UNIVERSITY PARK – Penn State’s Faculty Senate voted at its Nov. 19 meeting to change its representation model from fixed size to proportional. The senate also updated policies on faculty employment conditions and faculty evaluation assessments and heard updates from University leadership. A full video recording of the November meeting can be found on the senate’s website. 

Senate representation model 

After discussing the pros and cons of each model, Faculty Senate voted to change its representation model from fixed size back to proportional representation.  

The senate previously operated under a proportional model until voting in January 2011 to fix its size at 200. This decision was driven by room constraints at 112 Kern Building, where the senate holds its plenary meetings. Since that time, the electorate has grown, and the senate now allows its members to attend meetings via Zoom and in person.  

Given these developments, the Senate Self Study Special Committee made a motion during the October plenary meeting for the Senate to debate and vote on whether to change its representation model. Keith Shapiro, associate professor of art and chair of the Senate Self Study Special Committee on the Faculty Senate Representation Model, asked senators during that meeting to speak with their constituents to get their thoughts on both models and to continue the discussion and vote in November. 

During the discussion, one senator mentioned concern from her colleague about whether switching back to a proportional model would decrease the number of senators representing smaller units and campuses. Representatives of the Self Study Special Committee said that the question of how many representatives would be appropriate for each unit will be discussed at a later date after additional research is conducted.  

The next steps will be to determine the appropriate size of the senate body and to modify the governing documents to align with the changes. The Senate Committee on Committees and Rules has been tasked with bringing additional information and legislation to the floor in aiding the senate in determining the optimal number of elected faculty representatives. 

Committee reports 

Senate committees tasked with working in tandem with University leaders on various initiatives reported on their progress:     

• The Senate Committees on Curricular Affairs, Education and Intra-University Relations reported that faculty members are a part of every project work team involved in the Academic Portfolio and Program Review (APPR) and that they continue to work collaboratively with administrators. 

• The University Planning Committee reported reviewing the University’s 2024-28 Capital Plan, detailing new buildings and renovations at University Park and the campuses. The committee also met with Senior Vice President for Finance and Business / Treasurer Sara Thorndike to review the immediate past budget for 2023-24. Both reports will be shared in more detail with the full Senate in the near future.  

• The Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid and Education committees are continuing to meet with World Campus and the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences on the effort to implement the Energy and Sustainability Policy (ESP) program as a blended learning program to take online and at the campuses. The committees are also working on draft RFPs for other units to start offering blended learning programs, as well.  

• Educational Equity and Campus Environment reported progress on the Vice President for Inclusive Excellence position. A search committee has been charged and the search firm has begun holding scoping meetings with stakeholders across the University to gather information about what the position would look like and to develop a job description. The working timeline would have interviews for the position start in the spring.  

• Faculty Benefits is planning to review a report in January on the status of health insurance benefits and retirement plans and to present it during the February meeting of the Faculty Senate. 

• Faculty Affairs, together with Senate leadership, was asked to provide input on guidance for reviewing faculty contracts. Committee Chair Christina Grozinger, professor of entomology, stated that she, along with Senate leadership were asked about guidelines on contract renewals, and provided feedback.  She also stated that the topic was discussed generally in faculty affairs that morning and that the importance of multi-year contracts was emphasized.  

Updates from interim vice provost 

Interim Executive Vice President and Provost Tracy Langkilde provided updates on topics of importance to faculty, including the Academic Portfolio and Program Review (APPR), the Opportunity Grant Professional Development Program for non-tenure-line faculty, multiyear contracts and guidelines for reappointment.  

Referencing the earlier report from the Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs, Langkilde said that guidelines are being developed for non-tenure-line teaching faculty contract reappointments to provide standardized guidance across the Commonwealth Campuses and University Park. Langkilde said guidelines are still in early development. The plan is to share the guidelines and implement them for appointments ending June 30, 2025.  

Langkilde also updated the senators about whether something similar to the recent audit conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) at University Park that resulted in a conciliation agreement would also be done at the campuses. Langkilde said the University is looking at how it can implement a process for unit leaders to review salaries on a regular basis.  

Senate passes policy changes 

The Senate passed reports on updating the faculty contracts policy (AC61) to better align the language with existing practice; changing the Annual Evaluation of Faculty Performance policy (AC40) to include a peer review into the regular five-year extended faculty review process; and revising standing rules on the structure of the Committee on Curricular Affairs to increase internal efficiency. 

The changes to AC61, renamed from “Faculty Contracts” to “Employment Conditions for Employees Classified as Academic,” are the first updates to the policy since 1987. Associate Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs Abby Diehl said the revisions don’t change anything with regard to faculty appointments or contracts but better capture the nature of faculty work and the processes that support that work. Examples of the changes made include removing outdated terminology and adding a description of the types of appointments available to full-time faculty and the types of activities in which these faculty may engage, such as teaching, research and creative activity, service, librarianship and patient care.  

Revisions to AC40, “Annual Evaluation of Faculty Performance,” add the peer review into the already-existing five-year extended review for tenured and non-tenure line faculty who responsibilities include teaching, maintaining consistency with the Faculty Teaching Assessment Framework, developed through a series of Faculty Senate reports and approved by President Neeli Bendapudi in May 2023. The revisions also add language that encourages discussion of a faculty member’s readiness for promotion as part of the annual and extended five-year reviews.  

“We encourage those conversations to occur annually, as appropriate, but we’re not requiring them,” Senior Vice Provost Kathy Bieschke said. “What we are saying is that there has to be a conversation at least every five years with tenure-line and non-tenure-line faculty who aren’t fully promoted about what they need to do to continue to progress in the ranks.” 

The faculty appointments and performance evaluation policy changes will go into effect upon review and implementation by the University administration.  

Other Senate Business 

The Faculty Senate also voted to table Senate Policy 49-60, aimed at implementing its modified pass/fail grade policy, allowing the Senate Committee on Education to revise the policy and reintroduce it to the full senate at a later date. 

An update to this policy was passed by the senate during its Sept.14, 2021, meeting, reframing the policy as concerning “pass / fail” grading instead of “satisfactory / unsatisfactory” grading. That policy has not yet been implemented by the Administrative Council on Undergraduate Education (ACUE), due to concerns raised by several associate deans, faculty groups and advisers that led the policy to be referred back to Faculty Senate for further consideration. 

The senate also: 

• Heard an informational report breaking down student petitions to senate academic policies by college, campus and unit in 2023-24.  

About Faculty Senate   

Faculty Senate is a legislative body comprised of 200 faculty, elected by their peers from each college and campus. The senate also includes representatives from the undergraduate and graduate student body and University administration. The senate holds legislative authority on educational matters including curriculum, student policies, admissions, and retention/graduation requirements. The senate also serves as an advisory and consultative body to the University administration, a process referred to as shared governance.