University at Buffalo - The State University of New York

Published: April 10, 2003

By DONNA LONGENECKER
Reporter Assistant Editor

UB has lost nearly 150 centrally scheduled classrooms to administrative and other uses over the past 25 years, in spite of the university's increasing enrollment, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee learned yesterday. In fact, one senator-Roger Mayne, SUNY Distinguished Teaching Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, maintained that problems with scheduling classrooms for several required courses could potentially delay the graduations of two engineering students.

The senate's Facilities Committee, in a year-end report presented to the FSEC by chair Joseph Zambon, professor of periodontics and endodontics, recommended that the university create more centrally scheduled classrooms—given projected increases in enrollment—and to consider carefully further implications on scheduling if such space continues to decline.

Overcrowded classrooms, poorly utilized space—especially on Friday afternoons—and accessibility for students with disabilities are just some of the issues the Facilities Committee has been working to address with university administration, Zambon said. The report did note that progress is being made on prior recommendations to upgrade technology and seating in many classrooms. With a budget of just $100,000 a year for classroom maintenance, upgrades and repairs—which breaks down to about $725 per classroom—there is not enough money to address ongoing problems, said Zambon. For example, replacing damaged sound-abatement panels in some lecture halls can exceed the budget for that particular room, totaling $160,000 for one room, or $15 per square foot, per panel.

He also pointed out that the university is operating under outdated codes regarding the amount of classroom space allocated per student, which contributes to the problem of overcrowding, he said. Zambon noted that overcrowded classrooms often prompt faculty members to create several versions of an exam "to help students maintain academic integrity"—in other words, to prevent cheating.

He also described the impediments faced by students with disabilities—either because of overcrowding or because desks designed for their use often disappear. He suggested the installation of fixed seating for students with disabilities.

In an effort to assess faculty concerns, the committee created a survey of instructional facilities that can be accessed online at http://survey.med.buffalo.edu/survey/survey.asp?r=12344321. The results of the survey will be forwarded to the Faculty Senate.

In other business, John Boot, professor of management science and systems and chair of the senate's Academic Freedom and Responsibility Committee, reported on the status of the university's copywriting and intellectual property policies, as well as issues related to ownership of distance-learning lectures and related instructional materials. The committee strongly urged the university to develop a cohesive, encompassing set of policies governing these issues and make it part of orientation materials that are given to new faculty members, as well as ensure that such a document is available to current faculty.

A particular weakness pointed out by the committee is the university's absence of a clearly defined set of regulations regarding the ownership of software created or designed by faculty members. United University Professionals (UUP), the union representing SUNY faculty and professional staff, defines the rules of software ownership policy as such: Software belongs to SUNY or its Research Foundation unless all four conditions exist; the software was not created within the scope of employment; it was not created as work-for-hire; it was not a by-product of sponsored research and no university or research facilities, funds or personnel were used. The full text of the statement can be read at http://www.uupinfo.org/.

Boot reminded the executive committee of the potential for serious legal problems without such a document, although he acknowledged that even having well-defined policies won't prevent further fine-tuning as a direct result of court action and hinted that the university already was involved in legal action over the ownership/authorship of software created by a faculty member. "We're poorly protected by not having such a document. We're weakly protected in the context of software programming," said Boot.

Also at yesterday's meeting, Thomas B. Burrows, director of the Center for the Arts, updated the FSEC on the progress the CFA has made in achieving its mandate to be a good community partner while providing enrichment and instructional support to the university and its students.

The CFA's annual budget totals about $2 million, Burrows said, and for the past several years the center has met its goal of covering costs and no longer worries about filling the theatres, as attendance has more than doubled over the past five years.

"We're at a very good place. We're still doing it on the basis of earned revenue and sponsorship of special programming," Burrows said of the CFA's fiscal stability.

He cited mentorship of students by faculty and staff, outreach to area schools and increased corporate partnerships as being integral to the center's vitality and mission.