Faculty Governance Committee Meeting

Minutes December 12, 2007

The meting was called to order at 3:10 PM.

Members present: Bailey, Taggart, Jones, Justiniano, Murphy, Sheerer, Cope, Martinez (chair), Gilliland, Jones, Mageean, Horns.

1. Excused absences: Pagliari

Resource: Bonatz, Murphy, Lee, Ingalls

2. Approval of the minutes off previous meeting.

The minutes of November 14, 2007 were approved as presented.

The H. Murphy, the new university attorney assigned to the committee, was introduced.

3. Brief Discussion: Actions of the Board of Trustees regarding leadership development.

The Leadership Development Task Force approved its recommendation on the evaluation of administrators. The BOT disapproved the Faculty Governance Committee’s report on the evaluation of administrators. The Trustees will not approve the FGC’s definition of faculty involvement in the evaluation of the chancellor. Only the trustees can evaluate the chancellor. It remains the view of the FGC that while the BOT has the authority to evaluate the chancellor the BOT should give faculty some voice in who are the representatives that evaluate the chancellor. Also, it is important to have the task force create policies for the vice-chancellor, deans and chairs and then determine what goes into L. Will the set of policies created primarily by faculty be broad or narrow (only curriculum)? It was noted that representatives of the UNC-GA had met with the deans and it was suggested that they should meet with the faculty leadership.

4. University Policy Manual Committee: Dr. Rigsby will represent us on the university policy manual committee. The UPM is not supposed to take the place of the FM. We are not going to eliminate L. The intent of the BOT chair is to have the university manual drive the rest of it. This will necessitate changes in the FM. L, D, C, and possibly other things may need to be brought into alignment with what the trustees want. There is disagreement about which policies in the FM are faculty policies and which are administrative policies. An example of an area where something is in the FM and elsewhere: some research policies are in the FM, some in the Business Manual and some nowhere. Or there is no policy. Things need to come together. The time line is not fixed. The FGC believes that some policies should be determined primarily by the faculty. it was noted by the Provost that need policies on diversity and spousal hires, for example. In reference to the requirement for criminal background checks for new and possibly for existing faculty, an analogy was suggested with the policies of the foreign police states in which two members of the FGC used to reside. A policy for the proper use of such policies is needed.

5. Appendix C: Discussion of C was postponed until the next meeting.

6. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 4:27.