Present: Todd Steury (Chair), Donald Mulvaney (Immediate Past Chair), Ralph Kingston (Secretary), Mark Carpenter (Chair elect), L. Octavia Tripp (Secretary elect), Emmett Winn, Danilea Werner, Robert Norton, Robert Cochran, Cheryl Seals, Laura Kloberg (Administrative Assistant).

Not present: Bill Hardgrave. Guests: Mark DeGoti, Jaime Hammer, Grant Garber

Senate Chair Todd Steury called the meeting to order at 3:31 p.m.

Approval of Steering Minutes from January 11, 2022:

Hearing no objections, approved by unanimous consent.

Discussion and approval of Senate Agenda for February 25, 2022, at 3:30 p.m.

Information Item: Presentation by Mark DeGoti, SACSCOC Liaison. SACSCOC re-accreditation process.

Mark DeGoti provided an overview of SASCOC and the process through which the university is reaffirming its accreditation. The Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) for this cycle, DeGoti explained, targets student placement and achievement.

Information Item: Presentation by Jaime Hammer, General Counsel; and Grant Garber, University Counsel on legal considerations for faculty

Chair Steury shared that he had invited the General Counsel’s office to speak to Senate on two separate questions. The first related to questions about intellectual property. The second was in regards to the legislation on divisive concepts currently being discussed in committee in Montgomery.

Grant Garber spoke on the issue of intellectual property and in particular about questions on the ownership of research data which came up in the last Senate meeting. Under existing policy, faculty own copyright of materials produced for their teaching. Faculty also own copyright of their research publications, drafts, etc., subject to agreements entered into with publishers, etc. There are of course exceptions (for example, where the university commissioned the work.) The presumption in terms of patents, on the other hand, is that the university owns the patent / invention. The university may reassign ownership back to a faculty member, however.

In terms of research data, there is a short answer. The university generally owns research data. The Principal Investigator (PI) is entrusted as steward of that data. As a practical matter, who owns the data is not the most salient question in terms of the researcher’s day-to-day responsibilities. The better question is who is entrusted with the data, who it is shared with, who uses it and how, and how and when it is published. The answer to that is the PI. This power is anchored in the principle of Academic Freedom.

The distinction between ownership and stewardship matters most when faculty leave the institution. Each case is determined individually, but it is common that when a faculty member leaves the university that the university allows the researcher to take his or her research materials and data with him or her. Jaime Hammer talked about the most recent draft of legislation on the indoctrination of divisive concepts (HB312), stressing the university’s firm commitment to protecting academic freedom. Members of Steering posed a number of significant issues with the draft legislation and specific scenarios where faculty might worry about being targeted by the legislation.

Jaime Hammer and Grant Garber responded that, in their opinion, none of the scenarios posed would give rise to disciplinary action by the institution under the proposed law. Steering committee members remained concerned that, even if what faculty members teach is not illegal under the bill, the legislation would embolden attacks on university teaching more generally.

Action item: Reaffirmation of academic freedom

The committee discussed the reaffirmation of academic freedom proposed by the Senate DEI committee in conjunction with the Senate chair and officers of the Auburn chapter of the AAUP. The members debated whether this is a sufficient response to the draft legislation (HB312) but concluded that Senate Steering should support the proposal developed in committee. It was noted that senators can decide to change or amend the resolution if they wish.

The committee voted in favor of including the reaffirmation of academic freedom as an action item on the agenda for February 25.

The Steering committee then moved to discuss the agenda as a whole. To ensure senators have sufficient time to discuss the issue of academic freedom on February 25, the Steering committee decided to postpone Grant Garber’s presentation on intellectual property. It will be included instead on the agenda of the March Senate meeting. Also postponed will be DeGoti’s presentation on the SACSCOC re-accreditation process and a proposed pending action item on a change to the Senate constitution related to the composition of the DEI committee.

The Steering committee agreed that the call for Rules committee nominations from the floor and the presentation of Senate officer nominations would remain on the February 25 agenda.

Chair Steury shared that he intended to announce in Senate that, in addition to the creation of the ad hoc committee on additional professorial ranks, there were also efforts in place to add additional ranks to the lecturer series and changes would also be considered for clinical, research, etc., series, once it is clear what the ad hoc committee proposes.

He noted that President Gogue would also be making announcements in the meeting, but that there would not be a presentation from Dr. Fred Kam. Provost Hardgrave would not be making remarks. This means that he will not be addressing Senate again before departing Auburn for his new role at the University of Memphis.

The Steering committee agreed the agenda as amended by unanimous consent.

Unfinished or New Business

Chair Steury consulted with the members of the Steering committee on a proposal to introduce prayers before football games. The members of Steering committee were opposed to this.

Adjournment – Chair Steury adjourned the meeting at 5:16 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Ralph Kingston
Secretary, University Senate