East Carolina University




The fifth regular meeting of the 2009-2010 Faculty Senate was held on Tuesday, January 26, 2010, in the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room.


Agenda Item I.  Call to Order

Marianna Walker, Chair of the Faculty called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m.


Agenda Item II.  Approval of Minutes

The minutes of December 1, 2009  were approved as distributed.


Agenda Item III.  Special Order of the Day

A. Roll Call

Senators absent were: Professors Romack (Chemistry), Wang (Geography), Chandler (Hospitality Management), Spurr ( Mathematics), McAuliffe (Nursing), Parker (Theater and Dance), Wilson (Sociology/Faculty Assembly Delegate), Tovey (English/Past Chair of the Faculty), and Niswander (Business/Academic Deans’ Representative).


Alternates present were: Professors Sligar for Jenkins (Allied Health Sciences), Ballard for Dosser (Child Development and Family Relations), Schmidt for Jeffs (Education), Felts for Glascoff (Health and Human Performance), Mahar for Cooper (Health and Human Performance), Oakley for Jenks (History), and Boklage for Coleman (Medicine).


B.        Announcements

1.         The Chancellor has acted on the following resolutions from the December 1, 2009, Faculty Senate meeting:

09-47  Approval of Foundation Curriculum Course for Arts, COMM 2020: Fundamentals of Speech Communication (FC:FA) and Approval of Foundation Curriculum Course for Science, BIOL 2110/2111: Fundamental of Microbiology (FC:SC)

09-49  Sport and Exercise Psychology Concentration in the Master of Science 
degree in Exercise and Sport Science within the College of Health and
Human Performance; Risk Management and Insurance Concentration in
the BSBA in Finance within the College of Business; Health Physics
in the Master of Science degree in Physics within the College of Arts and Sciences; Notice of Intent to Plan a New Baccalaureate Degree in Religion/Religious Studies as a multidisciplinary program within the College of Arts and Sciences

09-50  Proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix I. Policy on Conflicts of Interest and Commitment – pending editorial revisions and additional action to be taken within sixty days as specified to the Faculty Governance Committee.

09-51  Proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D. Tenure and Promotion Policies and Procedures of ECU - with a request from the Chancellor that the Faculty Senate, as a part of the review of the Faculty Manual, begin another, more comprehensive review of Appendix D and propose further revisions identified as beneficial through the process. 

09-52 Curriculum matters contained in the November 12, 2009, University Curriculum Committee minute

2.         The ECU Integrated Planning Committee has been charged with the responsibility to update the “ECU Tomorrow: A Vision for Leadership and Service” commonly known as The Purple Book.  This document addresses the strategic direction for ECU and will link planning and effectiveness together, connecting multiple planning processes into a single, cohesive plan. To learn more about the process underway to update “ECU Tomorrow”, please visit the website (to be launched on February 17, 2010) at www.ecu.edu/cs-admin/ecutomorrow <http://www.ecu.edu/cs-admin/ecutomorrow> . We are also planning to have open forums that will provide opportunities for the ECU Community to have input during this process.

3.         Faculty Open Forums on East campus are held from 12-1 in 1026 Bate Bldg. on the 2nd Wednesday of each month with upcoming forums scheduled for April 14 and May 12.

Faculty Open Forums on West campus are held from 12 -1 in 1345 Health Sciences Bldg. on the 4th Wednesday of each month with upcoming forums scheduled for March 24, April 28, and May 26.

4.         Thanks to the following Faculty Senate Alternates who agreed to serve as Tellers today:
Carolyn Willis (Academic Library Services), Shahna Arps (Anthropology), Jason Bond (Biology) and Tripp Lamb (Biology).

5.         The Committee on Committees has been charged to seek volunteers to serve on the various 2010-11 academic, appellate, administrative, Board of Trustees, and student union committees. Faculty are strongly encouraged to participate in this component of shared faculty governance and complete a volunteer form by February 17, 2010.  Committee appointments will be finalized at the April 27, 2010, Faculty Senate meeting.  Faculty members have two ways to note their preference for service on the various standing University committees. 

            1)  On OneStop under Employee Section, faculty members click on “Faculty Committee Volunteer  Form” and complete the committee volunteer preference form.
2)   A faculty member may complete the volunteer preference form that is available on the Faculty Senate web site at:


C.        Erskine Bowles, President of the University of North Carolina System
Mr. Bowles.began his remarks by recognizing the contributions of Brenda Killingsworth, whom he called his mentor, and stated that she provided an appreciation of joint governance gained in the UNC Tomorrow efforts. President Bowles also expressed appreciation for the work of Elmer Poe who has been helping with the development of the UNC on-line program. President Bowles stated that ECU is a leader in distance education not only in the UNC system but nationally. He also mentioned the work of Charles Thompson in the longitudinal data study. This is a study of over a six year period to determine best teaching methods and practices.


President Bowles then stated that over the last eighteen months the UNC system budget cutbacks had been tough given a reduction of  $296 million. This is in addition to $170 million dollars last year and $50 million the year before that. During last year over 900 administrative positions have been abolished 600 of which had been recently filled. This resulted in a 24% reduction in administrative The President indicated that these were not just cuts; each cut indicated an employee who had a family and had been working hard had lost his or her job. Many of these people still do not have jobs today. Eliminating these jobs was not an easy decision to make.


President Bowles then indicated that he was an optimist and that because various administrators, including Chancellor Ballard, had made good budgeting decisions, academic cuts had been held to 5% last year.  At ECU the academic cuts had also held to 5% and the permanent academic cuts to 1%.  By doing this the system was able to meet the core responsibility of protecting the academic core and manage the University effectively and efficiently. The number one priority has continued to be to do all we can to improve basic learning. Much of this emphasis has to be to improve K though 12 educational programs since there will be no sustainable economic recovery in North Carolina unless we improve primary and secondary education. The university system is both part of the solution as well as part of the problem since most of the K through 12 teachers are produced in our universities. More teachers are produced at ECU than anywhere else in the system. In the future, we will need additional and higher quality teachers. More math and science teachers are needed and in addition principals with stronger leadership skills are will be required. Using the best practice data that Professor Thompson is developing will be important in this effort since decisions can be data driven. President Bowles remarked that he will be able to decide whether more funding should be available to Appalachian State University or to ECU. This will allow smart choices to be made with the limited resources that currently exist. .


President Bowles continued his remarks by stating that we must provide access to higher education to every qualified high school graduate. Success in a knowledge -based global economy will also include the community college system. President Bowles mentioned that ECU had done an excellent job in improving the relationship with the community college so that more high school graduates can start their education and transfer to the University. This will allow them to get their basic academic skills at the community college and not to come to the University unprepared and requiring remedial courses and eventually dropping out of college after a year or two on financial aid.


That is also the reason that tuition costs are being held down to 3.6% at ECU, which compares favorably with tuition increases nationally. The skills developed in the University and the community college system are essential to producing an improved workforce in the state. The cost of admission must be held down to allow this to happen. Need based aid must also be provided to every student who qualifies. President Bowles reported that during the time that he has been with the university system, need based tuition had increased from $2 million to over $139 million. Distance education has also grown rapidly over the last 5 years. Over 60,000 distance education students are taking one or more courses; there are 129 full degree programs on line and 54 certificate programs which is more than what the University of Phoenix offers. We have also been recognized by the Sloan Foundation as having the best fully integrated distance education program in the country. President Bowles indicated that the quality of the distance education courses had to be equal to the quality of face to face classes in order for the degrees that are conferred to be of the same educational value; if these standards are not the same the value of the diploma is lowered.  The President stated that the faculty is responsible for maintaining the quality of the on line course offerings.


President Bowles stated that the university system also needs to maintain a focus in its research efforts and attract some of the stimulus dollars. Currently the system has attracted approximately a billion dollars in research annually. Indications are that thirty four jobs are produced for every million dollars spent in research. This indicates that 34,000 good jobs have been generated by the current research efforts of the universities. Grant writing has increased this year and requests have been made for an additional billion dollars in research.  A research focus must also be maintained where growth in the future is anticipated. This includes research in health and wellness, sustainability, advanced manufacturing, marine science, port logistics, bioinformatics and biomanufacturing, biotechnology and areas that will create the jobs of the future.


President Bowles stated that university students must also be offered the skills that are needed in a global marketplace with many of these skills obtained through a liberal arts education. These include analytical skills, problem solving and communication skills, strong math and science skills, and the ability to work with people from different cultures and backgrounds. The President concluded his remarks by saying that these were the major areas of concern for the university system that should be the focus at the present.


Following his remarks, Professor Marianna Walker, Chair of the Faculty, presented President Bowles with a gift. No questions were posed to President Bowles.


D.        Steve Ballard, Chancellor

Chancellor Ballard stated the he was not quite as optimistic as President Bowles is about the budget. State revenue is down for the first six months of the year and the unemployment rate is 11.2% which is an alarming figure that has an impact on sales and payroll tax receipts. The April 15th budget picture will determine the attitude of the legislature; guarded optimism is all that is possible at this time in the Chancellor’s opinion. The Office of State Budget and Management has asked the University to prepare for a base budget cut of 5%, which is a little less than $14 million for ECU. Money that was held back last year can provide for this 5% cut; and the Chancellor stated that he was are hopeful that there will not be a need to go back to any college to ask for additional deductions in academic budgets. However, the Chancellor concluded that he would not know this for three more months. There are ten business groups that have identified possible savings if things get worse.


Consolidations and outsourcing of some of the current services are anticipated in the recommendations of these business groups. These are big changes in the way ECU does business; they would be painful and thus he anticipates that these changes would not be pleasantly received. These are cuts that will be made prior to going to the academic areas for savings and it may yet again be June or later in the summer before it is known  know what cuts will be required of ECU in the second year of this biennium.


The Board of Governors met in January and will meet again in February. Retreat rights for Chancellors and Vice Chancellors had been one of the most controversial topics on the agenda of these meetings. It is expected that a new policy will be approved that will be more descriptive than current practice. A tentative approval was also given for campus based tuition plan. The Chancellor stated that an increase in $200 per student in fall 2011 had been approved last year but that all this money went back to the state budget and was not available to the campuses. The leadership of the House and the Senate has now indicated that this year they will consider reasonable campus based tuition increases where money would remain on campus. However, if there are budget gaps based on a lack of tax revenue again this year ,the decision may be made to use the same method of an across the board tuition increase with funds reverting to the state budget. The Chancellor warned that there could be another $1 billion structural deficit in the state budget again this year.


The tuition increase requested by ECU this year was the second lowest in the UNC system.  This is in part the result of a realization that the availability of student aid is directly related to students’ retention. For every $500 gap in financial aid there is a 9% increase in the probability that the student will drop out of college. ECU did not meet the retention goals this year.  The financial aid money that may be lost as a result of this is important for the University in meeting retention goals which are expected to be even higher next year. The current student retention results were 9 students lower than the goal set for the University. ECU also exceeded the limit of out-of-state students which resulting in a budget decrease for the second year in a row. This limit was exceeded by 26 students. The reason is that the in state yield rate was lower this year and the out of state yield rate was higher than anticipated in admission of a freshman class of 4, 100 students. The Chancellor also noted that the Board of Governors approved the Masters in Sustainable Tourism program in the January board meeting.


Professor Sprague (Physics) asked about the University’s retention numbers and whether ECU met their goals. Chancellor said the goal was 79% and ECU’s retention rate was 78.8% thus we missed the goal by 2%. This was better performance than many other universities in the system with ECU having the highest retention goal of the four universities in our category.


Professor Brown (Psychology) asked if he was expecting a budget freeze? The Chancellor replied that he did not think so, but that by late Spring it was a possibility. Chancellor Ballard also stated that he expected everything to be reasonably stable this year until the April 15th review of income tax receipts and that ECU was in a better situation than last year due to the 5% that was currently being withheld from the funds that were budgeted.


E.        Marilyn Sheerer, Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs

Provost Sheerer provided a brief report on faculty employment that included longitudinal profiles of faculty tenure status and tenure status of permanent and temporary faculty with those reports noted and linked below.

               Full and Part Time Faculty by Unit and Tenure Status

Faculty FTE by Unit, Gender, and Full or Part Time Status
Longitudinal Profile of Faculty Tenure Status (all ECU Units included)

               Longitudinal Profile of Faculty Tenure Status (excluding School of Medicine)


In summary, the Provost reported that the total number of full time faculty in 2007 was 1,619 and in 2009 the number of full time faculty was 1, 719 which included an increase in 100 over these two years. The tenured full time faculty in 2007 was 41% and in 2009 was 43.4%. The tenure track full time faculty was 27.7% in 2007 and 26.7% in 2009. This was a result of having to take positions back last year during the budget cutback. The fixed term faculty members in 2007 were 31.3% of the faculty and in 2009 this percentage had dropped to a total of 29.9% of the faculty. The Provost explained this by indicating that there were contracts that were not renewed last year for budgetary reasons. Comparative data is difficult to obtain from the other universities in the system; the Provost reported that national data is not consistent and is complicated by the percentage of salary that is paid for by research funding rather than full time teaching. The Provost expressed an opinion that the data that collected by IPAR needs to be brought back to the faculty senate at a later meeting.


The ECU philosophy about fixed term faculty members has changed. The Provost remarked that when she came to ECU in 1996 she was warned to keep the fixed term faculty around 10% in anticipation of a requirement for a reduction in force. The percentage of fixed term faculty is now more in line with the percentage of tenure track faculty at this time. The University would like to extend longer term contracts of two to three years. Last year one year fixed term contracts were extended due to budget cutbacks and the amount of risk that was assumed in issuing longer term contracts. Selected two and three year contracts were given this year at the recommendations of the Deans; however, one-year contracts may be expected to continue as long as ECU needs to respond to lean budget years. The Provost stated that the fixed-term faculty are highly valued, but that the priority is to preserve the tenured and tenure track faculty when the decisions are made about reductions in the workforce.


The Provost reported that there has been an attempt to include the faculty in the drafting of the faculty workload policy. Faculty senate committees have been active in giving input and the policy is now in draft sixteen. The Provost stated that terms are now defined better and the policy is less restrictive than in previous drafts.


Regarding the ranking of proposed new programs, the Provost reported that General Administration provided a limited time frame for this ranking to be sent forward. The Academic Council made their decisions based on review of the listing sent by the Educational Policies and Planning Committee. Some decisions and differences in evaluation techniques were required by variables such as requirements for maintaining ECU’s doctorial status and the continued need to produce doctorial graduates.  The General Administration will review the ranked programs and will use a different ranking criteria than previously used by either the Educational Policies and Planning Committee or the Academic Council.


Professor Van Willigen (Sociology) asked about the reduction in the current Serious Illness and Disability Leave for Faculty policy of the number of weeks with pay from 15 to 8 calendar weeks given to mothers and fathers following a birth.  Provost Sheerer responded about the history of the policy since 2004 and stated that, following the discussion with members of the Faculty Welfare Committee and the Administrative EPA Personnel Policies Committee. The Academic Council provided feedback and a possible compromise to reduce the number of weeks paid from 15 to 12 calendar weeks of paid leave in any 12 month period. The current policy related to physicians employed by the practice plan allows the mother to be offered a semester in leave and then the father to take the next semester in leave which results in an entire year of lost salary to the practice plan.


Professor Mathews (Anthropology) asked if the administration was going to reduce the number of weeks that a parent could take off for maternity leave she wondered where was the University in relation to the childcare center proposal from several years ago.  Provost Sheerer responded that there has been no further discussion of the child care proposal due to the budget cuts but that this was a very good proposal and deserved consideration at a future date.


Professor Gilliland (Medicine) stated that the childcare facility available for faculty on West campus was run by the hospital and not the University.


Professor Rigsby (Geology) stated that in reference to the policy, the difference between academic institutions and industry was that faculty worked on an academic calendar and that both the proposed 8 weeks and compromised 12 weeks do not work well in academics. She stated that she remembered the discussion in 2004 and 2005 when the current policy was drafted and approved and that the number of weeks proposed and approved were equivalent to what goes on in academics.  Provost Sheerer responded that she would look again at that piece of the policy. 


Professor Givens (Foreign Language and Literatures) stated that with mothers being given the proposed 12 weeks of maternity and fathers only given 21 days for paternity leave creates an assumption that the mother’s role is more important than a father’s in raising a child.  He expressed his disapproval of that notion.


Professor Howard (Communication) asked if both parents were still allowed to take leave in the proposed policy.   Provost Sheerer replied yes.


F.         Marianna Walker, Chair of the Faculty

Chair Walker (Allied Health Sciences) provided the following remarks to the body:

“It’s hard to believe that it’s the beginning of a new year, a new decade, and a half way through an academic year.  As you all know, this year has been one of the busiest for the faculty senate and its academic and appellate committees.  At the beginning of the year, we began the review of the faculty manual, which has paved the way for the process of tenure and promotion, curriculum development, faculty welfare, and academic policies central to the faculty. In addition to this major charge, the faculty and administration have been involved in other major initiatives including the Integrated Strategic Planning, often referred to as ECU Tomorrow update, Graduate Enrollment task force, Honors College Business Plan, SACS, University Space Committee, Life Sciences and Biotechnology Building Planning, and the University Policy Manual. In addition to these initiatives, members of the university standing academic are reviewing administrative policies and providing feedback to the Academic Council to such policies as Faculty Workload, Gifts Affecting the Curriculum, and Faculty Research Leave to name a few.

Faculty and administrators are working together on such committees as the Faculty Manual Steering Committee and the Faculty Advisory Group. Faculty members are participating in many Searches, for faculty, unit administrators, and deans, attending Faculty Forums, in addition to teaching, advising, and research. 


Wow!  Even though I’ve been a faculty officer for the past 2 ½ years, I don’t think I’ve witnessed such a productive, positive, and progressive year in the faculty senate.  The work that is underway is prolific, reflective, and collaborative. Faculty who have been active in university committees and the senate for a period of time have stepped up and are assisting newer committee members and committee chairs with the review of the faculty manual and in staying on top of additional committee charges. Unit administrators, Deans, Vice Chancellors, and other administrators are meeting with faculty in a multitude of meetings, with resulting positive outcomes.  Shared governance is working at East Carolina University!


I’ve often heard the statement that the definition of shared governance is not easily defined.  As with many ambiguous terms, the definition depends on its context.  The context of the work this year is centered in meticulous and careful thought in the review and update of policy, process, faculty manual language, and merit of sections in the faculty manual.  How far have we come?  Let me share with you, how these phenomenal committees have progressed so far.


The Academic Standards Committee are meeting overtime and in addition to reviewing 22 sections in Part V (Academic Policies) as charged to them, and three administrative policies (one which will be presented today) they continue with standing charges in the review of courses for Foundation credit. They are considering not only the review of the wording of these areas, but are considering the reorganization of Part V.  They have noticed that the charges to the committee overlap with Admission and Retention Committee, especially concerning Student Conduct and Disruptive Academic Behavior. The two committees plan to meet and discuss the issues central to both committees.


The Admission and Retention Committee have been busy at their work as well. They are completing their work on Academic Integrity, which is proposed to be addressed at the Faculty Senate in February, and the Grade Appeals section was reviewed and then approved by the Faculty Senate and Chancellor in November 2009. They continue to review the Student Attendance Regulations and will collaborate with members of the Academic Standards in the review of Student Conduct and Disruptive Academic Behavior.


The Faculty Governance Committee was meeting twice monthly and continue to revisit Appendix C and D, in addition to Guidelines for Organizing into Code Units, Academic Freedom sections, Part 12: PAD, and Part 13: Promotion and tenure timelines.  The committee has and will continue to review the faculty workload policy, and will consider updating the Joint Appointment section in the manual. On a number of occasions, Donna Payne, University Attorney, has consulted in FM sections, specifically Appendix D. Thanks to this committee for all their hard work and collaboration. We always have a lively group.


Another committee who has been extremely active has been the Faculty Welfare Committee. They are meeting frequently and have divided into subgroups. They have recommended wording changes from everything from Faculty Marshals (in Part V) to retirement.  They were charged with the review of 54 sections! Under the direction of their awesome Chair, this committee has already provided detailed feedback relating to the relocation of sections to the University Policy Manual, but with guidelines for categorization and reorganization. This committee recently had a Joint Meeting with EPA Personnel Policy Committee, Academic Council, and the Chair of the Faculty relating to Faculty Research Leave (100% reassignment) and the Serious Illness and Disability Leave for Faculty policy.  Thanks to this group for a job well done!


The Educational Policies and Planning Committee is currently addressing faculty manual issues relating to curriculum and program development, with their first report being presented to day to the body. They also participated in a ranking of academic programs, as requested by the Academic Council and the Provost. It was a short notice from GA, but EPPC came through! 


Two appellate committees have been working diligently on their charged Faculty Manual review. Both the Faculty Grievance Committee and the Grievance Board have met with the University Attorney, Donna Payne, to obtain feedback and suggestions about Appendix Y, which related to Appendix D revisions. In these committees, the precedence is given to grievances, although the committee continues to meet to review and consider revisions to the Faculty Manual. The Grievance Board met in December with representatives from the University Attorney, Human Resources, and EEO office.  This committee is examining Appendices J, V, W, and X and is looking at other university faculty manuals to assist in the updating and revision of these sections.


Once the committees have completed their review of their respective faculty manual sections, the Faculty Senate will vote on the recommendations, and the resolutions will be forwarded to the Chancellor for consideration of approval. The Faculty Advisory Group, Faculty Officers, and the Faculty Manual Steering Committee will also be involved in the formatting, reorganization, and recommendation of relocated Faculty Manual sections into the University Policy Manual.


The structure of the Faculty Senate, university standing academic and appellate committees, and mutual respect with the administration has resulted in positive steps toward successful shared governance. 


We need to applaud these committees. Make sure that you, as senators, support them by reading edited sections of the faculty manual as linked to the agenda in the next three months. Contact the committee Chair, committee members, including the Faculty Senate representative, with questions or concerns, prior to the faculty senate meeting.


Volunteer for these academic and appellate committees for the 2010-2011 academic year. Become part of the process. The faculty senate structure has resulted in productive committee work that is positive and honest. Members of the Faculty take their work seriously. They are taking the review of the faculty manual seriously and approaching it with dedication and insight!  I applaud these committees and appreciate all they are doing for the faculty and the university. As senators and committee members this year, we are all advocating for the entire faculty.  Let’s take our job seriously.  This is service at its best. Faculty senate – structured success.  Let’s keep working!”


No questions were posed to Professor Marianna Walker.


G.        Bill Koch, Associate Vice Chancellor with Campus Operations
Bill Koch provided the Faculty Senators with a Written report on Parking and Transportation.  His presentation to the Senate related to the Faculty Senate Resolution, dated December 2002.


Mr. Koch also briefly discussed the upcoming increase in parking fees. He stated that the Board of Trustees had directed that there be in increase in parking fees in year two of the two year parking plan presented to the faculty senate last year. The Board only approved year one of the two year plan and directed that the plan be re-examined for additional parking fees in year two. At this time, there is no indication that a further increase in the coming will be required by the Board of Trustees. So the two year plan presented last year to the faculty senate is expected to be put into effect without additional parking fees. No questions were posed to Mr. Koch.

H.        Question Period

Professor Sprague (Physics) asked Vice Chancellor Mageean for an update on the search for the Associate Dean of the Graduate School and the possible search for a Dean of the Graduate School.  Vice Chancellor Mageean stated that the open, national external search for the associate dean, chaired by Professor Margie Gallagher, was in the final stages (with all three finalists within the ECU faculty). She also stated that as for the Dean of the Graduate School, she had decided to also have an open, national external search and that the search committee, chaired by Professor Alan White, would move ahead as soon as possible.  She stated that she would move forward with forming the Search Committee for the new Dean and would work with Professor Walker to form a search committee.  She also noted that Professor Paul Gemperline had her full support in his role as interim Dean.


Agenda Item IV.  Unfinished Business

There was no unfinished business to come before the body at this time.


Agenda Item V.  Report of Committees


A.   Academic Standards Committee

Professor Linda Wolfe (Anthropology), Chair of the Committee, presented formal faculty advice on the proposed administrative Policy on Gifts Affecting Curriculum.  She noted that this draft policy was forwarded to the committee form Chair Marianna Walker. 


Chair Walker stated that this is being proposed as a new administrative policy and members of the Academic Council (Provost Sheerer, Vice Chancellors Horns and Mageean) had asked for formal faculty advice.  Chair Walker reminded the Senators that the formal advice gathered from the committee and action by the Senate would go through the normal approval process, with the advice of the Senate acting, assigning a formal resolution number, and forwarding their action to Chancellor Ballard for consideration. Once acting on the resolution, Chancellor Ballard will probably forward the formal faculty advice on the new administrative policy back to the Academic Council.


There were no questions posed to Professor Wolfe.  The Faculty Senate then voted to approve the formal faculty advice presented in the proposed administrative Policy on Gifts Affecting Curriculum.  RESOLUTION #10-01


B.  Committee on Committees  

Professor Catherine Rigsby (Geology), Chair of the Committee, first reminded faculty members of the need for committee volunteers.  First the Senate addressed the election of a new member to Appellate Due Process Committee.  With no nominations from the floor, Professor Rose Allen (Allied Health Sciences) was elected to fill the 2012 open alternate member seat.


Second, the Senate addressed the election of a new member to Appellate Hearing Committee. 

With no nominations from the floor, Professor Angela Thomson (History) was elected to fill the 2011 open regular member seat.  Professor Rigsby then asked Committee Vice Chair, Professor Bauer (English) to present the final committee report. 


Third, the Senate addressed the election of UNC Faculty Assembly Delegate and Alternates. 

With no nominations from the floor, Professor Catherine Rigsby (Geology) was elected to serve another three year term as a UNC Faculty Assembly Delegate. Professors Mike Felts (Health and Human Performance) and Christine Zoller (Art and Design) were elected to serve three year terms as UNC Faculty Assembly Alternates.


C.  Educational Policies and Planning Committee 
Professor Edson Justiniano (Physics), Chair of the Committee, first discussed the Committee’s Ranking of Academic Programs and how the process was hindered by various things, including confusing criteria, lack of supporting materials, lack of time to actually talk with program units,  and urgency in reacting to the Academic Council’s request.  (Link to ECU’s Final Ranking forwarded to General Administration.)


Professor Brown (Psychology) asked what criteria did the Committee use to rank the programs. Professor Justiniano replied: cost to ECU, academic need, value to community, the need for administrative support, duplication in other institutions, and relevance of the program.


Professor Zeager (Economics) asked if it was correct that the Education Policies and Planning Committee did not get a chance to hear from the academic units about the rankings.  Professor Justiniano replied yes, that due to the short timeframe, the units were not contacted and stated that the entire process was flawed since there was no time to receive   feedback from the actual units. He also noted that the lack of coordination in the process made it extremely hard for the Committee to do its work.


Vice Chancellor Mageean stated that the timetable was unusual from General Administration and that she agreed, the process was not efficient but that the time restraints were not the Academic Council’s fault.  Professor Walker stated that the Academic Council did extend the reporting deadline by a day or two to allow for the Educational Policies and Planning Committee to report.


Following discussion on that topic, Professor Justiniano then presented a request to move the Communication to the School of Art and Design. There was no discussion and the request was approved as presented.  RESOLUTION #10-02


Professor Justiniano then presented proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic Information, Section III. Curriculum Development. Professor Rigsby (Geology) asked if Professor Justiniano could provide an overview of why it has taken so long for final approval of the process. She asked what were the main issues that needed to be addressed.  Professor Justiniano reviewed the current approval process and stated the proposed changes omitted the Academic Council from the approval rationale. The Committee did not feel that it was their place to advise or determine the process given the legal implications.


Professor Paul Gemperline (Interim Dean of the Graduate School) asked for speaking privileges to address his concerns and was allowed to speak to the body after Chair Walker obtained a vote of the Faculty Senate.  Professor Gemperline then stated that in relation to the curriculum process there had been significant changes made to the process that, he believed made things  work better.  In spite of better cooperation with the Educational Policies and Planning Committee and the Graduate School, when graduate programs are considered by Faculty Senate, the Graduate Curriculum Committee did not have representation on the Faculty Senate.  He requested a way to cooperate better so that when there was a graduate curriculum matter before the Faculty Senate, there would be a graduate faculty member present to speak. He continued by stating that the University needed to look for a way for appropriate graduate faculty to be involved in the approval process and offered a procedure for involving representatives of the graduate faculty in the process of approval of proposals by the Faculty Senate. This would include committee work as well as actions from the floor of the Faculty Senate. Professor Gemperline illustrated his point by mentioning a Health and Human Performance proposal that was offered by the Educational Policies and Planning Committee last Fall for a change in the Sports Science graduate curriculum.  The curriculum included the involvement of the Psychology Department. However, on the day of the report, the curriculum report was pulled from the agenda due to faculty within the Department of Psychology questioning EPPC and Chair Walker before the meeting about the approval of the departmental faculty.  Although later it was determined that the Psychology Department Chair had overseen the approval, this delay caused problems within the Health and Human Performance department’s program planning by  delaying them in offering the programs that they had planned to offer.


Following his remarks, Chair Walker reminded Professor Gemperline that over 80% of the members of the Faculty Senate were members of the graduate faculty, that Senate meeting agendas are always posted online and distributed ahead of time, and that anyone can request speaking privileges prior to the meeting if wanting to address a particular issue on the agenda.


Following discussion, the proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic Information, Section III. Curriculum Development was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #10-03


D.  University Curriculum Committee
Professor Paul Schwager (Business), Chair of the Committee, presented the curriculum matters contained in the December 10, 2009 University Curriculum Committee minutes. There was no discussion and the curriculum matters were approved as presented.


E.  University Environment Committee
Professor Hunt McKinnon, (Interior Design and Merchandising) a member of the Committee, presented a proposed “Green Get To ECU Day” event.  Professor Sharer (English)
asked that the proposal be renamed and offered to send a suggested new name to both Professor McKinnon and Professor Tim Kelley (Chair of the Committee). There was no objection and Professor McKinnon indicated that he would take the suggestion of the name change back to the committee and asked if Professor Sharer would e-mail her proposed name change for the event for consideration..


Professor Rigsby (Geology) stated that she supported the resolution but thought that it may not be safe enough to ride bikes, walk, etc. for many faculty, staff, and students.  She wanted to know how else the ECU community could get involved. She also stated that the University needed more conversations with local city officials to make this proposed event more workable.  Professor McKinnon offered to take her suggestion and inquiry into how more colleagues could get involved back to the Committee for further discussion.


Following discussion, the proposed “Green Get To ECU Day” event was approved as presented, with pending name change. RESOLUTION #10-05


Agenda Item VI. New Business

There was no new business to come before the body at this time.


The meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,


Hunt McKinnon                                                                                  Lori Lee

Secretary of the Faculty                                                                    Faculty Senate

Department of Interior Design and Merchandising                                                          





10-01  Formal faculty advice on the proposed administrative Policy on Gifts Affecting Curriculum.

            Disposition:   Chancellor


10-02  Request to move Media Production Program (including faculty, curriculum and students)

            from the School of Communication to the School of Art and Design.

            Disposition:   Chancellor


10-03  Proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic Information, Section III.
   Curriculum Development.

            Disposition:   Chancellor


10-04  Curriculum matters contained in the December 10, 2009 University Curriculum

            Committee minutes.

            Disposition:   Chancellor


10-05  Proposed Green Get To ECU Day” event.

            Disposition:   Chancellor