FACULTY SENATE
FULL MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2010
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
Concentration 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:
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/fsonline/customcf/committee/callforvolunteers.htm.
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. RESOLUTION #10-04
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
FACULTY
SENATE RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE JANUARY 26, 2010, MEETING
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