Academic Staff Assembly (ASA) Minutes
Approved 11-10-08
MINUTES
ACADEMIC STAFF ASSEMBLY
Monday, 13 October 2008
272 Bascom Hall (3:30-4:45 pm)
Provost Patrick Farrell called the meeting to order at 3:30.
Wisconsin Alumni Association President Paula Bonner invites all academic staff to “On Wisconsin! A Great University and Its Friends Welcome Chancellor Martin” at the Kohl Center on Thursday, October 23 from 3:30-5:30. There will be musical performances, food, videos, and a featured address by Biddy Martin. Bonner noted that Chancellor Martin was the 5th chancellor hired from outside the campus and only the 2nd woman chancellor.
AUTOMATIC CONSENT BUSINESS
The minutes of the 9/8/2008 Academic Staff Assembly meeting were approved.
STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS
Academic Staff Executive Committee (ASEC) – Susan Crowley, chair
The Great People. Great Place. fundraising campaign is continuing in its “quiet phase” looking for major donors. The UW Credit Union is one of the first to sign on. Any contribution made this year will be matched by both the Credit Union and the UW Foundation.
Compensation and Economic Benefits Committee: Miriam Simmons, chair
According to its annual report, the committee prepared a “white paper” on allowing instruction leave for teaching academic staff, similar to sabbaticals for faculty. The proposal has been turned over to ASEC for next steps. The committee also updated the FAQ document that is now on the web. They will continue to look at the issue of Category A maxima and pay equity.
Professional Development and Recognition Committee: Kevin Niemi, co-chair
Kevin presented the annual report for the committee. He announced that this round of professional development grants are due to department chairs on October 10 and finally to the Secretary of the Academic Staff on Oct. 31. The reviewing committee will meet before Thanksgiving to make the awards. The call for Excellence Award nominations will go out in December.
GUESTS: Ombuds John Mather and Steve Bauman (www.ombuds.wisc.edu)
John explained that the ombuds office operates in strict confidentiality to protect visitor identity, but the annual report to the provost tells about the number of cases and gives other demographics. The majority of those who contacted their office were academic staff and women. They see 70 people in a typical year, and between the four ombuds they log about 2000 hours talking to groups on campus explaining how their office works. Part of their annual report provided insight into some systemic problems on the campus. Power relationship issues are common along with some peer-to-peer problems. Faculty more often are concerned about promotion and salary compression. Classified and academic staff are stressed over changes in their environment: reorganization, relocation, and retooling.
Ombuds conclude that in an ideal world, there would be better treatment of others and more sensitivity to stress. Department chairs and PIs would be better supervisors, and faculty would have an timely and understandable promotion process. Communication regarding changes would involve input from those affected. And, all concerned staff would contact the ombuds program before any issues reach a crisis level. Finally, Steve and John challenged all to bring civility to their workplaces.
BUSINESS
Jo Ann Carr led a discussion of how to identify and communicate contributions of academic staff to campus and external audiences without starting a definition by saying who we are not. A systematic approach to cataloging contributions would help in defining who we are and what we do. She asked Assembly representatives to break into five small groups to brainstorm responses to five questions and report to the whole group after ten minutes.
Group 1: How are contributions of academic staff shared with your unit, department, and supervisor?
Staff share their success within one unit at biweekly “faculty” meetings that are then broadcast to unit members. The SMPH CASI puts out a call for success stories and good works. Another unit uses annual 360 degree self-evaluation then promotes the positive contributions that come out of those.
Group 2: How are contributions of academic staff collected and recognized within a unit or department?
All acknowledged that there was no one method to organize and document academic staff contributions.
Group 3: How do the contributions get shared beyond the unit?
In some units, email and newsletters are used to reach some alumni and outside groups, but there is no consistent way to reach various audiences. Faculty get recognition for service activities, but academic staff do not.
Group 4: What has worked well for your unit in sharing contributions?
Genetics has a web site, CALS uses a news link, and the libraries recognize staff at 5 and 10 years, etc. In small departments, the chair should be responsible for recognizing contributions of academic staff, but websites are probably the best way to disseminate information.
Group 5: What are available mechanisms at the university for highlighting academic staff?
Not just academic staff award winners but also nominees should be recognized in some way. Some larger colleges have their own award and recognition ceremonies.
In news releases and articles, academic staff should be recognized as such, with a possible sidebar explaining what it means to be an “academic staff” member. The Communications Committee, chaired by Brian Rust, will work with Wisconsin Week to help the general community understand who we are and how far-reaching our contributions go.
There was a final suggestion to think about a “meter stick” for defining academic staff.
Jo Ann asked representatives to use the index card provided to evaluate the small group session idea, provide additional information about communication, and sign up to “adopt” a district.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Submitted by Colleen McCabe
Secretary of the Academic Staff