Last updated on 05/29/2014
5/28/2014, 3PM-?PM, 115 Lawrence. The agenda is here. Live video will be here. I’ll try to live blog a little, inserting comments into the agenda below. But first, Gottfredson will speak. Here’s hoping he’ll just announce his resignation and let us get on with the work of running our university. On the off chance that won’t happen, presumably he’ll say some words about:
1) Academic Freedom Policy: Sign and give students, staff and administrators freedom to speak on UO policies and practices, or not?
2) Legal Services Policy: This gives Randy Geller freedom to speak about legal opinions. But Geller resigned. Who’s in charge now? Who knows. I’ve been trying to get a copy of Sam Hill’s resume for more than three weeks.
3) Rape allegations cover-up allegations: Gottfredson’s timeline will collapse when the public records come out. So he’s still getting Hubin to stonewall on public records. When will Hubin do the right thing?
4) Senate and faculty participation in review of administrators. Stalled. We don’t even know if Gottfredson is being reviewed this month.
5) Ending athletic subsidies and efforts to dismantle faculty oversight of athletics via the Senate IAC.
6) Budget priorities.
Then, as soon as Gottfredson stops talking, the Senate can start the cleanup. It’s a big job.
Gottfredson: Kyr announces Gottfredson will be leaving immediately after his comments, without answering questions. What a surprise. Crowd giggles.
Talks about how good it is we’re having these conversations – ironic given his efforts to hide things. He brags about starting mandatory sexual harassment training when he came here. He, Mullens and Holmes are close to finalizing their appointments to his “external review panel”. Supports conduct code revisions.
Now that he’s bbeen backed into a corner on it, he finally announces he has signed the Academic Freedom Policy, with a signing statement to be posted. Crowd claps. He then brags about his long efforts to further strengthen academic freedom protections. Seriously?
Kyr asks those faculty and staff who worked on the policy to stand and be recognized. Crown claps. Gottfredson leaves.
Agenda:
4.1 Motion (Legislation): Curriculum Report, Spring Term 2014; Committee on Courses; James Imamura, Chair
This committee does its job in the open and publishes detailed minutes. I don’t see anything controversial, and the athletic department seems to have given up trying to scam them, for now.
Jim Imamura (Physics) presents the report, passes unanimously.
4.2 Announcement of Spring 2014 Election Results; Robert Kyr, Professor (Music) & UO Senate President
4.3 Announcement of Run-Off Elections; Robert Kyr, Professor (Music) & UO Senate President
Runoffs for 3 positions (including me for Senator).
4.4 Election of Senate President-elect (Vice President)
Randy Sullivan (Chemistry) and Chris Phillips (Math) are running to be Senate President for 2014-15. Their statements are at the above link.
Kyr reads Chris Phillips’s statement: Phillips has a sense of humor, that’s for sure! Meat is about communication, administrative bloat, spam-blocking.
Randy Sullivan (Chemistry demonstrator): Says he has skill to see through deadlocks. Praises Gottfredson – bold move for this crowd. Shout out to UO staff gets applause. Mentions strengths / weaknesses / differences of Senate constituencies.
Vote by secret ballot of senators present. [Update: Sullivan is elected.]
4.5 Senate Budget Committee, Interinstitutional Faculty Senate, and COIA Representative Elections (Fall 2014); Robert Kyr, Professor (Music) & UO Senate President
Will be done by email before the fall. The SBC hasn’t reported to the Senate since 2010. I don’t see a report on the agenda for this year either. [Update: will come in June.]
4.6 Motion (Resolution): Affirming University Mission Statement [Suspension of the Rules]
Provost Coltrane still hasn’t sent in the Mission Statement? Impossible. This motion was taken off the agenda earlier today.
4.7 Motion (Legislation): Task Force to Address Sexual Violence and Survivor Support (TFESVSS) ; Michael Dreiling, Professor (Sociology) & UO Senator [Suspension of the Rules]
The subject of a 2.5 hour public forum last week. Will the Senate ask the task force to address the March 8-9 alleged rapes and Gottfredson’s alleged cover up, or not?
Senate suspends 3 week notice rule for motions. Kyr reads it. My take is that his is a strong motion! Calls out the administration on lack of transparency in response to the basketball rape allegations, etc.
Dreiling explains that his original draft has been amended in response to discussions in the Senate and via listserv. Describes it as a consensus – not pointing a particular finger at the administration. Discussion about how this task force will work on mandatory course proposal. Schlegel (student) proposes amendment to make that explicit, with a Winter 2015 deadline. Amendment passes.
Back to the motion. Martinez (Education) proposes amendment to make this a standing committee. Whatever, let’s get this done. Motion fails. Another amendment to add staff, etc. Getting complicated, can’t keep up!
4:12 PM: Amended motion passes unanimously.
Student Conduct Code revisions:
4.10 Motion (Legislation): Proposed Change to Student Conduct Code Regarding Definition of Words; Student Conduct and Community Standards Committee (Sandy Weintraub, Director of Student Conduct and Community Standards) [Suspension of the Rules]
Kyr reads it. Change is to change consent to explicit consent. Approved, 4:17PM
4.8 Motion (Legislation): Proposed Change to Student Conduct Code to Standard Preponderance of Evidence; Student Conduct and Community Standards Committee (Sandy Weintraub, Director of Student Conduct and Community Standards)
Kyr reads it. Change comes from the 2011 Title IX letter. Lowers the standard of proof for expelling students for SCC violations to “50% plus epsilon”, which is already the standard in the rest of the code for findings of responsibility.
Tullis (student) speaks against the motion, arguing that the motion hinders due process, allows harsh penalties with too little evidence.
Davidson (Poli Sci): Asks if this is really about Title IX, why is the revision proposed for all possible wrong-doing covered by the student conduct code?
Warnek (Philosophy): Says that the DOE has actually now changed its position on the preponderance. [?]
Cramer: This motion allows university to set high standards for being part of the community.
Davidson raises more questions. [Sorry, I’m listening too much, blogging too little.]
Freyd corrects Warnek, reads OCR statement requiring use of preponderance.
Cramer explains that it can boil down to whether to expel an assaulter, or have the survivor leave the university voluntarily, because their assaulter is allowed to stay.
Much more debate, at 5:04 the motion passes.
Senate votes to extend the meeting until at least 5:30.
Kyr announces Randy Sullivan won election as President Elect.
4.9 Motion (Legislation): Proposed Change to Student Conduct Code to Extend Jurisdiction Off Campus; Student Conduct and Community Standards Committee (Sandy Weintraub, Director of Student Conduct and Community Standards)
Wilson (Classics) proposes amendment, supported by Eugene Mayor, Police Chief etc. to amend this to include “Adversely and significantly affects the learning and living environment.”
Passes.
5:25 PM: Senate Adjourns.
Unfinished business – including extensive conduct code revisions, legislation to take back control of the Faculty Athletics position from Jim O’Fallon and Mike Gottfredson:
4.11 Motion (Legislation): Proposed Revisions to Student Conduct Code Dealing with Sexual Misconduct; John Bonine, Professor (Law) [Suspension of the Rules]
All these are important. Background here. We’re doing this at the last minute because Gottfredson hid what happened from the Senate.
4.12 Motion (Legislation): Adding a Multicultural Course Requirement; Helena Schlegel, UO Senator (Student) [Suspension of the Rules]
Important, also last minute, again because Gottfredson hid the facts, making it hard to prepare a response to them. More here.
4.13 Motion (Legislation): Selection of the UO Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR); Pedro Garcia-Caro, Professor (Romance Languages) & UO Senator
About time. Resolution passed April 9th, Gottfredson gave a do nothing response then dismantled the IAC. So it has to come back as legislation.
4.14 Motion (Resolution): Campus Planning Regarding Kitchen Facility; sponsor TBD [Suspension of the Rules]
4.15 Motion (Legislation): Working Group for Campus Planning Committee; sponsor TBD [Suspension of the Rules]
These are news to me. Anyone know the background?
Uh … looks like it’s gonna be a sweeping, glowing retrospective on this year’s accomplishments, complete with a nod to the women’s softball team headed to Omaha, and an invocation for continued excitement next year.
Lowering the standard of evidence from “clear and convincing” to “preponderance of evidence” is a dangerous motion. I don’t think all the implications of this action are being properly considered and “Preponderance of the evidence” means that students could be expelled if UO thinks there is as little as a 51% chance that the accused is guilty.
The Education Department’s recommendation of lowering the standard of evidence is based on a complete misunderstanding of Title IX.
That is not a misunderstanding. The Dear Colleague Letter is clear that if you receive Federal funds you have to use the preponderance of evidence standard. If it is more likely than not that sexual violence or harassment occurred you must act as if it has occurred. If a student ever accuses you of sexual harassment remember that. It is the standard you may be judged on.
Again, you can say it is a misunderstanding but institutions are bound to follow the recommendation.
Here is the White House report on lowering the standard of proof:
https://www.notalone.gov/assets/checklist-for-campus-sexual-misconduct-policies.pdf
I found the discussion in the senate confusing. On the one hand, we have a problem with sexual assault and harassment on campus. But, I heard repeatedly from the Student Conduct Office that expulsion is *extremely rare*. On the other hand, we have now adopted a lower standard of evidence. There was a lot of talk about “higher standards” of conduct for our community. It seems to me the sensible way to do that is (1) expulsion should be a routine consequence of serious misbehavior, and hence probably should not be that infrequent, and (2) we should be sure about the guilt of those who we expel, and that would require a standard of evidence greater than 50% + epsilon. By the way, while I of course think those found guilty of violent behavior should be expelled, I also think people who commit repeated (say more than one) instances of academic dishonesty should be expelled. Neither is consistent with a community of learning. And this is in no way is meant to say that the acts are equivalent, simply that part of the learning process of which the Student Conduct Office speaks needs to include the kind of education that results from serious consequences for bad actions.
This Old Man was disappointed by statements from some that the Senate should respect the hard work of committees by passing committee motions without discussion or amendment. That would be dereliction of duty — committees propose, the Senate decides and must take that responsibility seriously.
The Senate is completely constrained by the 2 hour time limit and this should be changed. Deliberation, debate and negotiation takes time.