Purdue University Northwest > Faculty Senate > News > Senate Meeting Minutes > Faculty Senate Minutes, November 14, 2025

Faculty Senate Minutes, November 14, 2025

November 14, 2025

Faculty Senate, November 14, 2025

10:00 AM-12:00 PM: Westville – LSF 002

Minutes

Voting Members Present:
Ali Alavizadeh, Khair Al Shamaileh, Lee Artz, Gokarna Aryal, Geoffrey Barrow, Matthew Bauman, Shreya Bhandari, Frank Colucci, John Durocher, Masoud Fathizadeh, Rob Hallock, Maria Hughes, Shontrai Irving, Jessica Ivy, Patrick Keegan, Hansung Kim, Tae-Hoon Kim, Kenny Kincaid, Dave Kozel, Robert Kramer, Yun Liu, Patti Ludwig-Beymer, Claudia Mich, Colette Morrow, Hassan Naji, Laurie Parpart, Sheila Rezak, Pam Saylor, Diane Spoljoric, George Stefanik, Nicolae Tarfulea, Kathy Tobin, Melanie Walski, Sarah White, Donna Whitten, Cheng Zhang, Hairong Zhao

Voting Members Absent:
Jim Dolen

Non-Voting Members Present:
Tony Elmendorf, Alan McCafferty, Joe Coates

Others Present:
Chris Holford, Marie Mora, Raida Abuizam, Mike Biel, Molly Bowler, Mita Choudhury, Colin Fewer, Jen Gregory, Emily Hixon, Britt Hudson, Adele Minix, Laura Pardonek, José Sánchez, Avik Sanyal, Sara Sharp

  1. Determination of quorum.
    • Quorum determined at 10:00 AM
  2. Call to order.
    • Meeting called to order at 10:03 AM
  3. Approval of the agenda.
    • Motion for approval by R. Hallock
    • Seconded by P. Ludwig-Beymer
    • Approved by voice vote
  4. Approval of the minutes from October 10, 2025
    • Ludwig-Beymer suggested a friendly amendment to section 9.11.4 regarding students responding to questions from ICE agents if they have a warrant. It was clarified that, whether or not a warrant is in place, students are not required to answer questions.
    • Motion for approval by R. Hallock
    • Seconded by P. Ludwig-Beymer
    • Approved by voice vote
  5. Remarks by the Senate Chair
    • The Chair emphasized the central importance of the post-tenure review (PTR) process as the main agenda item, highlighting that multiple versions of the PTR document had circulated and that faculty input was making a significant impact on revisions. He encouraged all faculty members to provide thoughtful, polite feedback both in the meeting and within their departments, noting that input from the wider faculty truly shapes outcomes.
    • Regarding Gen Ed requirements, he said upcoming changes will significantly affect all programs and students, so careful departmental review and active faculty feedback are vital. Dave encouraged senators to communicate the discussion’s key points back to their departments and to gather any concerns or suggestions ahead of eventual Senate action. He also noted the broader context of state-level changes—such as new civic responsibility requirements—and urged faculty to remain proactive and adaptable as the Gen Ed framework continues to evolve.
    • Kozel also introduced the formation of a university-wide task force to evaluate academic structure. He made it clear this initiative was meant for long-term dialog and planning, not immediate reorganization, and would involve representatives from all colleges and relevant administrative offices. The goal is to gather broad input, explore models for academic organization, and make informed, faculty-led recommendations over the course of a year.
  6. Remarks by the Chancellor
    • Chancellor Holford’s remarks emphasized the importance of ongoing, proactive faculty input about organizational structure, especially as campus facilities change and future opportunities arise. He stressed the importance of preparing in advance by maintaining open discussion, so that decisions can be made thoughtfully rather than hurriedly. Holford also recognized the 250th anniversaries of some service branches and the country (which coincides with Purdue Northwest’s 10th anniversary), noting that celebrations and commemorations will take place across campus. He thanked veterans and discussed the new Purdue Northwest license plate available to benefit student scholarships before concluding his updates.
  7. Remarks by the Provost/VCAA
    • Provost Mora provided a broad set of updates in her remarks. She highlighted upcoming graduation ceremonies and special events within various colleges, such as the Nursing program pinning ceremony and the continuation of the Order of the Engineer ceremony.
    • Mora announced a renewed focus on consistently tracking graduate outcomes for both state reporting and institutional learning.
    • She discussed the ongoing post-tenure review (PTR) process, emphasizing the iterative nature of its development, continued faculty input, and appreciation for the Senate’s collaborative engagement. Additionally, she announced the extension of Library hours during finals week, a direct response to student government initiatives.
    • She commended our Masters of Social Work program on its candidacy for accreditation.
    • Other key points included progress on the College of Business Dean’s search, a forthcoming update about the sabbatical application process, and active vendor selection for a new system for posting course syllabi—with faculty input being solicited.
    • Mora concluded with a timely regulatory update: all new academic program proposals must now include components that foster civic responsibility, in line with new state guidelines.
    • Following Provost Mora’s remarks, there was a Q&A and discussion period in which the following key topics were addressed:
      1. Faculty asked for clarification on the new syllabi posting process. The Provost confirmed it would remain faculty-driven but use a streamlined system, with faculty input on vendor selection.
      2. Questions about the post-tenure review (PTR) submission portal were raised; Mora stated that PTR will be integrated with the annual review process and not require a separate system or duplicate submissions.
      3. Inquiries about the new state requirement for civic responsibility in the curriculum revealed it applies only to new degree proposals, not every course.
      4. Concerns about recent federal H-1B application requirements for international faculty were discussed, with Provost Mora and Chancellor Holford directing faculty to West Lafayette for up-to-date guidance. They emphasized that the situation is evolving and support is available.
      5. Additional questions focused on minimizing administrative burdens, supporting faculty through transitions, and ensuring transparency during the implementation of new evaluation and policy requirements.
  1. SGA Report (Molly Bowler)
    • Bowler announced the completion of the campus pollinator garden, contributing to Purdue Northwest’s status as a certified Bee Campus. She provided an update on efforts to return recycling bins to the cafeteria, explaining that issues with contamination had previously led to their removal. Molly described a new collaboration with the campus’s recycling provider to procure clear signage and proper bins. Additionally, she mentioned an upcoming event initiative that would connect students with their deans to promote better communication and accessibility within the colleges.
      1. Alavizadeh asked about a COT rep. Bowler said a rep has been elected.
  1. Unfinished Business
    • None
  2. New Business:
    • Curriculum Documents Approval (Curriculog login)
      1. Artz said there are five documents for approval.
        1. 2 CE courses
        2. Applied AI
        3. MCH ENG
          1. Motioned for approval by L. Artz
          2. Seconded by H. Kim
          3. Approved by voice vote.
        4. For Action:
          • None
        5. Discussion Items:
          • FSD 25-07 Post-Tenure Review
            1. The discussion on FSD 25-07 Post-Tenure Review covered revisions to create a fair, transparent, and minimally burdensome process, prompted by legal requirements.
            2. Key themes included the use of an overall weighted average score (rather than individual category deficiencies) for determining performance improvement plans or probation; a three-level review structure culminating with the Provost, with faculty rebuttal rights; and college-specific guidelines requiring Provost approval. Faculty expressed concerns about the balance between administrative and peer review, the alignment of PTR and annual review processes, and the need for clarity on legal mandates—requesting, for instance, a third-party legal review. There was consensus that PTR should not be tied to promotion/tenure evaluation and that small teaching loads would not negatively affect reviews. Explicit protections for academic freedom and dissent were newly highlighted in the document. Senate leadership stressed that further feedback is necessary soon, as the policy must be finalized for West Lafayette by December.
          • FSD 25-06 ExL Courses
            1. Tobin presented the document and asked to move it to approval.
            2. Motion to move to action by K. Tobin
              1. Seconded by R. Hallock
              2. Approved by voice vote.
            3. Motion to approve by K. Tobin
              1. Seconded by L. Parpart
              2. Approved by voice vote
  • FSD 25-04 Purdue University Northwest General Education Requirements
    1. The discussion on FSD 25-04, Purdue University Northwest General Education Requirements, centered on a revised proposal to enhance the flexibility, clarity, and transferability of Gen Ed requirements. K. Tobin introduced changes, including a new “interdisciplinary ways of knowing” category and more adaptable options for meeting Gen Ed requirements. There was a focused discussion on ensuring changes work for diverse programs—including those with strict accreditation (engineering, nursing)—and on the timing of implementation, with agreement that new requirements should apply only to incoming students, not to those mid-program. Faculty raised questions about learning outcomes, assessment, and potential impacts on students and curricula. The proposal was explicitly not up for approval at this meeting; instead, faculty were asked to take the draft back to their departments for further discussion and feedback. The committee will continue to gather input and bring a revised document forward for a future vote.
    2. Chancellor Holford requested that any changes to the Gen Ed Requirements be made effective for a future incoming class—such as starting with students entering in fall 2026—rather than for current students. This is to ensure that current students are not disrupted in their path to graduation or forced out of sequence by new requirements. The committee agreed to consider this in setting the effective date for any new Gen Ed policies.
  1. Reports from Senate Standing Committee Chairs
    • Curriculum (Lee Artz)
      1. 25 proposals to address today.
      2. Program revisions should be submitted by January for approval in February.
    • Faculty Affairs (Rob Hallock)
      1. Hallock said the committee will introduce updates to P&T guidelines for January 2026.
      2. Working on final PTR draft.
      3. Need to populate the ad hoc committee on replacement to Interfolio for FAR.
    • Gen Ed & Assessment (Kathy Tobin)
      1. Tobin stated that the committee will be bringing forward a previously-approved Gen Ed course in the technology category at the next Senate meeting. She explained that most new Gen Ed curriculum proposals are being paused until the broader Gen Ed requirements revision is finalized, though necessary or already-approved items will proceed. Kathy also noted her impending retirement, which will require her department to name a new committee representative. She thanked committee members for their dedication and expressed optimism about continued momentum and improvements in Gen Ed assessment.
    • Nominations, Elections, & Awards (John Durocher)
      1. Durocher discussed seeking more volunteers for the committee exploring alternatives to Interfolio from COB, CON, and COT. He said representatives from the CES and the Library have been appointed.
      2. He said the committee would inform C. Morrow which committee she will be appointed to after they meet this afternoon.
      3. He announced clarifying updates to the faculty award nomination documents—including aligning instructions across awards, specifying that 2–3 recent syllabi examples should be submitted for teaching awards, and refining what evidence is submitted for scholarship and engagement awards.
      4. The new Outstanding Non-Tenure Track Teaching Award now explicitly includes eligibility for professors of practice, continuing lecturers, and limited-term lecturers, following feedback during the meeting. P. Saylor noted that clinical faculty were not included in the document. Durocher said the committee would make those changes.
      5. He suggested a dedicated review committee may be needed for non-tenure-track teaching award applications.
      6. The language of the PNW Outstanding Scholarship Award has been updated for clarity.
      7. Awards documents presentation.
        1. Durocher explained that the committee made several changes to the awards documents to improve clarity and presentation. These changes included specifying that nominees for teaching awards should submit only 2–3 recent sample syllabi, and that applicants for the scholarship award should provide a list of their refereed articles with appropriate links (rather than complete copies) to streamline the review process. Requirements for supporting documentation (such as letters) were moved earlier in the instructions for greater visibility. Overall, these updates aimed to align formatting and instructions across all awards, making the nomination process more user-friendly and consistent, while keeping the core criteria unchanged.
        2. Durocher motioned for approval of the changes
        3. Seconded by R. Hallock
        4. Approved by voice vote.
  • Ed Policy (Pam Saylor)
    1. Saylor stated that the committee reviewed and confirmed alignment between the Center for Faculty Excellence’s new AI guidance for syllabi and the Faculty Senate’s existing AI policy, FSD 23-11. The committee has made a few minor revisions to this guidance document, which they will circulate as a draft at the next Executive Committee meeting before bringing it to the full Senate for discussion. Saylor also mentioned that updates to the syllabus template are underway. Additionally, the committee is actively monitoring and discussing ongoing university academic restructuring to ensure the policy remains current.
  • Student Affairs (Tae-Hoon Kim)
    1. Kim noted that there were no undergraduate appeals or academic integrity cases during the month. The committee is working to unify and clarify the undergraduate appeal and academic integrity policies, especially regarding timelines, to make them easier for all stakeholders to understand. They are also collaborating with students to create a centralized website for critical student information and are exploring ways to better support students experiencing food insecurity. Isabella Jalil Valencia (chemistry) was recognized as the October Student of the Month, with nominations for November open until November 17.
    2. Morrow asked the Student Affairs Committee whether they had addressed her previous request for the university to educate students, faculty, and staff about their rights and protocols related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions on campus. She emphasized that everyone should understand that ICE must have a judicial warrant to detain individuals. She clarified the legal protections for private spaces and for non-cooperation with ICE without proper authorization. Citing local and national examples, she argued that such education aligns with Purdue’s civic literacy goals. Committee members responded that they had not yet discussed her request but welcomed her to resubmit it for consideration. Colette said she would also forward the request to Faculty Affairs. The discussion concluded with agreement to revisit the issue in committee and add it to future agendas.
  1. West Lafayette Report (Joe Coates)
    • Coates highlighted ongoing discussions about changes to the prescription drug plan—emphasizing affordability, accessibility, and sustainability—and encouraged faculty to review their prescriptions for cost savings. He reported that the IRB system will be integrated into Purdue’s research administration system, streamlining the approval of research protocols. A draft document on AI literacy is under review, with attention to curriculum integration and foundational learning outcomes. There was also discussion of introducing mid-semester grade reports, and Professor Zook presented the widely adopted Integrated Liberal Arts Program. Committees are also addressing AI in curricula, mental health support, and academic regulations. Finally, the EDI unit is considering a name change to comply with regulations. Joe will share the full report with the Senate.
  2. IFC Report (Geoffrey Barrow)
    • Barrow said IFC met on the 28th, and they were notified that their meeting is next Tuesday.
    • “Inter-campus” has had different definitions over time. Questions remain about what will happen to PU Indianapolis.
    • Barrow explained that the Interfaculty Council (IFC) differs substantially from the Faculty Senate in both structure and function. The IFC primarily serves as a forum for representatives from different campuses to share information and personal perspectives—there are no formal votes or official recommendations. By contrast, the Faculty Senate operates as a formal legislative body, with set agendas, voting procedures, and the authority to make governance decisions that impact university policy. Thus, while the IFC enables intercampus dialogue, it lacks the decision-making power and procedural rigor of the Senate.
  3. Open discussion (as time permits)
    • None
  4. Adjournment
    • Meeting adjourned at 12:11 PM