TEXT OF CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT
September 19, 2003 University Senate Meeting
Dr. Paul Panayotatos, Chair
 
Welcome to you all -- senators and non-senators alike. I extend a special welcome to the members of our governing boards and to the honorable members of the NJ state legislature. Please be kind to our version of parliamentary procedure which today is streamlined as much as possible. The agenda has only two items and has already been approved by the Executive Committee on behalf of the Senate. We will defer the secretary's report and most business to our October meeting in Camden. The one item of business is the special election to replace Arlene Walker-Andrews as faculty representative to the BoG. Arlene will be missed but we wish her good luck in her new administrative career. You have all been issued ballots and as well as the candidates' written statements. Please mark them and return them to Ms. Mickelsen at the sign-in desk before you leave the meeting today and return them before the meeting is adjourned.

I also want to specifically welcome our new University senators. Please make it you first priority to attend the meetings of the standing committee of which you are a member. President McCormick has graciously approved the expenditure for buses from Newark and Camden for all our future meetings, so from now on it will be much easier for all senators from those campuses to attend committee and senate meetings. I also direct you to visit the senate website which, again thanks to the President McCormick, will soon be much more visible and easily visited through a Rutgers homepage link labeled "Shared Governance."

Today is a particularly joyful occasion as it is characterized by two landmarks. One is the beginning of a tradition, namely the first of a long series of Annual Addresses to the University Community by President McCormick. The other is the beginning of the 50th academic year of operation of the University Senate.

Fifty years ago, in June of 1953, the Board of Trustees created the University Senate. The Senate replaced the University Council, which was a body consisting of equal numbers of faculty and administrators. During that academic year, the Senate had 31 faculty and 17 administrator senators, and was chaired by the university president, Dr. Lewis Webster Jones. In 1969, during the chairmanship of President Mason Gross, the Senate was expanded to 50 faculty, 25 administrators and 18 students, and began electing its own chair.  Since then 16 chairs have been elected, all faculty: 6 from Newark, and 10 from New Brunswick. The roster of chairs reflects the complexity of the university, and includes faculty from all multipurpose colleges, Faculties of Arts and Sciences, graduate faculties and the professional schools. We have with us today five past chairs whom I will introduce to you.

I start backwards with my immediate predecessor and mentor, Dr. Kathy Scott, representing Rutgers College.  Would you please stand and be recognized?  Dr. Louie Crew, representing the Newark College of Arts and Sciences; Dr. Natalie Borisovets, Libraries; Dr. Ken Carlson, Graduate School of Education; and Dr. Ashby Foote, University College-New Brunswick

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the person who provides continuity and keeps the institutional memory for the senate, namely its executive secretary, Ken Swalagin. Linda Mickelsen, administrative assistant, ensures the smooth operation of our meetings.

At 50, the University Senate is at the same time mature and full of youthful eagerness. The word is out to the University Community that the senate has been rejuvenated. As a result, there is increasing enthusiasm of among new and returning senators. This, in combination with a president who wants to associate his administration with the strengthening of shared governance, holds the promise of continuously improving the effectiveness of the Senate, and of the contributions the Senate makes to Rutgers.

I do not mean to downplay the contributions of the Senate and senators over earlier years. However, over such a long period of time there are bound to be crests and valleys for any institution. We are fortunate now to be reaping the fruits of the concerted efforts of previous chairs and senators who ensured that the perception that "The senate is not an effective governance mechanism" is put to rest. My own unusual campaign promise was "to try to keep up the momentum of the past few years that revitalized the Senate." The fact that that promise would get anyone elected is a testimonial to the success of the previous chairs.

Indeed, over the years the senate met approximately 250 times and produced over 500 reports and resolutions,  on occasion tackling some particularly thorny problems such as the university’s harassment policy, a student code of conduct, and divestiture of all Rutgers holdings in South Africa during apartheid.

Looking at the decades, in the 60's major issues were: addition of students to the Senate roster, specifying graduation requirements, the grading system, the proposal for Douglass College, the change of the name of the university by adding "The State University of New Jersey," and, yes, parking.

In the 70's the Senate dealt with promotions and tenure, added alumni representation to its roster, periodically reviewed undergraduate admissions, dealt with the statewide master plan for higher education, the independent corporate status of Targum, and the University reorganization.

In the 80's major issues were: the formulation of guidelines for undergraduate education, and for referenda, the NCAA, promotions procedure, renaming facilities to honor Paul Robeson, the recommendation of the McCormick Commission, and the generation of the Faculty Handbook, restructuring of the University Senate, and the budget reduction. The 90's and beyond are too recent to recount.

The senate has collaborated with the administration, but has proven it can stand firm when necessary in its role as the guardian of academic quality. That was the case of the proposed College of Applied and Professional Studies two years ago.
Also as recently as last year, in a period of transition and uncertainty in the university administration, the Senate stepped in and assumed a leadership role in formulating a position on such a seminal event as the publication of the restructuring proposal.

I fully expect the University Senate to play an increasingly central role in formulating the future of this university in the coming months and years.

This concludes my report.