Apply     Visit     Give     |     Alumni     Parents     Offices     TCNJ Today

November 2003

Faculty Senate Meeting- November 12, 2003

3:30-4:50 p.m.
Biology 209

Roll call:

Excused: Ruane Miller, Palmer, Rao, Vincelette, Wu.

Dan Crofts: Introduction of Pete Mills.  Commends his clever system of banking student fees to leverage construction bond issues.  Says that Mills will discuss ongoing campus construction.

Pete Mills: Science complex almost finished, should be done by January.

Parking Garage and New Student Housing.  Ewing did not want parking garages close to Pennington Road.  Insisted on New Student Housing there, with Parking Garage more interior to the campus.  TCNJ agreed.

Garage will be 4 stories; brick and Georgian archwork; on site of old softball field.

New Student Housing: three buildings with 200 students apiece, 50 apartments apiece, 4 students to an apartment with shared living room and kitchen.
All scheduled to open in September!

New softball field and soccer field will replace southern part of student parking lots.  Will improve impervious surface ratio on campus.  Hoping to finish by Fall 2004.

Question: Will the houses on Pennington Road be staying there long term?
Mills: Yes, no one wanted Pennington Road to have an institutional image.  The houses will be used for transfer student housing and paths will connect to New Student Housing.

Question: Why is the garage named Metzger and is that permanent?
Mills: It is not permanent, when the garage was first designed it was located near Metzger Drive.

Question: Will there be a gain in parking spaces?
There will be a gain of about 300 spaces, but upper classmen are now bringing more cars on campus than before, and with fewer eight o’clock classes and fewer evening classes there is more traffic pressure in the center of the day.

Question: Who are the intended residents for the new housing?
Mills:  The college has always followed a policy of making better housing available on a seniority basis: seniors, then juniors, then sophomores.

Question: Will the soccer and softball fields be grass or turf?
Mills: The soccer field will be Nexturf, and the softball will be grass.  The College has a large intramural program.

New Library construction is started; hole is dug and building should be finished by June 2005.

What to do with Travers-Wolfe?  We either invest a large sum to keep it going, or we take it down.  Everyone likes having freshman together-to take it down would mean having to move 1300 freshman to another place. One idea would be to take down Centennial and Norsworthy and build for 500 beds in each spot, then add an addition on Ely, Allen, Brewster which would add 350 beds.  This would keep all freshman together. There would be lots of advantages and no parking would be necessary because underclassmen can’t have cars. The location would be good because it’s close the new library and the food. Another angle: the new library will be four stories: can they design four story above ground residence halls that blend in with the library?  Preliminary indications look good.  This is close to being decided.

Question: what about underground parking as an option?
Mills: We tried underground parking under Eickhoff Hall. We found it was double the cost of tiered parking, about $20,000 a car.  This is too expensive.

Question: What is going on with Holman and Forcina?
Mills: The new library should be completed in June 2005.  The rest of construction planning for academic buildings will be held for one year or 18 months because we could not tell what impact the new academic curriculum and schedule would have on facilities. We had to look at different options. Consultant for the art building will start in June 2004.  It isn’t yet clear whether it is best to build a completely new art building, or whether there could be some connection to the 1968 wing of the old library, that might be retrofit for an art gallery. This offers lots of quality space without spending much money.

Question: What timeline on new Art and Education buildings?
Mills:  If you were going to build Art for two years and then another two for an Education building it would take until about 2009.  The new Education building would probably go where Holman is now.  Art would need to be moved before that would start.

Question: Is this all going to happen?  We are frustrated in the Education building. It is like living in the projects, there are no windows.
Mills: Confident that one of the plans will be implemented, especially if classroom demand is there.  If it is not there we have to reconsider.

Question: The Art Department will have problem with the library building. The visibility of the arts is greatly lacking. Wasn’t something once mentioned about an arts triangle and maybe working something out in proximity to the Music building?
Mills: Some thought has been given to a new Art building across from the Music building (in the parking lot adjacent to Loser Hall). The question still arises as to what are we going to use old library for? Should we just knock it down?  Or use it?  There is about a $25 million difference between options.  We are also waiting to see whether a construction bond issue is passed.

Question: Is the ice hockey rink to be built?
Mills: An event center will be added to the Student Center.  It will be meant for large student events of 1500-3000.  Adding an ice rink will cost c$7 million.  Additions to the Student Center come from a different pool of money than other buildings.

Question: Why use the old library?
Mills:  It could provide a lot of space, versus a brand new building which wouldn’t have that much space.

Question: Will the art faculty have input?
Mills: Yes.

Question: Where is Computer Science in all of this?
Mills: We are thinking of putting it on top of Armstrong, building another floor so there will be two.

Question: Will this be before or after Forcina is finished?
Mills: It will be before because Computer Science is in Holman.

Question:  Are there plans for larger lecture halls?
Mills: The library is coming up with another 120 seat lecture hall. The art area will come up with a lecture hall and so will education.

Question: Two hundred or three hundred seats?
Mills: We looked at the demand, and did not see the need for rooms that large.

Question:  We don’t have a place with conference rooms or accommodations for conferences or for visiting scholars. What about facilities for them?
Mills: We would love to do it and we have looked at other college hotels. We can’t afford it.  The only way would be if a hotel corporation would be willing to come in and it is difficult to do so. We were thinking this could occur perhaps at the Bull Run property. Most hotels coming in would want to build a 300 bed hotel.

Question:  Do we want all freshmen in the same place?
Mills: When the issue first came up students were opposed to it but they adjusted. Most now think the social experience is better. It creates a strong bond within a class.

Question: You plan to take down buildings that are not that old.  Will the buildings that are going up be more durable?
Mills:  College architecture has gone through phases. Holman has a pre-cast plank system. We can’t punch through it, can’t move mechanical system elsewhere. Forcina has offices on the interior and classes on the outside. We cannot correct it. They must be knocked down.

Question: Are there any other projects?
Mills:  The road around the campus will be switched to a one way road counterclockwise past the lakes between Administrative Services and Armstrong. As you come in to campus from Pennington Road, you will find that it will be two ways as far as Administrative Services.  There will also be a better jogging track built with more separation from the roadway; this is a safety issue.

Crofts: Thanks Mills, moves to regular Senate meeting procedures.

Roll call.

John Karsnitz:  In regards to planning facilities, the president established an ad hoc meeting to provide some feedback concerning operational issues.  They want people to have more input in planning.  The president feels there is a disconnect between planning and the campus community.

Jean Konzal: Who is they and we?

Karsnitz: They are the planning group. We want them to be attentive to all stakeholder groups.  Not just the faculty but the other constituency groups.

Konzal: Is there a list of priorities?

Karsnitz: I don’t think so: check report when it comes out.

Crofts: Please look at the agenda regarding faculty work in transformed system.  A group was invited to a meeting last Friday, November 7.  It included Steve Briggs and others from his office, three from Senate Exec, three from ad hoc Chairs, 3 deans, three faculty appointed by Briggs for balance, and Ralph Edelback as AFT local head.  In all, six members of Senate were present: Edelbach, Crofts, Marcia O’Connell, Michael Robertson, Ed Conjura, and Bill Behre.

There was very little disagreement regarding Briggs’ proposed statement of principles. Everyone could live with the core values and principles. It reflected input from Senate.

Bonzena Leven: What are the key changes?
Crofts: They are similar to what Briggs presented to Senate on October 22.  Teaching is first and foremost, with advising and mentoring connected to teaching.  Scholarship is a strong second, and service is third.

Look at the handout grids.  They are close to identical.  Ralph wants language that reflects the actual language of the contract. The basic scheme pleased everyone at the meeting on November 7.

Edelbach: The grid should be closely aligned with contract. It is important if the administration changes.  The provost understands the clarification.

Ed Conjura: There are reasons why the grid is attractive.  Who would have thought back three years ago that we would be offered six course loads, each to meet for 160 minutes per week, plus SOSA?  The provost in effect offers everyone 3 hours of SOSA per year, plus 3 more hours to enhance your courses.  And you can also apply for an additional course equivalent of SOSA. It is a pretty good deal.  I like it and have no problem with it. The chairs went to the Academic Leaders meeting, and made a fuss.  In two weeks we have managed to come together and figure out something that will work. Now we have to work out other details.

Karsnitz: Can we link issue of student credits and faculty weighted hours?

Rick Kamber:  Can student hours differ from faculty hours?4 for students and 3 for faculty; can they tie together?

Edelbach:  Very unique and new situation, even if related to Stockton example.  It is not addressed by the contract.  There is no conflict contractually.

Kamber:  I am concerned with grid.  The classes will take longer to teach.

Conjura: It gives 3 hours of automatic SOSA, 3 hours to enhance, and you can apply for three more of SOSA.

Kamber: I am assuming that the additional amount of work will amount to .5?
We need to account for one additional course. Not two up but one up.  The other is for scholarship.

Art Hohmuth: My impression was that we would like to get 4 hours.  This matter of having to report each academic semester has also raised hackles. The material from the meeting of November 7 is silent on reporting.

Crofts: We haven’t gotten there yet.  The big question that emerged at the meeting on November 7 had to do with the differing effects of 3 and 4 hour models with regard to the the Provost’s promise to provide 20 FTEs of administrative release and 12 FTEs of SOSA release under the new system.  If you count by four rather than three, the 96 slots of SOSA release diminish to 72, and the 160 slots of administrative release diminish to 120.

Conjura:   Compensation for chairs needs to be addressed. The chairs are closest to faculty.  19 chairs have had to communicate via email and there hasn’t been enough time to work out all the details.

Marcia O’Connell:  Counting by 3 rather than 4 makes the commitment to scholarship more visible.  Also, if you count by 4 some faculty will conclude that you are asking for 4 contact hours for faculty, even though that is not true.

Hank Fradella: I like grid.  My concern lies in the blocs, 3 for scholarship, and 3 hours that is not tied to scholarship or its equivalent.  CFA document was very careful to say that each faculty member should be able to emphasize in different areas.

Crofts: Scholarship is expected.

Bill Behre: It is designed as default model and people need to be able to switch.

Pamela Kravitz: I have two points.  If we schedule in four hours is it assumed that we could use it up to four hours but didn’t have to?  Also, how is the reporting done?  How is it supervised?

Maureen Gorman: CFA recommended not going to 4. Contact for teachers is only 3. Fourth hour is for students. Briggs was careful to say only three, unless it’s a lab course.

Teresa San Pedro: Will 3 or 4 be eliminated in the future? Are we talking about units? Do most places use units?

Crofts: Credits will be needed for the next few years.  The software did not allow a direct jump to units.

Don Vandegrift: The faculty is going to have three contact hours for courses.  How is the faculty protected against having to do more?

Crofts: Ralph, is there contractual protection?
Edelbach:  To require more than three would be clear violation of contract.

Kamber: No faculty member should be required to teach or schedule in the fourth hour. It is contractually protected.  Favors stipulating that time be set aside for scholarship.  We would be foolish to say maybe we will give more time to advising and service. We want to use that time for scholarship during the academic year.

Edelbach: We need to look five years from now.  This will get easier every year we do it.

Crofts: Meeting adjourned.

Top