Members of the ISU Faculty Senate decided to hold an emergency session Wednesday after senators were unable to conclude debate on a section of the faculty handbook during the regular session on Tuesday.

The emotionally charged meeting stemmed from discussion and comments regarding a section of the faculty handbook outlining the procedure for developing new courses and curricula.

While voting to admit of new major and minor proposals, the procedural handbook guidelines came under critical review. Martha Selby, adjunct assistant professor of materials science and engineering, announced a discrepancy in the Senate’s adherence to the handbook’s language in section 10.8.

“With regards to the collegewide proposals like the minor in bioengineering, there was not a formal vote taken among college faculty as outlined in the handbook,” she said. “I would like to point out that the guidelines have not been followed properly and request a motion asking to postpone the vote.”

The handbook item in question outlines specific procedures to be taken with regard to introducing new programs available to students. Item 10.8 states that, after a new course or curriculum is approved by the department or college that initiates it, all proposed changes from a given college must be approved by the college curriculum committee, the college faculty, the Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee, the Faculty Senate and the Iowa Board of Regents. Selby said a handful of Tuesday’s new proposals had not followed the exact guidelines of 10.8 and failed to reflect opinion of the entire college faculty, despite approval by college and Senate curriculum committees.

“This issue came to my attention early this week before our meeting, and I waited to see what the members would do with the situation,” said Sedahlia Crase, Faculty Senate president and professor of human development and family studies. “We will do whatever it takes to come to agreement so this issue doesn’t cause tension among members of this body.”

Opinions around the room varied – there were those anxiously trying to get their proposals approved and implemented, while others saw conflict between current procedure and the wording of the faculty handbook.

“I have never been asked to vote on collegewide curricula, and I don’t think I am qualified to vote on a program like one in civil or mechanical engineering, where I don’t hold expertise,” said Steve Freeman, assistant director of agriculture and biosystems engineering.

Representatives from the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences echoed this thought, saying that adhering stringently to the wording of the handbook would make approval of new programs untimely and inefficient by requiring the entire college faculty to vote. According to the Senate members representing LAS, applying the explicit language of 10.8 would “muck up the system” because the curriculum committee representing the college already expressed the opinion of the collective faculty.

“Liberal Arts and Sciences has done everything they can possibly do to pass the motion to allow instatement of a new program,” said Suzanne Hendrich, Faculty Senator and professor of food science and human nutrition. “The College of Human Sciences, for example, does not have a governance document, and everything that comes out regarding proposals has been passed by the curriculum committees and represents the faculty body.”

Debate proceeded regarding explicit adherence to the handbook wording, and heated arguments arose between members.

“This question has never come up in the Senate,” said David Holger, executive vice president and associate provost. “I regretfully ask you to consider the impact that this will have on the credibility of the Faculty Senate.”

The ultimate decision was to postpone voting on proposed majors and minors in every department except those in Liberal Arts and Sciences, whose proponents tirelessly explained that their proposal represented the entirety of the LAS faculty and that nothing more could be done to gain support. As a result of the vote, a major in world languages and cultures and a minor in music technology were the only curriculum additions made. All other decisions will be decided on when the Faculty Executive Board convenes in tomorrow morning’s emergency session.

“I’d like to say that, despite the arcane macerations today, we need to consider our students, our respectful degrees of expertise and our university with regards to how we treat one another and governing body of this Senate,” said Gregory Palermo, past Senate president and professor of architecture. “I encourage all of you to go back to your colleges, look at your documents and compare it to the language stated in the faculty handbook. Today’s debate has shown us that we can work together to find a course of action and change what we need to be sure the integrity of this body is maintained.”