Two of the university’s four colleges feel disenchanted toward the university council that distributes faculty research grants, Bob Augustine, dean of the graduate school, said at Tuesday’s Faculty Senate meeting.

As a result, a faculty survey measuring the faculty’s views on the Council for Faculty Research was conducted. Data from a council survey of 78 faculty members backed the suggestion to reconfigure the membership format.

The senate voted 9-3 to postpone action until council chair Richard Sylvia can further describe the survey.

Between the fiscal years of 1998 and 2002, that run from July 1 to June 30 of that year, the College of Sciences and the College of Arts and Humanities received more than 92 percent of the university’s 118 released summer grants.

“The current system allows for an imbalance of faculty from certain colleges,” said Augustine who presented information compiled by the Council of Faculty Research to the senate. “This could get everyone on a level playing field.”

The new council membership format would grant the four colleges an elected and appointed member on the proposed nine-person committee. One elected member from Booth Library will also sit on the council.

Bud Fischer, a biological sciences professor and former member on the council, disagreed with the notion grant money be equally dispersed. He cited the lack of grant proposals from some departments and a vacant seat in the council’s Pedagogy and Educational Theory position, which is intended to help diversify the applicants, as reasons the situation is not equal.

“If you want to play the game,” he said, “you have got to help yourself … the way the game works is that you go up against everyone. If you’re good enough to win, you win. I lose weekly.”

Although Reed Benedict, a sociology and anthropology professor, agreed with the format claiming the senate should vote as the faculty voted, many senate members disagreed.

“It seems more like a change than progress,” political science professor Dave Carwell said. “They’re upset, so they want to change.

Research is critical for faculty members because it allows them to study and update themselves on their subjects of expertise. The action is also one of the three requirements faculty must fulfill – teaching classes and professional studies are the other two.

“What you need are people who understand the different research areas,” associate psychology professor Steve Scher said. “The colleges aren’t broken up by the research areas.”

The senate also decided to set the date of the annual Faculty Forum Feb. 24, instead of March 23.

The earlier in the semester the forum is held, the more likely faculty will attend, Fischer said. The March date also falls close to Spring Break. The motion passed by unanimous consent.

Currently, the setup for the Facilities Naming Council is comprised of eight members elected by the president. The senate voted 10-1, with one abstention, to compile a new council. Members would include chairs or representatives from the Faculty Senate, Student Senate, Staff Senate, Council of Chairs and Council of Academic Affairs, along with two members elected by the president.

The system needed change because of the setup, Fischer said. Fischer, who previously served on the Facilities Naming Council, said it took three or four months to change Lantz Gym to Lantz Arena because so much consultation and requirements were needed.

The senate’s motion Tuesday, which was passed 10-1 with one abstention, suggests the responsibilities be reduced to one entity. The terms were previously two years and the senate unanimously passed a motion reducing it to one year.

“It’s a disaster the way it’s set up,” Fischer said.

The senate also unanimously voted to pass guidelines to assure shared governance, or equal representation, was followed in future building naming decisions.