Approved Minutes For Meeting On September 12, 2007

Date: September 12, 2007 

Program:

1. The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Tuesday Ashner. Visitors and guests were welcomed and introduced.

2. Roll Call

Members Present: Tuesday Ashner, Phil Bankester, Don Castle, Carla Coppi, Patty Cosgrove, Paulette Curkin, JP Dunn, Dave Hahn, Gabriele Hoffmann, Heidi Jung, Cordy Love, Lisa McKennedy, Dana McKenzie, Allison Sutphin, Sharon Walters.

Proxies: Pat Eckert for Sandra Rhoads, Lisa McKennedy for Barbara Nowack.

Members Absent: Mike Cubley, Brad Dillard, Mary Stammer.

3. T. Ashner announced the purpose of the meeting was to determine if the Council wished to take a position on the issue the campus is currently facing, i.e., the plagiarism allegations against President Poshard. She reported she has met with the Chancellor, the President and the other constituency heads and has gathered information regarding this issue. The Executive Committee met earlier in the day and decided that if the Council comes up with a resolution, a press release, a letter, etc., then it will be released to the constituency and the Council will vote on any action at its next meeting.

T. Ashner reported on her meeting with the constituency heads, noting most simply wanted the guidelines that appear in both the Student Conduct Code and in the Employee Handbook to be followed. What Chancellor Trevi¤o has decided to do is to ask the Faculty Association, the Graduate Council and the Faculty Senate to appoint faculty to a committee to review President Poshard's dissertation. It will be handled just like any other charge of plagiarism. T. Ashner noted there is precedence for this kind of charge, so the Chancellor wants to follow the written procedures. The Faculty Senate on September 11, 2007, approved a resolution that supported the Chancellor's idea. The committee's charge will be to hear both sides, to find out what the rules on style were at the time the dissertation was written, to determine whether there are minor or major infractions and to put forth a recommendation that follows precedence. P. Eckert believed the committee should also take into consideration what the Conduct Code guidelines were at the time. It is also different today than when President Poshard was a student. P. Cosgrove noted that generally the rules to go by are the ones that were in place when a student starts her/his paper as opposed to when the degree was granted.

P. Bankester believes the committee reviewing the plagiarism charge should require [someone from AFAC] to come forth with their accusations. D. Castle responded that it is the Daily Egyptian that has made the accusations public; now the Chronicle of Higher Education is making the accusation about his thesis. P. Curkin believes that even though the Faculty Senate did not, the Council should make a statement about the University being held hostage by an anonymous group of individuals. P. Bankester agreed. T. Ashner indicated someone would have to make a motion, which she cautioned would have to be very carefully worded. The Council cannot draft something that would infringe on anyone's right to free speech. H. Jung asked if the Council has to do anything. JP Dunn believed that if the Council did not act, it might appear that the Council did not care. T. Ashner responded that she did not believe the Council needed to take a position. She called the special meeting [and the Executive Committee agreed] because she was asked to by a Council member. T. Ashner recommended that no action be taken because she believes the plagiarism charge is an issue and President Poshard's job is an issue, and the two are unrelated. President Poshard's job is determined by the Board of Trustees, and they will make the decision in that regard. With respect to the accusation of plagiarism, she believes it is an academic issue, and falls within the academic community to handle. P. Bankester agreed, but pointed out that there is so much public outcry against the man. The Civil Service Council approved a letter voicing its support for President Poshard, and P. Bankester did not believe it would be a bad thing for this Council to do as well.

In the ensuing discussion, there was support for drafting a resolution against AFAC. However, concerns were expressed that drafting such a resolution would not stop the group and would only serve to "feed the fire." Some believed denouncing the group would make a point both to the public and the community. It might also cause others to speak out. Another concern expressed was the fact that there is no direct evidence against AFAC but only hearsay and second or third party information. Therefore, it would be difficult to vote for any kind of negative resolution against the organization.

T. Ashner indicated there are two issues, one being whether the Council wants a resolution censuring AFAC; the other being whether to publish something in support of President Poshard. Another option would be to do nothing. C. Coppi asked if the Council had a right to speak for the constituency when it does not know its sentiments. T. Ashner reiterated that anything the Council drafts will be posted prior to a vote to allow the constituency to comment and give feedback. Based on that, the Council may or may not pass a resolution. T. Ashner asked if there were any motions. P. Curkin moved the Council draft a resolution censuring the group allegedly known as Alumni and Faculty Against Corruption at SIUC; seconded by P. Bankester. T. Ashner clarified that the motion is to develop a resolution that the Council will vote on at its September 19 meeting. P. Bankester noted it was the Faculty Senate's Executive Council that drafted and proposed a similar resolution [which was subsequently withdrawn]. After further discussion, a vote was taken on the motion. Motion failed 8-9 on a show of hands vote. T. Ashner asked if there were any other motions from the floor. Hearing none, she thanked Council members for their attendance.

9. Adjournment