%. So what did we learn from all this and what, how can we use it going forward? You guys are offering high-demand courses, so departments are doing a great job. Students prefer in the winter term, at least online course sections, departments, adjusted caps and modality based on real-time data that the registrar shared with them. Enrollments are unevenly distributed across the colleges. You can see that distribution here. Studying abroad bounce back to where it was at, prevent that Mike levels and we have seat capacity to sell. Now, going forward for the summer, we're gonna do everything we did for winter. But we're going to add some things. Visiting students can come here. So Delaware into went elsewhere like my son could take a class here and the summer and then transfer it back to his school. Help students finish in four by using the summer term. And that's an important data point to share with advisors and departments. Some students are just shy of the necessary credits to graduate, so summer can help them a graduate earlier or like on time, instead of waiting the whole semester and lose the opportunity to earn income on a job. And then we should explore adding experimental experiential learning opportunities to summer and winter going forward. So we're very excited by the growth and we're just getting started. And I wanted to thank everyone for everyone's efforts. It did show up in the statistics and in helping our students get ahead or catch up. That's all I have. Thank you. I will field questions. I'm going to ask in the order that they came in and I ask that you keep them relatively brief. So we'll start with Senator Morgan. Yeah. Thank you. There are a couple of important things I wanted to say, not really questions but comments. The coronavirus pandemic is not over. Indeed, it's likely to continue for many, many years into the future. And the effects on loss of learning are going to be with us for the rest of this decade. As students who lost opportunities to learn in elementary school and high school enter the University of Delaware with weaker backgrounds than they might otherwise have had. I, myself have seen loss of learning in freshman and sophomore level courses when I teach students in junior and senior level horses. So I think these COVID impact statements probably should continue to be. Part of the PNT process for many years to come. I also wanted to say that another impact appears to have been great inflation in high-schools. We've been told in the past that the best way of predicting success of students that UD is to look at their high school grades. However, that may no longer be the case. And I think it's important that we be fully aware of what's been happening in the high school when we consider revising the criteria for admission to UD. Thank you. Okay. Next we have Senator Kennedy buck. Hi, George. Thanks so much for the presentation today. Very interesting. So my question has to do with the digital badges. And what I'm asking is, is there any way that any of that learning will translate into coursework than a person may take an a major. We'd like to take take two badges and call me in the morning and put them together to have a certificate program type of thing. For now, badges are used for non-credit programs that you did not for credit programs. I am exploring, building, articulate inside articulation agreements for our non-credit certificates to meet requirements at the department level for majors. But that's at the discretion of the department. I would also wonder about related to certificate programs. So many, so many badges go into building certificate programs. Thank you. Yeah, you can. Some universities have built tailored pathways through their badges, which lead to like a master badge, master's certificate. And we've explored that possibility, but we're gonna go with baby steps. And honestly you have to have a nice population of badges to build those types of catered pathways for students. Thank you so much. Alright, Next, I'll call on Senator PEDOT and just a reminder to everyone, remember to say your department when you after you say your name for the minutes. Okay. Senator repel. Dr. Yvonne builder PEDOT, a senator from the graduate students. I had a quick question. I think I saw on the future of badging. You had mentioned non-credit leadership opportunities like SGA. I was wondering if the Graduate Student Government could be included as well. And maybe if you could say a little bit about what those conversations look like, I'd appreciate it. Yeah, we had really good discussions with potential users on campus of digital badges. And there are lots of different use cases. Once we get the guidelines and guidance for users on campus, we will let you know. Then you can review if your use case matches the guidance and guidelines were being those reflect the conversations we had. So there's gonna be no surprises. It could be really interesting to have a badge for leadership development. We've talked about that with graduate college. And we'd see tall. So I would encourage you to take a look at it. And if you're interested, you could apply to issue a digital badge for such a leadership development program. Okay, Senator Jeff, thank you very much. A few moments ago I was applauding rather than raising my hand. If anyone else has anything awkward on Zoom, I will be very sympathetic. I'd like to ask if if could give us an update on the virus here at UD. Thank you. Okay. I think I'm unmuted little bit of a process. Thanks for the question. I think there was a group that was meeting regularly. We have not yet met this semester, so I really don't have an update for you, but except that I will look into things and get back to you. I know that there is a no doubt about a flu and vaccine clinic that was hosted this week. So that's something that to encourage anyone who needs an updated booster or an updated flu shot to go ahead and thank you. So the clinic, that's really all I have to say at this point. Okay. Alright, great. So we're gonna, we're gonna go ahead and move ahead If there are no other questions and I don't see any two announcements. And we have quite a few announcements and short updates to share with you about things that have been going on since December and some of the things that we've done over the last semester and where we're going in the future. So our first big announcement, our past president position has changed. As many of you know, Chris Williams was our past president, representing us on Senate. And he's moved into an administrative role as vice provost of sustainability. So he can no longer be our past president in Senate. So we've replaced him with Amy hag Strome for the remainder of this semester. So Amy was very gracious to step back into that role. And I'd like to thank Chris Williams for his many years of service. The faculty senate. He's been very, it's been invaluable. He served as president twice. So I hope you'll all join in giving a virtual applause to Chris Williams. Williams and wishing him the best of luck in his new role. Alright. Then the next thing I wanted to do was give you some updates on every meeting we end with new business. Sometimes it seems like some of that new business moves into the into the Cloud and we never see it again. So I wanted to come back and let you know what we're doing with some of the new business that we discussed from September to December. So some of the resolutions that are going to be discussed in the future, we pulled the academic standards for now, but we're going to talk about that in March. We are there are separating out the academic standards. That was what Doug Zander disgust at our last meeting. Just as a reminder, they have not been updated in over ten years. At the University of Delaware. There there's some issues with these. So we need to look at the standards and make some revisions to help our students out. So we're going to talk about those at our next meeting. We split those out into two and we'll give you lots of time to look at those. We also talked about term limits for chairs, that working group was not able to complete their work to make it onto the agenda this time for February. So that will be coming back in in March. We're at our last meeting, we talked about increasing the number of students in administration Senate seats will have a resolution on this coming up in March as well. Then finally, PT handbook modifications. This is a leftover item from last year that we are working on and we should have resolutions we hope by March on. So those are some of the upcoming resolutions that we're going to talk about for our ad hoc committees, where we're adding, we have two ad hoc committees. We may add more, but we are looking at changing the room in which we meet for Senate. We're looking for a bigger room because we did expand our Senate. And 10 for Gore will not be B, as conducive to meetings. So we have a committee together, ad-hoc committee together looking at the room change. Hopefully we'll be able to do that in in fall semester. Also, we had Senator Biddle had asked about remote work and service availability. And we're going to put together an ad hoc committee to look at the issues related to remote work and how that impacts services that are available to faculty, staff and students. Finally, we have several ongoing conversations. We are working on looking at the issue of DSS accommodations for out of class exams. And I imagine this will take us, we'll look at this throughout the semester. We're also looking at the ombuds office and trying to put something together by the end of the year. And then finally, we're going to look at the excused absence policy so that we have better guidance. And hopefully what we're looking to do is create something that you can put your syllabus very easily that will provide guidance to both students, students and faculty on excused absences. So that's those are the updates from last semester. If you have any new business item that is. Let's see. Provost Carlson, do you have a question right now? Did I did I Yeah. Hi. I think Jose era, student life is here. He was just texting me that there was a meeting. So would you like to recognize him and he can give an update and respect to Senator Job's question. Oh, sure. So you just need to raise your hand virtually so we can find you. Okay. Got it. Thanks. Okay. Thanks. Jose Maria, student life. So just just to address the question, I did want to let folks know. We do still have our coronavirus operating group. Operations group that meets to monitor coronavirus on campus. And that happened over winter session. And a number of communications were sent out. Spring. Covid guidelines were published and sent to students. So we did ask students to test prior to coming back to campus, um, and we have given them guidance around specific guidance around what to do either if they're exposed or if they test positive. We continue obviously to have a vaccination requirements for students as well. So just wanted to make sure folks were aware of that. We do continue to have a number of antigen test kits available for students, staff and faculty. And those can be picked up at various locations, like the students centers, desks, and other places around campus. But if there are specific questions, certainly you can send me an email. And I'm happy to get you to the right the right point of information. Thanks. Thanks. This seems like a good point in time. Senator Morgan, I'm not taking questions straight now. Is this related to COVID? Okay. We'll hold off to the end of the announcements. So just a reminder for if you are being asked to speak are called on to speak or you're speaking as part of any part of the agenda, just raise your hand. That'll make you rise to the top. And we can, we can see you and unmute you, which is the most important part. Okay? So now a big topic of interest has been the chat GPT. And so we had Kevin Goodrich come in from C towel to talk a little bit about that. Okay. Got it. Okay. Ready. I am ready. Thanks so much. I'll tend to get very center for teaching assessment of learning. Over the past couple of weeks, we've developed this website. You've got the URL at the top. It also happens to be at the bottom of this particular slide. It's a resource that we develop, tried to collect our best set of suggestions and advice. Faculty who are thinking about the impact of these tools. The name of these tools is there's not a coherence understanding of what we should be calling. This was even, we say we're calling the advanced automated tools generative as a word that is increasingly common. I think we'll probably move in that direction at some point. But there are longer-term questions that we're not going to address today. They're not dressing this documents. The things you've been rethinking about. What does this mean? Doesn't mean anything for what we teach students. The way that we test students provide feedback. What is that students do? The SA going to die? Those are great questions, but they're not questions that I can help you with today, although I certainly have any opinions. But the focus right now is on what should you be doing if you're teaching this semester. So our biggest advice for you, our best advice for you is to figure out your policy. Your policy can change the semester if it's clearly communicated, that's okay. But whatever you're doing, make a decision and clearly communicate that with your students. We strongly recommend that you play some language in your syllabus, and we have some sample language reach these particular four scenarios in our syllabus that our websites and we also have a link from the syllabus template also points to the same direction. Next slide, please. So things that you should be thinking about as you're making this decision. First off, if you allow students to use these tools, you have to think about or tell them what you want them to be cited or acknowledges some way. And if you don't want them to cite it, you have to tell them how. This is stuff that's not in the APA or MLA style guides or handbooks, It's just chew new. So a very concrete level. You got to tell them how to do this. You need to help your students think through and you're going to have to think through this and work through this yourself. How are these tools most effectively used? Are these good tools for brainstorming? Are these good things to think about at the very beginning of writing or creating something, or they best used in editing and providing feedback and suggestions. Frankly, we don't have good answers for these questions right now, but we hope that together we'll start to figure this out. But you've got some good instincts from your experience and from your discipline. What is his US students to do that can push you in the right direction. These tools are very limited set, but we're going to talk about that in just a moment. Let's set that aside for the next slide. There are ethical issues with these tools. And the way that they're not just are using these tools are there. They're definitely. But the way they've been created where one lawsuit from many artists, I guess one of the companies that created an arch and generation tool, because these tools, the current generation of most of these tools, they're trained on large datasets. And we don't know where these datasets came from, how things ought to be, and the datasets were they allowed to be in the data's? There are a lot of complicated ethical and legal issues that we're all starting to work through in many different ways. Finally, most of these tools right now are proprietary, enclosed in their commercial. We have some information about how they work. We have some, there's some information that companies aren't going to share. I think more importantly in war immediately, to use many of these tools, somebody has to give personal information should accompany these companies. They UD does not have any sort of recruitment. So if you're going to encourage or require students to use these tools, you need to think through. Are you comfortable? Require encouraging students to give to this other organization their name, phone number, maybe their email address, and other information that the company is going to require them before they give you access to the tool. I can't make that decision for you, but it's something you need to take. Next slide, please. Finally, some of you may decide or have already decided that these tools aren't ready. You need students to be doing their own work with house, this kind of collaboration. You want to modify or create assignments that are not amenable to the use of these tools. You want students to not even be tempted to use these tools. So these are some things that you can think about as you try to do that. So first thing to remember is that the current generation is especially chat GBT. There's not an underlying intelligence, there's not a chain of reasoning that leads to the creation of its hex that it outputs. So if you focus on this higher order thinking skills, you're asking students to do something that the tools can do. Now sometimes they can follow us, they can convince us very cleverly that they are doing that, but they're not. If you ask the right kinds of probing questions, you can probably start to get at some information these tools are incapable of providing. You can also require students to explicitly use materials that these tools don't have access to or can't use because the tool doesn't have the context of your particular class, your discipline. E.g. you can require students to use vocabulary from your textbook that the 12 minute axis chair. Or you can require students to specifically referenced the discussion that you had in class. The tool definitely doesn't have access to that or your PowerPoint slides, your materials. So think about the materials that the tools have access to and find ways to incorporate materials that it doesn't have access. Finally, think about changing some of your focus from product or process. It's easy for these tools to spit out a large body of texts to create an image. So these tools are now creating music. They're creating videos. But you may want to focus on the process of creating those. So you can have your students write an annotated bibliography before they, like the first tranche, have students turn in their first draft and provide them feedback when they turn in their final draft, require them to answer several questions about changes made from their first draft for their final train. Why did you do this? What was challenging? What kind of feedback was, was helpful that I provided, that your classmates provided. So thinking about ways to emphasize the process less than theorem, we emphasize right now the products, if that is my best. Okay? We do have one question from Esther Biswas. This Hi, thanks. My question is this and I'm not totally familiar with all of the tools. But how would you know, there are different types of software that we as faculty have to check writings that students have created, like turn it in or other types of tools to determine whether or not they're plagiarizing. How would you know if a student had utilized for some piece of written work other than having the annotated bibliography or the process documents that preceded that the written work. How would you detect whether a student has used one of these tools to develop their writing? That's a great question for anybody who really figures out how to do this with a high level of accuracy, there is a lot and lot of money to be made. You should leave immediately filed for some patents and go find where these companies, because that's incredibly typical. There are some tools are being developed with the accuracy of these tools are still being determined. It seems like there's gonna be an arms race and arms race between the developers of the genetic tools and developers and some cases going to be the exact same company is also going to be wanting to sell us tools that detect whether or not their particular tool that companies are based on these tools, their detection tools. So right now there aren't good there are no good answers to that question. And that's one of the reasons why we're suggesting you focus on process. Because that's something that the current generation. And I think that's gonna be a weakness of my understanding. It's a weakness of business, higher current round of technology. The way that these tools work, they're essentially like Mad Libs is what kind of a way to think about them. They rely on the matching text and predicting text-based on the corpus of texts that has been analogues. That doesn't tell you anything about meeting chain of reasoning, of rationality. So there's not a good answer to your question. And I think that's one of the most frustrating things. And Senator morning routine myself. Thank you. So I wanted to have a quick follow up to what provost and said. Thanks. First of all, the current most prevalent variant of the virus is reported to be 25 times more infectious than the original variant. Secondly, the false negative rate for rapid antigen tests has been reported to be 20-30%. When they are performed correctly. If they're performed incorrectly, probably is even lower. Now, I made the point some time ago that there's a very cheap test that has a 50% accuracy rate. Senator Moran, I don't mean to say, okay, you can bring this up in new business. But I just don't want to take the time. We have some guests who are speaking and I don't want to take their time. I want to just focus on the topic that we have. Is there any other questions? If not, we're going to move on. And we have our next guest is Jennifer sailor who's gonna be talking are talking about the Gen Ed committee. Thank you, Dr. get. So hi, everyone. My name is Jenna for sale or for those of you who don't know me, I see so many familiar faces. I'm actually presenting on behalf of our General Education Committee and I'm from the School of Nursing for the minutes. This is just an announcement and really were focused on social justice just to give you some background, this is a core aspect of the University of Delaware strategic plan. And UD students really should have a foundational understanding of ways in which their particular field study or career relates to social justice in our actual contemporary world today. The Committee in 2021 to 2020 to really examine, tell other universities have approached social justice as it relates to general education curriculum. As we all know on this call, It can be defined in many different ways. And also there's many departments and certain pockets here on campus that are working on social justice efforts and many different arenas. So the agenda committee is really dedicated to capture in the complex and diverse ways that the university can actually define operationalized and how we can teach social Justin's to our students. How do we build this foundation? Because then everybody is excited about this. So gaining a better understanding, taken our baby steps, how does the UD community us envision moving forward on integrating social justice into our undergraduate curriculum across the entire university. We've had many ideas. I'm sharing this for the first time for Gen Ed and I heard that this has gone to faculty senate previously. Some of the things we're thinking about as defining social justice. What do we as faculty and staff and students here at UDub wanted to find it. We're thinking of hosting working groups of interested faculty. We also like to identify maybe some courses that have incorporated social justice or maybe the faculty that are interested in doing so. Finally, maybe identifying some avenues in which we can ensure that students are exposed to and engage with social justice issues. This could be a specific course, it could be a program. We're really just open to gathering information. And everybody's excited to say how you can get involved. So the next slide I'll show you that we're sending out a survey. I know Dr. gasoline, Karen are very excited to go ahead and send it out to faculty senate. We work together and put the survey together. In addition to that, we're going to have to hybrid focus groups to accommodate those that are unable to come to campus. They are occurring on March 20, s 1215-115. We tried to get it in-between courses, as well as Tuesday, April 4th. Again, at the same time, these events will be recorded in case you miss it. And also they will be held in the Career Services Center, which is at 04:01 academy street right next to Perkins. If do we do our focus groups, then we're going to broaden things up a little bit. And we're going to have a virtual town hall, and they're gonna be April 10 of the 17th. We're kinda looking at April 17th a little bit more as the 10th falls on break for a lot of parents that have children at home. The QR code is there. You want to go ahead and start your survey now, you're not mandated to do it, is just you can opt in if you're interested in it. So that's my update from the GenEd committee and hopefully I will have more. And Nancy, I know we're running out of time and if there's any burning questions, you can always feel free to e-mail me too. Anyone have any questions? Alright. The next thing we're gonna do is president elect Jim Morrison is gonna give us a brief update on the second open hearing on Medicare Advantage. And I know that Senator Morrison, president elect Morrison was having some issues with his his Zoom. Okay. Thank you. Nancy. Yes. As you know, we had a open session because a town hall meeting, I guess you'd call it on the Medicare Advantage. As you know, there's a move to push the retiree health care benefits, do a high mark. The Medicare Advantage program. And we've had two sessions. We had one back in December where we I guess you can conclude that there was lot of confusion out there and a lot of information that was not really accurate or something was going on. And then we decide to have a meeting on January 24th. Then we had 100.2070, 272 participants attend this session. And we had Raymond Siegfried, who was a former senator in Delaware on health care benefits. We had Karen Peterson was there. And make sure that if you have the people here, we had Karen Peterson there and we had married RAM, which is an attorney. And we had Thomas Plessy, who's a school administrator, give presentations. So the first part was representative sick freak gave an overview of how the Medicare and Medicaid cap and this is a high mark advantaged trans work together. And what are some of the alternatives that are out there for retirees who may not want to move to a high mark Medicare Advantage program. We had a great discussion and there's a lot going on. The legislature, as you know, is working on revising in the initial proposal. There was a bill, senate bill, I think it was 29, where they formed a committee to look into this proposal in more detail. As there was a lot of opposition came out with the original plan. And we were advised at our meeting by the lawyer that we should really oppose this Senate Bill 29, which has already been burned on this made up of the committee that represented that included representatives that basically like the high mark Medicare Advantage Plans. So the committee seems to be biased. So there was a recommendation that we said no contact or a state legislators and inform them that we really want an unbiased committee. So basically we are in a year of planning to do hopefully revise the proposal. Right now we have about 1000/1000 retirees University of Delaware that are part of the current plan. And the university spends around six or $7 million a year to participate in this state plan. The university has decided to really participate in the plan that's offered by the State of Delaware in terms of retiree benefits, healthcare benefits, a lot of money, about $70 million, 1,000 retirees. And I guess the main point of the Medicare session was that many people thought that the information coming out was not accurate, it was not fair. And there's a lot going on behind the scenes. The plan is not as as well intended as the current plan we have. So I guess that's where we are in ASC. We were sort of hopefully asking each faculty member effects this law eventually the contact their legislators and I guess to oppose the current high mark Medicare Advantage plan in the hope of having choice. And I guess that was the big outcome also, is that we'd like to have more choices for our retirees. Leaves that we have the commitment that the university has already done to provide health care benefits to our retirees, not to provide benefits of lesser service in the future. So I guess the final word is we'd like to prison or sourness. And the administration really to look into alternatives, either to go on our own. As the University of dollars, maybe cheaper and more effective. We can save money. That's one alternative. Or maybe haven't administration to really look into other plans that besides the high mark Medicare Advantage plan. So it was a great meeting, Nancy, We had a lot of participants, say 172 individuals. And hopefully we can have the administration to take this seriously and come up with some alternatives. So that's my report, Nancy. Alright. Thanks, Jim. Alright. We have a question before we start from Senator Kaufman. Yeah. Thank you, Nancy. Jim, a quick question on this question of choice. As the as the, the program exists now or as it is about to be implemented. Is there any choice? If I retire tomorrow and they say, Okay, you're on you're on Medicare Advantage. And I say, I'd prefer not to be. Is there a way to opt out and to opt into the regular Medicare? Is there a way to do that? Yeah, that's a good question. And of course, right now, if you want support from the University of Delaware to pay part of the course, you have to opt in to the statewide program because the University of Delaware, evidently he has, I guess I'd call it a formal arrangement where the state to participate. So if you don't want support from the University of Delaware and of course, you can opt out, but I'm not really sure how flexible retirees have right now to opt out. And maybe John, you know more about this, about this opt-in and opt-out. Senator Morgan? Thank you. There are a lot of moving parts. We really don't know what the state committee is going to recommend on the 1st of May. We don't know what the legislature will do in the ensuing two months before June 30 when they have to approve a budget. There just as enormous uncertainty. I do endorse what Jim Morrison said about if you are a Delaware resident, please do contact your representative and your senator to let them know your concerns. That is very, very important on the issue about about an alternative to what the state might go with. One of the most disturbing aspects of the contract that the State signed with high mark on September 28 is a requirement that all participants in the state plan have no alternative within the state plan other than high mark, which would have made it impossible for the university to do something different or its own retirees. That is very problematic and hopefully that will not be part of whatever the state comes up with later this year, actually, in the next five months. Johnson. Okay. Can I have if people have questions, can I have them contact you? They may not be able to provide definitive answers because I'm not an expert on Medicare or Medicare Advantage. Okay. An e-mail to me and I may say I can't. I just don't know. Okay. That'll be great because I don't want to I don't want our meeting going on and on. I think we could talk about this for a long time, but we've had to open hearings. So I think it would be better if if people have questions, e-mail Senator Morgan, and then he can point you in the right direction for answers. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So now we're moving on to the business of the Senate. We have our consent agenda. We're going to discuss the consent agenda. The consent agenda includes changes that are very minor, such as adding a class to a program. And then we vote on these as a whole. So there are 45 items in the consent agenda. I'm going to go through and show these on the screen and you should have them in your agenda. So I'm not going to talk about everything. But as you can see, we're starting to get more and more program education goals, which is great. So I'll leave this up for a minute. Those were the undergrad proposals. Here we have the graduate proposals. So we want to start by seeing if anybody would like to remove an item from the consent agenda and put it on the regular agenda. Okay. So is there any discussion? And there it is. So seeing no discussion, we can now vote on the consent agenda. So remember to use your green check or red X. So all in favor of passing the consent agenda, please provide a green check. And if you're posed a red X. Okay, we have 59 in favor President capsule. Okay. And I'm a position now extent 59 in favor zero pose the consent agenda is passed. Next, we move on to the regular agenda. The regular agenda consists of mixed academic, larger proposals, changes to the faculty handbook, or since the Senate sorts of items. So we'll go by the these resolution by resolution. And our first resolution is to approve the disestablishment of the MA in early childhood development and programming. Whereas in 2016, the Department of Human Development and Family Sciences developed an MA in early childhood development and programming in response to the partnership with China. And where's the partnership with the China? In MA program has not solidified and is discontinued. Whereas the MA program has continued to its small enrollment of local students past couple of years. And currently no new students are enrolled in. Whereas the cost of maintaining the program, the disestablishment of the program has been proposed and discussed at the faculty meeting. Be it therefore resolved that the HDFS faculty recommend and approve the disestablishment of the MA in early childhood development and programming. So is there any I see. Is there any discussion of this resolution? I see Senator Morgan. Yeah. Thank you. I don't mean to be a knit picker, but the result clause refers to an action in the past, but as faculty, rather than an action by the Senate. And so I think the result clause needs to be modified. Okay. I think we know what's intended, but it doesn't actually say that. Okay. I shouldn't say the HDFS faculty and the faculty senate recommend the disestablishment, early childhood development and programming. Okay, Now, let's see. I can I don't know if I want to change this on the fly. I'm going to actually see if John Senator Jeb can give me a little clue on what to do about this in relation to thank you, Senator Jeff. Thank you. I smile because Roberts doesn't like friendly amendments, but the rest of the world does. Since we all belong to the rest of the world, and since the change is harmless, resolute, resolved flaws. That simply says that the Faculty Senate recommends the disestablishment would be fine. It reads as if the final result clause sounds like it was a really a final whereas clause. Recognizing that the faculty of the College and the program had to read the disestablishment clause that simply said, the faculty senate recommends the disestablishment would be fine and would be harmless. Okay. Now, do I have to do that on this version or as long as it's on the agenda corrected, it would be good to do it on this version. However, I think if if there is no objection with unanimous consent, you could you could agree that it could be corrected at the end. Okay. So let's start let's start with that discussion. Is there any other discussion sides this okay. Hearing none. Then we move forward to see if we have a unanimous consent to fix this afterward. Done. So. If you are in favor of fixing this after after the meeting, please give us a Red Green excuse me. A green green check. Okay. We have enough, president kettle. Yeah. Alright, then, okay. We'll fix the result clause after. And now we're going to vote on this resolution. So all in favor of this resolution? Please give a green check. All opposed? A Red Cross? Okay. 55 in favor or opposed? In favor? None. Opposed. Motion passes. Okay. Okay. This one is in the correct forum, so our next resolution is to disestablish the MBA. Wasn't supposed to disestablish the MBA MA in Economics. Whereas the economics MA MBA program needs to be established to give the economics MA program. Given that the economics program, MA program has been disestablished, whereas students can enroll in a program that doesn't exist, whereas the disestablishment supports the Economics Department and the MBA program given the the economics MA does not exist. Be it therefore resolved that the faculty senate approves the disestablishment of the economics MA slash MBA program for July 1, 2023. Is there any discussion of this resolution? See no discussion. You ready for the question? Hey, we're ready to vote. So let's vote on this resolution all in favor or give it a green check. And if you're posed, give it a red X. 57 in favor. Okay, we have 15, 57 in favor. Zero posed. The resolution passes. We have our next academic resolution to disestablish the MBA in entrepreneurship and innovation. Whereas the entrepreneurship and innovation MBA has not been offered for a number of years and has minimal interest at the Department of Business Administration. And whereas the students no longer being recruited to the program and the past course requirements are no longer in effect. And whereas the Department of Business Administration has no plans to offer this program in the future. Be it therefore resolved that the entrepreneurship and innovation major MBA program should be disestablished for fall of 2023. Is there any discussion on this resolution? Okay. There So are we ready for the question? For those in favor? Please give a green check and opposed. Give a red X. We have 56 and favor. Aye. Any opposed? No. No opposition. Okay. 56 in favor. Oppose. This resolution. Passes. Then next is the disestablishment of the MA in Languages, literatures and Cultures and pedagogy. The German Studies concentration. Whereas the German Studies concentration that MA has not been offered for a number of years in the Department of Languages, literatures, and Cultures. And where's the students are no longer being recruited to the program in the past course requirements are no longer in effect. Whereas the Department of Languages, literatures, and Cultures, and it has no plans to offer this program in the future. Be it therefore resolved that the German Studies Concentration MA program should be disestablished for fall of 2023. Is there any discussion? Okay. No discussion. We ready for the question? Alright. Let's vote on this resolution. All in favor, give me a green check for those opposed. A red X. We have 55 in favor. Okay, 55 in favor. Zero opposed. This resolution passes. Before we discuss the next set of of resolutions, I would I'm going to call upon Senator Rusty Lee to speak on behalf to provide some reasoning behind these series of resolutions. You President catch-all. There were seven resolutions that actually come from an issue we've noticed with curriculum log. Two years ago, we changed the name of a minor in the College of Ag. And changing that minor name did not stick with that specific year students or the incoming students, all students in the miners had the name changed. So we're hoping we have these name changes here and this is the best process we have as of today. And we are hoping this summer that we can come up with a new curriculum reform that will handle this. What we have to do in order to maintain the students that are currently in these programs. In that same named program is to disestablish them and then start new programs with the new name. We do not require all of the documentation typical for a new program because this is just a continuation of what it is. But that's why all of this looks very clunky. But this is right now the best we have. The four plus one is the easiest one, but then we have several others regarding their BA and BS programs to fix. And this is the only option we have right now. Thank you, Senator Lee. So when you see these these resolutions, they're gonna look very similar. Senator, repetitive. Okay. So discussion. If they are similar, is there any way and maybe this is a question for John jab, can we vote on them as a cluster? Senator? Jeff? Traditionally answer has been no. That part and I believe it's part about reporting. A lot of the Senate's reporting function to the board is for its actions, it takes on specific programs. And for that reason, we tend to separate these out so that we should look at it as a reporting function. And if if Senator Lee Chairman Li would like to add anything to that, he could know I I again, I out of the parliamentarian. Okay. So because these are so similar, the primary difference that we see is that we have the names of geological science that are being changed to the name of earth sciences. So the body is pretty much the same. What's different is the resolve statement. So I'm going to read the body onetime and then for the next several there, they are all almost identical. So I'll just move to the results statement. So where's the expertise and training affecting the Department of Earth Sciences no longer aligns with our undergraduate degree in minor names of geological sciences. And where's the degree and minor names of geological sciences no longer represents the breadth of curriculum we offer. And where's the national and regional data suggests that we adapt to the degree and minor names of earth sciences to improve our recruitment and attention, retention of faculty and students. Whereas new names will be more effective for graduates to convey their breadth of their educational education to potential employers. And whereas the proposed program will align with our degree name of Earth Science Education in our department name. Be it therefore resolved that the Faculty Senate recommends to approve the name change of the current degree, degree of geological sciences and secondary stem education for plus one to earth sciences, secondary stem education for plus one for fall of 2023. Is there any discussion any additional discussion? Hearing? None. We're going to rewrite it. All right. Senator russ. Hi. Yes. Thank you. I just want to confirm that students who are currently enrolled in what will become the formerly named program, but that will simply automatically adjust on their transcripts. I mean, this will be a seamless process for them. So we can we can talk to Senator lee again about that. The students that were admitted to the program that's called geological science will remain in geological sciences. Students that are admitted next fall will be your Sciences. Okay. Great. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Do we have any additional discussion? Okay. So are we ready for the question? Okay. Let's let's vote on this resolution. All in favor, green check. All opposed. Red, X. We have 54 In favor. I'm in favor zero opposed. The resolution passes. So you have that sense of Deja vu. This is basically the same. We're approving, provisionally approving for five years the BA in earth sciences and the body of the, whereas this is the same. The resolved is what changes resolved is that the Faculty Senate recommends to approve the name change of the current degrees of geological sciences Ba to earth sciences BA for fall 2023. So is there any discussion? We're ready for the question. All in favor? Green, check imposed, red, X 50, and favor. Okay, So the resolution passes 50 in favor, zero post. The next is the same, except it's the BS in earth sciences. So same, same body statement and the resolved. So it may be it therefore resolved that the Faculty Senate recommends to approve the name change of the current degrees of geological sciences B. S to earth sciences BS, for fall 2023. Any discussion? Hearing? None. Ready for the question? All in favor? Green? Green check. Those opposed, red X 53 in favor. 53 in favor or opposed, the resolution passes. Now, the same question were to approve the miner, same body. The resolve station statement is that the Faculty Senate recommends to approve the name change of the current minor in geological sciences to the minor in earth sciences for fall 2023. Any discussion? We ready for the question? Okay. Green check. If you approve red X. If you do not approve. 52 in favor. Okay. 52 in favor or oppose, the resolution passes. Now we have the flip side, the disestablishment of the BA in geological sciences, same. Whereas clauses very similar. Resolved that the BAA and geological sciences degree should be disestablished for fall 2023. Any discussion? Okay, we're ready for the question. All in favor green check those opposed, red X 53 in favor. 53 in favor or oppose. The resolution passes. Okay. So this is the disestablishment of the BS in geological sciences. Same whereas statements, the resolved is that the BLS and geological sciences degree be disestablished for fall of 2023. Any discussion? Okay. And we're ready for the question. All in favor? Green. Check. And he posed red X 56 and favor. Okay. 56 in favor or opposed resolution passes. We're almost done with these. The disestablishment of the minor and geological sciences same whereas statements, the resolve statement is that the miner in geological sciences degree should be disestablished for fall of 2023. Any discussion? Ready for the question? All in favor green x those opposed. Green. Check. Those opposed red X 58 and favor 58 in favor or opposed, The motion passes. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you for your patients on those. And now we're moving on to R1 regular resolution. It's not it's that is based on our discussion of Section 3.1, 0.14 that we had in September. Rules Committee has been working on this throughout the semester. So I'm going to have Senator dabbler, the chair of Rules Committee, talk a little bit about the rationale behind this resolution. Hey, everybody. So this resolution, little bit of background on this. So I'll give a little bit of background and then I'll try to say a little bit about what we came up with and then put, put a little bit of context around this. So just as, just for background, as everybody remembers, for about a year-and-a-half, we went fully online for a fully online course instruction where the vast majority of our courses were being were being given online. And that was back then, that was in conflict with the faculty handbook. Specifically, Section 3.1, 0.14 explicitly stated that faculty members could not be forced to teach courses online. And so this body approved a couple of temporary approved, a couple of temporary resolutions that said, if, you know, if there is, if the majority of courses are being taught online than faculty can be forced to teach courses online and then fired. And then back in September, the executive committee had a September I believe it was September. The executive committee had a resolution that inserted a single sentence into section 3.1, 0.1 for that, tried to make that permanent. So we weren't constantly changing the faculty handbook. In the case of COVID got worse again, or if there was some new emergent threat or something like that. And so there was a resolution that was specifically for if the majority of courses are being taught online. Due to some emerging threat as defined by various authorities, then faculty could be forced to teach online. That that was the resolution earlier this year of approving that resolution. As you may as some of you may remember, there was an extended discussion including a live editing session of the entirety of Section 3.14 because there were a variety of issues that folks took with it. So just to sort of just to provide a couple of examples of things that folks had issues with in section 3.1, 0.14, which again is the section on the use of innovative technology and online course format. There were parts of the parts of this section that specifically called out only the new art campus. And so there were questions about. Whether or not some of this applied more broadly. There was language in there that referred to traditional classroom instruction. And there were questions about like, okay, well, what is a classroom these days? There are lots of different learning environments these days, so we need to back off that language a bit. There was, there was some language towards the end of the thing that some folks felt was a bit suggestive that only full-time faculty can can provide effective instruction in certain circumstances. To which some folks that objection. And there was sort of this broader concept that what is online instruction in these days, it seems to be turning, morphing the sort of COVID and now sort of moving through COVID after a number of years morphing into a continuum as opposed to strict boundary, boundary conditions as to what is online and what is not. So that's where we stood in that long discussion. We tried, if you recall, we tried a bunch of different edits on the floor back in September. Many folks are proposed amendments. Those ultimately didn't get anywhere. Senator Kennedy Buck sent it back to the executive committee to hash through the whole thing and figure out what we could do to update it. Executive committee disgust and sent it to rules. And so we enrolls, came up with the following edits. So just a little bit more about what Section 3.1, 0.14 is trying to do before, before we move on to a new discussion. So in its original incarnation, this section is trying to do a lot of things and a lot of different things. So just sort of reading through it, the original version of it. It tries to establish UD as a primarily in-person University with lots of, with lots of branches that are not in-person. It tries to affirm our freedom to teach online if we want to, and why we might want to do that. It tries to define what online means. It tries to scope how online content is kept up to our standards as a faculty. But it also tries to affirm our freedom to teach in person if we don't want to, if desired. And then, as we had some discussion earlier in the year, some of the, some of the, some of this section was actually motivated by a concern that parts of the curriculum might move to massive online courses. And so this specific session section also tried to ensure that sort of online content is not used to replace faculty in any way. Okay. So we came up with the changes that we did. Here's the red line version. You can read through you can read through all of those. There's in the agenda, there's one bit, there's one sort of procedural bits. So there's one red, one red bit of texts that is not underlined on the screen, but is underlined in the document that's online. But there's really there's basically two important things to keep in mind for this resolution as you read through it. First of all, is that our task on rules was not to make new policies. So there's this resolution is not changing any policies or procedures that were in place beforehand. Alright, so we're not trying we're not doing anything different. It's just updating and cleaning the language so that it matches the more modern profile of the faculty, staff and student activities here at UGA. But it was designed to be as inclusive as possible. With in terms of things like shifting norms of online education, instructional modalities, et cetera. But we also wanted to keep in place those safeguards that were originally there, like the academic freedom safeguards that were originally laid out in section 3.1, 0.14, as it stood before. So our goal was to have a revised section that was more streamlined and flexible in which in which everybody could sort of see themselves. So that was the motivation, that's the process that we went through. And the red line is here. You can look at it and happy to take any questions or potentially deflect them to others. I'm just going back to the resolution right now, what the resolution states. And then is there a discussion and I see Senator uh, PEDOT has raised the sand. Thanks, guys. I just like to ask a question. Can I see the red lining again? Sure. Sorry. That wasn't the question, but I have a second question after that. Yes. I was just wondering Dr. Doppler, if the section non full-time faculty should not be used to replace full-time faculty. And the assignment of online instruction should be read by departments or their faculty as a reason to limit what graduate students can teach during the winter term or summer term. When a lot of times we do take assignments to teach online. And then secondly, I guess something that remains in that paragraph is faculty must maintain responsibility and control over online course content and assessment. Should that be read as faculty should be controlling what graduate students teaching online course environments. Thanks. Next, we shall I shall I respond to the question since night through yes. Yes. Go ahead and respond. So I think that the right so I think the answer is no to both. So in terms of the actual, So the second question, first, in terms of the content and course content and who's, who and what's being taught, whether it's by graduate students or faculty. That's actually fairly explicitly laid out in the first paragraph. And we didn't want to change that. Up there. Up in the first paragraph, there's a sentence that says, essentially it's up to the faculty members and academic units, the curriculum committees and so on, so on to ensure appropriate incorporation of effective online techniques and things like that, right? So the content is still being driven as it is now, in large part by curriculum committees and things like that, right? So there's nothing in here that's really changing or modifying any way in which the faculty versus graduate student peace. And to the first part, in fact, one of the things that we wanted to strike out there was this question early on, you'll see one of the things that's in there. What struck out from there was that there was this statement about maintaining educational quality and consistency, but using faculty to teach courses that was specifically struck out because there are, there are other course developers and lectures that are not just full-time faculty. And so in order to be more inclusively explicitly struck that out. So I think the answer to both of your questions is no, nothing about the dynamic and changing here at this time. And we have a sedentary, Rakesh Rakesh from the math department. So I just wanted that clarification. I think it's clear, but just to be sure. So faculty have the right not to teach online courses, but faculty have no right insane which courses go online? Yeah, so that is a that is a feature that was in the in the original incarnation of this section. That is, that is correct. So as we discussed this section, there are various aspects to this that there's various aspects of this that arise that are sort of like, well, how exactly do these things get created that right? Because you could have a situation where you have a department that says e.g. we want this section to go online. There's a lot of demand for it are Curriculum Committee has said that there should be an online section or maybe even an online degree program. And you as a faculty member may say, Well, I don't want to teach this course online. At the moment. There's nothing that really precludes the department from saying, Okay, well, we're going to have somebody teach. You can if you don't want to teach this, we're going to have to have somebody teach this course because our curriculum committee wants it and so on and so forth. Now that does not stop you. And in fact, it doesn't know your workload allocation, e.g. and what courses you teach is a discussion that you have with your department chair and things like that, right? And that dynamic also doesn't change. So nothing, there's no, we tried to word things here in a way that there's no change in that this is just the wording change in this new change in policy or how curricular decided and how when faculty can decide to teach online versus not. But it's definitely true that if you say, if you're a department chair comes to you and says, We want this course to be online. You're free to say, I want to be in-person. And department chair says, Okay, well, we're going to give this online version to some somebody. And then you say, well now I'm down to 12.5 per cent in my workload allocation. And so you have to work with your department chair to figure that process out. That's still that's still there. And Senator mortgage. Thank you. I would like to respond to one of Senator repeat those questions by quoting from the collective bargaining agreement, section 11.10. Before assigning S contracts for instruction, the appropriate care director or dean shall informed full-time members that means of the faculty of their academic unit of opportunities to teach overload courses for S contracts, including study abroad courses and online courses during regular semesters and winter term and summer sessions. And then it goes on with another sentence about broadly advertising it. So the way this has been operationalized, at least in my department and probably other departments to that e.g. in like September, the chair's assistant sends out to all the full-time faculty a question about whether they wish to teach in the winter session. And they're given a couple of weeks to respond. And if there are any courses that will be taught in the winter session for which no full-time faculty member has volunteered. Then there is a wider solicitation sent out to postdocs graduate students. And perhaps a few others. What we don't want to have happen is the University sort of undermining the graduate students by going out and hiring people who are willing to teach courses for even less than the normal graduate students stipend, which has been known to happen at some other universities. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any additional discussion on this resolution? Okay. I see no discussion. Are we ready for the question? Alright. So here I'm just moving back to the resolution. Excuse me. So using your green check, if you support all those in favor, give it a green check. All those opposed. Give it a red X. We have 50 and favor. Okay. We have fit. Any opposed? No. 50 in favor or opposed. The resolution passes. All right. So that concludes our regular agenda and now we're moving on to excuse me. The our presentations. I do see Senator Daniel D. I have a quick he's you're all set. Okay. Great. So we have Matt conservative who is going to talk about the COACHE survey. Do you want me to pull it up now, Matt? Sure. That'd be great. Okay. Can everybody see this? Yeah, it's visible to me, so it should be visible to others. So thank you for the time. I'll be brief because I know there is another presentation and this meeting has gone long and we won't have chances in the future. I think lots of them to talk about the action items and the COACHE survey. What you're looking at here on your screen is a new webpage. It went live today and it represents part of the final report of the coach committee. I'll explain what I mean by part of in just a moment. This page, which will eventually be on the faculty affairs section of the Provost webpage is not there right now. That's where it will end up though after we redesign that page, shows you the action items recommended by the coach committee as the final step in the COACHE survey process. So just to remind those of you who were here and to inform those of you who weren't here. Three years ago, UD implemented its first ever COACHE survey, which is a nationally benchmarked survey of faculty job satisfaction. It gave us results, detailed results, and benchmark them against five peers and 110 cohort schools who also took the COACHE survey in the last few years. So very powerful tool for looking at faculty attitudes and faculty job satisfaction. And that's really important to know it for retention and recruitment and faculty success. So I'm really happy that the university made that commitment. And this is how we're following through on it. We got the results. The pandemic hit, we stopped the process, and we got through that tough academic year, resume the process, and did what we're supposed to do as part of that process which is analyzed. The results, have some community conversations, look at other information, and then make recommendations for improving some of the areas where we need improvement. And that's what this does. So we had five working groups that looked at some of the areas of concern. And we produced a report that's organized under these three headings, climate, coaching and collaboration. Because these are the three thematic areas where we saw the opportunities for UT to improve. I'm not going to go into detail because I'd like you to on your own, go through and click through this and see. But we have defined how we're using the terms climate coaching and collaboration in the three boxes there. Just above that. Before we move on, you will be able, in a week's time by February 13th to click on the top button that says full report of the coach committee. So that'll be up in a week's time. And that'll contain a little bit more than what you see on this webpage. And then of course, we've had online and available to you all along the comprehensive summary report of the COACHE survey results. So we wanted to put that here. As well, if you wanted to look at those. So what we've got on this page is focused on the action items and I'm going to go through those in just a second. The full report is also going to contain some summary justification statements from the COACHE survey and the analysis that we did showing why these actions are needed. That's gonna be in the full report that you click on that button here on this page, if you scroll down, Nancy will see topic by topic. You have an outline of recommendations. So it goes climate, then coaching, then collaboration, and on any one of these, so if you want to just give one of those a click, when you click the top-level, you're gonna get some implementation considerations to pop up and those are more detailed action items for us to work on. So I encourage you look not just at the top-level, click and look at this level as well because this is where the real action comes in. Some of these, you may look at them and you may think thinking about the agenda of this meeting and some of the things that Nancy said in her announcements were already working on this and we are and that's great. Some of these, a lot of these, I think you're going to look at them and say these are really consistent with the university's strategic plan and that's by design, it's meant to be the work of making all of these. So bringing them to fruition is collective work, right? It is the work of shared governance. So it's going to involve working with the faculty senate and its various committees. It's going to involve working with human resources and academic leadership and others on campus. It's an ambitious list. I think it's a doable list. It's a list that's going to keep us busy for a couple of years. And that's what it's meant to do as well. Because ultimately what we want to do is work on these things together. Be able to demonstrate progress. And then when we take another COACHE survey, be able to see improved marks and some of the areas that we had some challenges with. So this is available and live now, Nancy, if you want to put the link in the chat, please do. Like I said, that full report, that'll be up in a week's time, and I encourage you to look at that as well. And like I said, at the top, we'll be talking about this more. There'll be lots to do. And I look forward to working with people on these recommendations. Thank you. Okay. We have a question from Senator Galileo. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yeah. Yeah. One of the things that was a glaring omission in the comprehensive summary were any mention of narrative comments by people which was a part of the COACHE survey. Are those going to be included in this final report? And if not, why does the provost's office feel that they can keep the narrative comments out of the report? That's a great question. There are survey results that are quantitative there, those, those one to five ratings. And then there were open-ended narrative questions. So we don't share and this is part of the agreement we make with Coach. We don't share the narrative comments publicly because they could reveal who wrote them. And we need to make assurances that people's privacy is gonna be protected when offering those comments. The final report though, does characterize some important elements from the qualitative comments. So you will see that in the final report. So let me just follow up on on, on the fact that I thought that the coach people would scrub the narrative comments of any possibility of being able to be identified and that they've done that. And so that that there is no agreement that you can't release the narrative comments once they've been scrubbed by coach to make sure that nobody is identifiable. Now, is that what I'm saying? Not correct because that was my impression. Yeah, I think that's not correct. How is it not correct? Factually, everything that I just said is not correct. I don't know about everything. I'm gonna I'm gonna take this allow you to take this offline so that you can maybe talk, talk through it a little bit more. Because we do have another question and we do have another presentation. So we'll note your question, Senator Galileo, and see if we can get an answer. Okay. Centimorgan. Thank you. It is indeed, it can be very difficult to determine whether or not a question can reveal who asked it. Because the people in coach or whatever are not omniscient. Some things may be obvious to some people that aren't instantly obvious to coach people. I know this from experience when I, along with two other members of the AAUP went through the responses, narrative responses in 2016. And there were there were all sorts of subtleties that we had to keep in mind. What I would say is that there's nothing to prevent the AAUP doing its own survey. But if we do it, we have to make it really clear that they were going to publish the results. And if people are not comfortable sharing what they have to say with the world, they shouldn't respond. Thank you. Right. Great. Okay. We're gonna move on. We have one more guest. We have Dr. Ray Pressfield, the Assistant Vice President for Student Life, who's going to talk about the timely care app. And so Dr. Ray, if you raise your hand, you will rise to the top and we'll see, we'll unmute you. Your virtual hand is what I mean. It's Dr. Ray here. I believe she is. Okay. Yes. Can you hear me? Oh, there we are. Okay. Now we can hear you. Thanks. Yeah. Hello. Good evening, everybody. My name is Dr. Ray Cross field and I'm the Assistant Vice President for Student Life and student well-being. And just wanted to share with you some info about a new opportunity that we have for students. So if we can go to the next slide. Okay, So we have contracted with timely care, which is essentially a virtual mental health option for students. They are able to, as you look at this particular slide, they have access to talk now, which is the ability to what I call turning hot moment into a cooler moment. So a student can call and say, I'm having a really hard time with my roommate, really not sure what to do. And they can speak to someone right then and there. They can also do scheduled appointments with licensed therapists. There's also the option for health coaching. So if someone had questions about nutrition or sleep, they could utilize this app. Then there's also a self-care content where students would be able to go through and look for things that are important to them, that are related to their self-care. If we can go to the next one. Yeah. So students are able to explore just health and stress issues. It's right to their phone or their iPad or to their tablet. It gives students the ability to reach out when they think it's appropriate, but it's also still an opportunity for students. It is available to every student, graduate student, undergrad students as well. And we all we still continue to have CCS D as an option. But some students say, You know what? I just need something on the fly or I just need to connect with somebody that is not at UCSD. Some graduate students have voiced, they don't particularly like to be in the waiting room because sometimes they're sitting in the waiting room as some of the folks that they teach. So this just gives another option. For some, depending on country of origin, things like that. Some folks do not wish to go to C CSD, but that is still an option for folks. And this gives students the ability to have nine sessions. The national average that students engage in therapy be in-person or through virtual, is about six to eight sessions. So we just took it one step further just to give folks the option. The next slide, please. So this is the part that is really about all of you. We wanted to have an opportunity for faculty and staff to get support. I've taught myself and done as a licensed mental health condition as well. I've been in the classroom with things have come up and just have colleagues come to me and go, I did not know what to say. So this is another opportunity for faculty to have another way to reach out and say, I don't know what is happening in this particular moment. Not really sure how to respond. Not really sure that this is even a thing. I just don't know. But this is another opportunity that faculty and staff could reach out to timely care and ask questions. And if there's something that anywhere along the way than any other clinicians or the folks that are working through timely care, say You know what, this is really serious or urgent. They partner with us that there's a clear stream of communication if there's levels to when to reach out and went to ring that alarm that we've already established with them. But like I said, this is another opportunity for faculty and staff. Especially as we see more and more students are bringing mental health concerns to the classrooms, to papers, to things like that, or even an interactions where some of you may wonder, I am not sure how to respond to this. Or what I should do with this information. This will be an opportunity for folks to be able to have some additional support. And last slide, please. This is an opportunity for folks to be able to see the video. Timely care will be on campus February 15.16. So we're going to do a hard launch then. Different offices, student groups are all going to be on campus together putting this information out. And we're also going to be teaching students how to log on, not for any emergency, but in the event that she may want to talk to someone later, that they would have it already set up on their phones, on their iPads or tablets in advance. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any questions? Senator or a PEDOT? Dr. Ray, Thanks for the presentation. Senator repetitive representing the grad students. I just had a quick question. Is this app free at the point of use? In other words, if I use this in my, in my capacity as a graduate student or in my capacity as an instructor. Will I be charged once I'm connected with a professional? No. And so what the way that this was set up was that this is available to students in terms of mental health care, for a health coaching and things like that. But you know, you're not going to be charged as someone who's utilizing the services through the UD app that we have set up. Great. Senator Rakesh. Hi, I'm rocking from the math department. Know whatever I'm going to say. It's all in formula. I've heard informally that the mental health services mental health services provided a specialist on campus. That opposite seriously understaffed. Is this an attempt to hire people outside the university to deal with student health, mental health, or what's going on? Yeah. Actually, no. This was to augment because what we found was that a lot of students actually prefer the telehealth as an option. C CSD has been just severely understaffed, but there have been increases in bringing in new employee and staff members. A lot of this also has to do with the fact that a lot of the opportunities from mental health conditions is through virtual work, where they could work from home. So we're, we're, we're managing two different pieces, but it is not in lieu of its in addition to is it correct that you're bringing in people I've heard otherwise. Oh, no, we've hired six people last week. Okay. So that was last week. This has been ongoing for awhile. But again, what we've been contending with is folks want to work from home and we really need folks to be in-person as well as virtual. So our primary is to have folks in person with students as much as humanly possible. I've heard people have been let go actually. Okay. We're gonna we're gonna keep this conversation to timely care. So if you have additional questions, you can reach out. Okay. Secretary doubler. Dr. Right. Thanks very much for this. It's great. I know this is something that we've been talking about here. We've been talking about in the Graduate College Council for the last year as a particularly serious issue. A couple of things here that I see that I'm really encouraged by this ability to facilitate the booking process for finding off-campus help. That was, that's been a sticking point for a lot of students we've heard. And the other one was sort of helping faculty, helped students. So that's another one because, you know, we're, we're not trained and most of us are not trained to deal with students in crisis, mental health crises, and so on and so forth. In both cases, you mentioned how the app kind of connects to either on-campus resources or off-campus resources. Is there is there a communication that's going on between UD and timely about specifically about what is available on campus and how they can how do we, how do we know that the information that we're getting from timely is relevant to students as we're talking to them. Yeah. So part of the agreement is that we have to provide current information and share information. Because what we don't want on either side is for someone to reach out for something and there is no response. So what is up uploaded upfront or all of the resources making sure that all contact people are where they say they are, that the phone number is websites to all correct. And then on the other side, we make sure that there is that ongoing conversation. We have hired somebody a few months ago now called a care coordinator, who is also in-person that if a student were to walk in or if they would have come through timely, that we are connecting folks. In person as well as off-campus. So we're just really vetting to make sure that those spaces that students can fall through. We're trying to make those minimum, and so it's timely care. You have another question for from Senator Pistoletto, which I probably pronounced wrong and I apologize. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Alright. But Giotto, undergraduate representative. Thank you so much for the presentation. Dr. I have a quick question regarding since it seems almost I hesitate to use the word outsourcing, but since we're timely care is an external entity of the University of Delaware or university students entitled to the same privacy rights when they use timely care as opposed to or similar to when they use in-house mental health care and other similar facilities? Oh, yeah, absolutely. And so like I had mentioned the folks that if a student were to connect with a mental health mental health provider, that person is licensed. And so they have, they are obligated to adhere to the laws of privacy. And for each person that they work with. The other side to this as well. Was that part of what was happening during COVID was that when students went home, if they left the state and things like that, they would be cut off from mental health care. But with timely care, we wouldn't be able for students to continue to work with that practitioner through the summer, even if they went home, which might be New Jersey or California. But privacy and all of those things that are still going to be maintained because those are licensed individuals. So yes. A senator, fidelity. Dr. Ray, I think you this is I think, very nice addition to in-person services. Quick question for you. You said there were links to off-campus resources for connections off campus resources. Is that just for the New York area or does that include the area around remote campuses like Wilmington, Dover, Georgetown, Lewis, et cetera. Yeah. So for folks have been hired in those locations to from the Dean of Students Office to from C CSD that are in each of those locations. And so what we're actually building is all of those connections, right? Because some of the students may transfer and then come to new art or they may not. So we're really creating a concerted effort to get all of these resources in each of these locations for the students that are UD students. Thank you. You're welcome. We have Senator Partridge. Thanks, Dr. Dre. Dre. Senator Partridge from the English Language Institute. I work with international students or their language services provided for students whose first language might not be English. So yes, Part of the reason that I really wanted to go with timely care versus others is that there is the opportunity for translators and 120 different languages. So that is definitely an option for students because a lot of students feel in their native language. So absolutely. Then we'll take one last question from Senator occur. Thank you, Dr. Ray. That sounds great. I have two questions. Every time I make a general call from health care to everywhere else. First thing, I find that the system is designed to keep me away from the expert to the extent possible. And let me try to answer your question without having to reach the ape-like. It's difficult to reach an expert. The second thing is before that happens, we are told your call may be recorded for data collection and training purposes. So both of these things, is there a chance that they might collect data which they'll use for other research or other purposes. And second, how soon? I mean, not in terms of time but visit designed for say, Okay, here's the Export. Go ahead and talk. Yes, it is designed for press the button. There's the expert and we've deliberately for the privacy of the folks utilizing it, we're not collecting that kind of info that we could circle back to somebody. We're not we because when we think about the services that are currently offered through any mental health services, that would be the fastest way to not get clients is to say, Oh, I'm going to ask you a bunch of other questions that have nothing to do with what brought you here. So press the button, you get to the expert. There's no wait time and they're not collecting additional info other than whatever the person has called for. If someone is called, instead, I'm depressed, they're going to ask questions around that. But only specific to why the person is calling. Well, thank you very much, dr. Ray. I don't know if you expected so many questions, but I'm glad that everybody had those questions are really great ones. So thank you very much. Thank you all very much. Okay. The next step is new business. Does anyone have any matters of new business that they would like to bring forward? Centripetal. Thanks, President Castro. Yeah, I had some based on some information gathered by the Diversity Committee of the Graduate Student Government. The graduate student delegation was hoping that standard could be set for graduate student and inclusion in departmental governance. It seems to vary throughout departments on campus. Just by way of example, if you look at graduate curriculum committees in some of our biggest programs, the School of Education and the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, e.g. do include graduate voices in those curriculum committees. While other big programs like physical therapy, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, and electrical and computer engineering do not. They don't provide the same space for graduate students to be involved in depart, departmental governance. And just in response to something Dr. Doppler said earlier, if we're going to be taking some of our undergraduate curriculum lessons from the faculty. We were hoping that graduate students can be involved in those discussions at the departmental level as well as new business. The graduate delegation was just wondering if the faculty senate executive committee, could one ask the faculty senate graduate studies committee to discover and present to the Faculty Senate the best practices for which departmental committee committees I'm sorry, the best practices for which departmental committees, graduate students should be included in an outline whether they ought to be included as voting members. And to ask if the coordinating committee on education might ensure that the bylaws available on the Provost website match current practice with respect to Graduate Student Inclusion in governance? I'm only going based on what was in the bylaws, but it's possible with a bigger graduate population that things have changed. Thanks. Alright, we'll look into that. Thank you. Dr. Moore. Senator Morgan. Thank you. I would like to provide some documentation for the statements I made soon after Jose Maria Perez statement about the coordinate the coronavirus group. I could do it one of two ways I could either share. If you allow me to share my screen, I can do it in about 1 min. Or I could also send an email to all the faculty senators on the faculty senate website, which do you think would be better? I prefer option number two because we're we've gone over by almost 15 min. So if you can send the information, we can forward it to faculty senators. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Thanks. Okay. Any other new business? Do we have a Then we're gonna move on to adjournment. Do we have a motion to adjourn the meeting? Can just give me a thumbs up. All right. Second. All in favor? Green check. Any opposed? I bet they're none. Alright. And we'll get our final tally. Okay. It looks like 36 and favor No. No. No. Okay. 36 and favor. The meeting is adjourned.
Regular meeting of the Faculty Senate on February 6, 2023
From Joseph Dombroski February 13, 2023
18 plays
18
0 comments
0
You unliked the media.