Faculty Governance Committee
Minutes March 25, 2009
Horns, Tovey, Wilson,
Bailey, Rigsby, Jones, Martinez, Sheerer, Walker, Mageean,
Lori Lee, Hope Murphy, Linda
I. The minutes of previous meetings were
II. Items Discussed:
- It was agreed that there was an editorial
mistake in Appendix D that was approved by the committee earlier this
year. A line was inadvertently left
out. The committee agreed to put
the line back in and accepted the addition as editorial.
- Discussion of the University Policy Manual. The discussion focused around the
question of who initiates the policies and which policies may be initiated
by the Faculty Senate. It was agreed that this needs to be
timeline for this policy issue was discussed.
Nothing of significance will be done before April 6th.
BOT has asked to meet with the faculty officers regarding why we need this
policy manual. The committee agreed that
the officers need to info the governance committee about that
conversation. The committee instructed
the officers to explain the of faculty (and governance
Committee) participation in the creation of the policy manual (and academic
policies, in general.
Faculty Welfare Committee raised questions about why the Chancellor keeps
sending committee policy changes that have been approved by the Faculty Senate back.
Provost Sheerer said that it is because the policies in questions are
not faculty policies, but are instead administrative policies. Discussion ensued regarding the need for open
and transparent governance of all policies that involve faculty. It was generally agreed that the formation of
a new policy manual should be a long process that will involve faculty. Nevertheless, the Provost said our process
could be considerably shortened because we have the NCSU policy manual to use
as a guide. If we use the NCSU policy as
a guide, the new policy manual will change which policies/suggestions can be
initiated by the faculty. Professor
Tovey acknowledged that he role of the Faculty Senate
has not be fully flushed out in the current draft
- Incorporating the concept of the Scholarship of
Engagement into the Faculty Manual was discussed. Two subcommittees will continue to work
on this: one will continue working
on definitions for the various types of scholarship; the other will work
on incorporating those definitions into the promotion and tenure sections
of the Faculty Manual.
- Professor Tovey presented the new version of the
guidelines for Review of Administrative Officers document. This is not a Faculty Governance
committee document. The committee’s
document was rejected by the Chancellor.
The current document was redone, Provost Sheerer with input from
Tovey, to reflect the Chancellors issues with the committee document. Professor Martinez will present the
document to the Faculty Senate
in April, but it will be presented for information and discussion
only. Martinez will send wording for the
committee’s report to the Senate around so that the full committee can
comment on that wording before the Senate meeting.
III. Other Business
- Professor Martinez brought up the fact that,
because Chancellor Ballard rejected the Faculty
Senate’s resolution about the use SIOS in faculty
evaluations, all faculty are now in the position of needing to use these
invalid survey results in their annual reports. She requested that the Provost provide
guidelines for ht faculty to use in preparing their annual reports. The Provost will meet with Professor
Tovey and David Weismiller next week to try to determine where to go from
A, Rigsby, Professor