FACULTY SENATE
FULL MINUTES OF MARCH 31, 2009
The seventh regular meeting of the 2008-2009
Agenda Item I. Call to Order
Janice Tovey, Chair of the Faculty called the meeting to
order at 2:10 p.m.
Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes
of February
24, 2009 were approved as presented.
Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll Call
Senators absent were: Professors Lazure and Zoller (Art and
Design), Gabbard (Education), Talente and Levine (Medicine), Eason (Nursing),
Coddington and Ciesielski (Technology and Computer Science), Parker (Theatre
and Dance), Taggart (Past Chair of the Faculty/Music), Vice Chancellor Horns, and
Chancellor Ballard.
Alternates present were: Professors Lillian for Deena
(English), Boswell for McCammon (Health and Human Performance), and Boklage for
Novick (Medicine).
B. Announcements
The
Chancellor has approved the following resolution from the November 4, 2008,
08-49 Approval of ENGL 3920: Film Theory and
Criticism as a Foundations Curriculum Course for Humanities. (Rejected
12-12-08/ Rejection Rescinded and now Approved, 2-24-09)
The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the January 31,
2009,
09-01 Foundation Curriculum Courses for Humanities,
as follows: ASIA 2010/GRBK 2010 Great Books of Modern China, GRBK 2400 Great
Books of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, GRBK 2500 Great Books of the
Enlightenment, GRBK 2600 Great Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries.
09-04 Request for authorization to establish a new
distance education degree program,
MS in Counselor
Education, within the College of Education; Request for
authorization to establish a new distance education degree, BS in Industrial Distribution and Logistics,
College of Technology and Computer Science; Request for authorization to
establish a new distance education degree program, BSBA in Management, College of Business;
Request for authorization to establish a new distance education degree program,
BSBA in Management Information Systems,
College of Business; and a Request for authorization to establish a new
distance education degree program, BSBA in Marketing, Operations, and Supply Chain
Management Concentration, College of Business.
The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the February 24,
2009,
09-07 Revised ECU
Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic Information, Section I.D. Class Roll
Verification.
09-09 Request for authorization to establish a MS in Sustainable Tourism in the Center for
Sustainable Tourism, Division of Research and Graduate Studies.
09-12 Revised ECU
Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section VI. Due Process Before Discharge or the Imposition of Serious
Sanctions.
09-14 Faculty Welfare
Committee report on the proposed increase in fees for parking
permits and support of the recommendation that the Parking and Transportation Committee and
the university’s administration reconsider its plans to increase the fees for
parking permits for the coming two academic years.
Academic Committee Chairs are
reminded that Committee
Annual Reports are due in the
Faculty
members are reminded that April 1 Chancellor Ballard will call for candidates
for the prestigious 2009/2010
Oliver Max Gardner award. A copy of the University’s nomination
procedures is available at:
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/fsonline/customcf/committee/aa/maxgardneraward.htm.
C. Steve
Ballard, Chancellor
Chancellor Ballard was unable to attend today’s meeting due
to an earlier scheduled meeting with Marc Basnight and other legislators in
D. Marilyn
Sheerer, Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs
Provost Sheerer began her comments by stating that she
wanted to review what administrative deductions have been taken as far as the
budget cuts. Provost Sheerer stated information on vacant positions changes
weekly. (Administrative
Reduction Report.) She reviewed purely administrative cuts in 2007-
2008 and possibility of 2009-2010; the cuts for the current and future year
were somewhat less detailed since they are currently being finalize. EPA non
teaching 2007-2008 eliminated six EPA non teaching positions $602,000; there is
also operating or funding for support persons positions in the Academic Affairs
division. In the Division of Administration and Finance there were a series of
cuts: some of these positions were in the mailroom, Assistant Vice Chancellor
and Director of military programs, an employee training person, another manager
and temporary staff and operating money was reduced. Probably around $300,000 was
saved in these reductions. In Advancement, there was an administrative support
position eliminated for a savings of $46,000 from the operating budget. The
Chancellor had $ 46,000 cut from his operating budget. Health Sciences had a
reduction $770,000 cut from their operating budget, Research and Graduate
studies cut $52,000 from the operating budget student affairs eliminated a
career services position for a total of over $1.3 million in 2007-2008. These
were all administrative cuts. There was
also a total of $54,000 in temporary money eliminated as well.
In 2008-09, Academic Affairs, a Director who was EPA non
teaching, and an Associate Dean in one of the Colleges, two SPA positions that
were administrative support, and one EPA non teaching positions in another
college, The Director of the Academic Enrichment Center, which was an EPA non
teaching position, and operating funds of about $117,000. In Administration and
Finance, there were inspectors in Health and Safety, a warehouse manager,
Assistant Pro Card Manager, administrative support positions, four
housekeeping, electricians, a receptionist position and operating funds of
$310,000. In Advancement there was a $40,000 reduction in the operating budget.
There was a consolidation in the Chancellor’s office that saved about $35,000
in EPA non teaching positions. In Health Sciences, an Associate Vice Chancellor
of Communications, an Associate Vice Chancellor for Planning and Programming,
an Associate Vice Chancellor for Regional Health an administrator in academic
affairs and operating funds of about $440,000 were eliminated. In Research and
Graduate Studies the Federal Relations position was consolidated into Dr. Megeean’s
office without a stipend; this saved
$80,000. In addition, $238,000 in operating funds was removed. Student
Affairs reduced their salary reserves and operating budget by about
$40,000. This is a total for 2008-2009
of about $2,255,000 in permanent positions as well as some non recurring cuts.
In 2009-2010, Academic Affairs is considering eliminating
sixteen EPA non teaching positions. An Associate Vice Chancellor’ position in
the Provost office has been eliminated. A number of other administrative
positions across academic affairs are being proposed for elimination. If the
reduction requirement goes up to 7% most eliminated; beyond 7% all of the
positions will be eliminated. Academic Affairs anticipates a reduction of
$576,000. Administration and Finance indicates thirty-two SPA positions
eliminated in addition to operating funds of $1,176,000. In Advancement, 2 EPA non teaching positions
are proposed to be eliminated for a total of $200,000, two SPA positions at
$72,000 in additional to $50,000 in operating funds. In Health Sciences, six
SPA positions for a total of $280,000 and operating funds of $500,000. In the
Chancellor’s office there will be a further consolidation of EPA non teaching
positions for an additional $8,000. In Research and Graduate Studies a savings
$201,600 in EPA positions and $202,800 in operating funds. Student Affairs
eliminating two EPA non teaching positions.
This would be a savings of about $6,874,000 in 2009-2010 ; this is also
a reduction of about $10,430,000 in the three year period.
Professor Sprague (Physics) stated that in the March 19,
2009, Board of Governors meeting, Chancellor Ballard spoke in favor of
financial exigency. He then asked what would trigger a request, by the
Chancellor, to start the process for declaring a financial exigency, what steps
would be taken under a declaration financial exigency that could not be taken
otherwise, and why financial exigency being considered as necessary at ECU and
not at UNC Chapel Hill? Provost Sheerer
responded that University Attorney Donna Payne defines financial exigency equal
to bankruptcy. If there was a declaration of a financial exigency, it would
allow for the removal of faculty and staff in an easier fashion. Right now the processes provided for within
the University are cumbersome. While faculty would be the last employees being
considered for cuts the 147 faculty positions being discussed are about 3% of
the total number of faculty and staff complement. Most of those positions are
vacancies and that number changes weekly.
If trying to terminate faculty positions so EPA nonteaching faculty and SPA
employees are being cut first and the consideration of financial exigency would
only be a last resort.
Professor Robinson (Mathematics) stated that within his
college half of the departments are made up of mostly tenure track and fixed
term faculty and that there was a simmering anger from fixed term faculty who
have sought him out. The fixed term
faculty has been used to drive the enrollment expansion and first to hit the
chopping block in this time of financial crisis. Professor Robinson stated that
the Chancellor’s staff should have included the March 19 Board of Trustees’
policy framework for resource allocation in serving in an open, transparent
way. This material has not been
forwarded to the University Budget Task Force and it was a contradiction to the
Board of Governors values statement document that was distributed under
Chancellor Ballard’s name. The Board of
Governors calls for “unconditional protection of the academic core” and sees it
as the highest priority. The ECU Board
of Trustees statement was that the faculty should be protected ‘as much as
would be possible’. Thus the Board of
Trustee’s document is at variance to the Board of Governor’s document and
Governor Perdue’s directives that 98% of the UNC budget should be funded. He
then asked Provost Sheerer how can the contradiction be explained between what
the Board of Governors are stating that academics are the first priority and
the ECU administration saying maybe but we have other priorities.
Provost Sheerer replied that the budget task force had been
looking all possible options to save money except the elimination of teaching
positions. The difficulty in looking for other ways of saving money is that 85%
of budget is in personnel expense. A number of administrative cuts have been
made and more are planned as were reviewed in this meeting. The administration
did not start with cutting faculty positions. Most of the 147 positions that
are now being considered are now vacant, although that number changes
daily, and represented less than 3% of
the total staff and faculty complement. The effort is not to touch the academic
core.
Professor Jenks (History) stated that administrators are
instructing Deans to not grant faculty research leave until such time as there
is a University policy on this practice. This relates to the core mission of
the University. He asked what was the
nature of the University policy that might be developed. Who would develop it and couldn’t this be
considered an assault on the departmental autonomy, i.e. disciplinary
integrity? The professoriate should
decide what research is necessary and deserves support. Provost Sheerer replied
that the University Attorney, Donna Payne had stated that there was no
University-wide policy for those who take research leave. There is a need for
the output to be detailed when leave was utilized, and faculty research leave
involved the use of State funds; some metric of productivity is necessary. At
UNC-CH for example, a university-wide committee exists that determines what money
is available for academic leave and grants. Other Universities have more
private research money. A policy is needed to clarify the committee made by the
Dean with respect to the expected outcomes of the faculty member’s research
time. Reassigned time has been handled informally up to now and used very
liberally across the disciplines, and given the budget situation we find
ourselves in the administration is looking at how that is being handled.
Professor Matthews (Anthropology) stated that she understood
the issues but over a long time period, this could affect talented people from
doing active research across many disciplines. She is aware of a lot of
nervousness among faculty in relation to how faculty can do their job and
achieve their research goals. The Provost responded that in two years we would
be in a better position to grant academic leave. However, a policy is still
needed to make clear when academic leave is given, why it is given, and what is
expected in return.
Professor Martinez (Foreign Languages and Literatures) asked
how did Provost Sheerer define productivity when meeting with the Chairs of the
Professor Martinez (Foreign Language and Literatures) asked,
for a point of information, if Provost Sheerer was using the ECU Faculty Manual when evaluating the
productivity of faculty? Also how was
she evaluating the productivity of administrators? Provost Sheerer responded
that she does indeed do evaluations with feedback forms and that the rate of
return from faculty of the IDEA report is about 25% which is very low. She also
stated that she felt good about how the administrators were being evaluated in
terms of how they are working on the goals that have been identified as
important or needing improvement in their units. The Chancellor has been clear
that administrator’s evaluations must be on file.
Professor Jenks (History) stated that the number of
administrators had grown but so had the faculty population. He asked if there were numbers to show an
increase in the ratios of increase in faculty and administrators over the same
10 year period to show which area was growing the fastest. Dean Niswander stated that this information
was available from the annual University’s Fact
Book.
Professor Robinson (Mathematics) stated that in reference to
the University Budget Task Force matrix, there had been a suggestion to
eliminate administrative stipends costing $4 million dollars. Provost Sheerer
replied that she was reviewing all stipends in her division and that the reason
it was being studied was because these monies have been committed to people to
do an extra job. The language changed
because Board of Trustees member Brody recommended that all stipends be “zeroed
out “ as of June 30 and then request that those EPA non faculty employees
provide a rationale as of July 1 for continued stipends.
Professor Robinson’s second question related to establishing
a hiring freeze. Provost Sheerer responded that there was resistance to
eliminating all faculty hires in the last Budget Task Force meeting because we
will miss the opportunity to take key areas forward over the next 2 year budget
period. The administration can not state
that there will not be any faculty hires because there are some critical needs
and the applicant pool has a wide selection of good candidates due to the
economic decline across the country.
Professor Rigsby (Geology) stated that in reference to
financial exigency, Chancellor Ballard did state that he was willing and ready
to declare financial exigency. In his
letter, he states that he is not ready to do that today and would need approval
from Erskine Bowles, Board of Governors, etc.
As you know, major program curtailment and financial exigency require
significant faculty involvement according to Board of Governors policy 605c1. The process needs to be open, transparent
communication and things should not be responded to without thoughtful
discussion and open dialogue. It is her understanding that most information
discussed in the University Budget Task Force has not been shared with the
University community. There has been no
attempt to follow current manual policies, i.e. standing University
committees. She then asked Provost
Sheerer if the administration was willing to step back and include the current
in-place policies when trying to address this budget crisis. Provost Sheerer stated that the University
Attorney had looked at what would be required to close a non productive
program; this is an example of using the policies that now exist. She had taken
the time to review those in-place policies and did not think that there was any
attempt to hide information. She was going to ask the University Budget Task
Force at the next meeting to provide specific statements if something was being
done incorrectly. It was her attempt to
be transparent and participate in shared faculty governance. She concluded that there are no secret
agendas.
Professor Niswander (Business) asked if there was anyone in
the Faculty Senate had attended at the Board of Governors meeting of March 19, 2009. He then stated that if the answer were no,
that the body should not jump to conclusions.
The Chancellor was willing and ready as a point of fact to discuss this
issue and that the body does not have a clue whether what was being assigned to
him was actually true or not. Professor Sprague (Physics) replied that he was
told about the Chancellor’s remarks by someone who was reliable and was present
at the meeting. He stated that he had
intended to ask the Chancellor if he had been in attendance at today’s meeting.
E. Phyllis
Horns, Interim Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences
Dr. Horns was
unable to attend the meeting due to her attendance in
F. Janice
Tovey, Chair of the Faculty
Professor Tovey
stated that she had several important items to discuss and may go over the
allotted time, but asked for their indulgence as she discussed the proposed
university policy manual and the budget issues surrounding fixed term faculty,
and the possibility of furloughs and financial exigency. She stated that she
had mentioned several meetings ago that a committee had been formed by the
Chancellor to develop the format and guidelines for a University Policy Manual
to serve all divisions of the university, including faculty, and identify the
process for policy development and who would be responsible. The charge came
originally from the Board of Trustees, which identified the lack of a
university-wide policy manual as a weakness at ECU.
This work
began during Professor Mark Taggart’s time as Chair of the Faculty, and he and
Professor Dee Dee Glascoff were appointed to the committee. Now, I serve on this committee, and Faculty Governance
Committee Chair, Professor Puri Martinez has recently been added. Our task was
to ensure that the role of faculty in policy making was affirmed and
articulated, that the specific policies and procedures for which the faculty have
primary responsibility are identified and then articulated and incorporated
into the document that will guide the process for developing the university’s
manual. We will be meeting next week for this very purpose.
The faculty
officers met on Founders Day with Bob Greczyn and David Brody, Chair and Vice
Chair respectively of the Board of Trustees, at their request. The reason for
this meeting was to make certain the faculty officers were aware of the need
for a streamlined faculty manual, but also for the faculty officers to
communicate the importance of having faculty involved with this process. ECU
has been functioning for a very long time with some policies for many business
practices not clearly defined and/or accessible. While the ECU Faculty Manual has grown to be a very large document, it covers
items that are not the immediate purview of the faculty, but the manual, more
importantly served to fill a gap. And it’s time for the university to have a
policy manual that presents business practices of all divisions and offices, in
addition to faculty policies and procedures.
The faculty
officers, the vice chancellors, and the board chair and vice chair understand
that this is a process of revision and cannot necessarily been accomplished
overnight. We anticipate several semesters of work before this policy manual
becomes a reality. And I want you to understand that also. And I’m counting on
you, as senators, as senate committee members and as faculty to contribute to
the development of the faculty portion of any university manual. We will have
to revise our current policies and procedures to conform to the new format.
This effort
will be challenging yet necessary —and we must preserve shared governance as
part of a more coherent university manual. I want to include senators, members
of senate committees, and the faculty in general. The revisions will be treated
as all revisions to the manual are treated now and will follow the same
process, working their way through committee to the Senate and on to the
Chancellor via resolutions. It will be a deliberate process that will provide
an opportunity for open comment by all senators. Right now, the next step for
the committee, once the guiding document is completed, will be to present it to
all divisions—you can count on hearing a report next fall at one of our Senate
meetings.
Next, each
time the faculty officers get together for our weekly meetings the budget
situation has become worse. Worst cases
become best cases and no one seems to know when the state revenues will start
to stabilize. Given this budget situation and the fact that so many faculty are
not available in summer, we need to have a serious discussion of the principles
that should guide faculty advice to the Chancellor during the summer. At this
time, I want to thank the members of the AAUP, ECU chapter for their letter
outlining their recommendations concerning financial exigency and furloughs.
You have that letter in front of you.
This is an
effective way to begin this discussion.
The faculty officers would like to invite the members of the ECU-AAUP
Executive Board, Chairs of Senate Committees and other interested faculty of a
meeting on Monday April 6 at 12:30 in the Senate conference room to discuss the
principles and criteria surrounding the contract renewals of fixed term
faculty, of furloughs, and of financial exigency.
Let me
provide some context for this called meeting: faculty in some colleges have
been asked to “rank” the fixed term faculty in their units. The Deans of these
colleges have determined that faculty should help him or her decide who gets
contracts as money becomes available. Faculty input IS important; we all know
that; however the faculty officers are concerned about having objective
criteria to identify these rankings. For some units who already have a clearly
defined evaluation process, this request may not be difficult. But others don’t
do this on a regular basis. Do we go by
seniority and longevity? By subjects they can teach? What about clinical and
research fixed term faculty? Are they subject to different guidelines? We would
like to discuss and clarify how a ranking might proceed—if it must be done at
all. Once we have some guidelines and
focus, the officers will be better able to advocate for faculty and maintain a
highly qualified professional faculty. And we need your advice and counsel NOW
while we can advocate for a strategic and fair decision-making process.
Finally, we
endorse the letter from the AAUP chapter in principle and would like the
opportunity to engage faculty in further discussion about the principles that
should guide any furloughs or financial exigency. While there is a process in
place for declaring exigency, we would like to review it and ensure that any
decision of this sort is also strategic and fair. Furloughs are another
story—they are still illegal in
The Faculty
Officers believe that this is an opportunity to provide insight and perspective
into the processes that we may have to deal with in the near future. We want to
create a set of guiding principles that can be reliable when jobs are evaluated
and when some of our fellow faculty members may lose their jobs. Please consider joining us on Monday, April 6,
12:3O in the Senate conference room, Rawl Annex 142 for this discussion. We are
willing to devote as much time as necessary—please feel free to come and go as
your schedule permits. If you can’t join us, please feel free to email any of
the officers with your concerns, ideas, or suggestions.
Professor
Sprague (Physics) asked why weren’t faculty policies going through the Faculty
Governance Committee, which is what it was designed for? Professor Tovey replied that there was no
timeframe yet established and was not sure how it would all work.
Professor Glascoff
(Health and Human Performance) stated that she was one of the original faculty
(along with Mark Taggart) who attended a meeting at NC State to learn how
things were done there. She imagined
that anyone could set up a meeting with faculty at NC State to alleviate
faculty concerns on how the policies are combined.
Professor Greene
(Education) asked if the dialogue meeting would be open to all faculty? Chair Tovey responded yes. Professor Vail
Smith (Health and Human Performance) asked if an announcement would be
distributed to all faculty? Chair Tovey
responded yes.
Professor Robinson
(Mathematics) asked when there is a conflict between the new policy manual and ECU Faculty Manual, which will
supersede? Professor Tovey responded
that pieces of the ECU Faculty Manual,
will be reformatted to fit into the new manual format. The ECU
Faculty Manual supersedes until the new manual is designed and that the
policies will remain the same unless they go through the standing University
committee approval process.
Professor Martinez
(Foreign Languages and Literatures) stated that she has not met yet with the
new policy manual committee, but was eager to meet with them next week. She
stated that members of the Faculty Governance Committee were committed to
making sure that this process was done right and that she continued keep the
Committee informed on any issues being addressed as the manual was designed. Professor
Tovey stated that the group would work one step at a time until they got it
right.
Professor Paul
(Business) asked who would have ownership of the new manual once it was
developed? Professor Tovey replied that
right now it would be housed on the Academic and Student Affairs website and
that the faculty policies would be the purview of the faculty with everything
still considered advisory to the Chancellor.
Professor Rigsby
(Geology) provided an example of how faculty involvement benefits the University
community. In April 2003, the Board of
Governors directed the creation of a Serious Illness and Disability Leave
Policy for Faculty. The directive stated
“Each constituent institution must establish a written policy to provide a
period of leave for faculty in cases of extraordinary illness, major
disability, or for parental purposes.” The proposed policy was referred to the
Faculty Welfare Committee for review, discussion, and approval before being
presented to the
G. Ken
Wilson, Faculty Assembly Delegate
Professor
Wilson (Sociology) provided information relating to the March 27, 2009 Faculty
Assembly meeting. Links to all materials
(agenda, minutes, annual report, nominations, budget comparison, academic
program planning and establishment process, and resolution) are available online
at:
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/fsonline/customcf/fsminute/fsm309facultyassemblyreport.htm.
He stated that all five Assembly Delegates traveled on their own accord to the
meeting. Within his brief remarks,
Professor Wilson stated that distance education was still in the
hands of the faculty just like any other curriculum course and that tuition by
the credit hour was on hold for the foreseeable future. He also noted that Professor Catherine Rigsby
(Geology) was elected as Vice Chair for the UNC Faculty Assembly.
H. Approval of
Spring 2009 Graduation Roster, including honors program graduates, subject to
the complete of degree requirements.
Professor Glascoff (Health and
Human Performance) moved approval of the Spring 2009 Graduation Roster,
including honors program graduates, subject to the complete of degree
requirements. RESOLUTION #09-16
I . Question Period
Professor Martinez (Foreign Language and Literatures) asked
for an update on the SOIS scores and resolution relating to this that had been
denied by the Chancellor. Professor Tovey (English) stated that she was meeting
with David Weismiler and Provost Sheerer soon to discuss this issue and that
she hoped to see a report to the
Professor Walker (Allied Health Sciences) asked VC Mageean
about the Stimulus Package and the money being made available to ECU. Vice
Chancellor Mageean stated that a huge amount of money was put into education
areas and that all of this information was updated daily on the Research and
Graduate Studies website. There was
nothing definite because the stimulus money had to be applied for and a complex
and multi-faceted approach was required for the stimulus money. Vice Chancellor
Mageean stated that a task force had been formed with Jan Tovey a part of the
group to represent the faculty.
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 for approval request for Removal
of Foundation Credit “FC” designation from ALL BUT the following School of
Theatre and Dance courses: THEA 1000, -1010, -2001, -4066; DNCE 1001, -1002,
-1003, - 1011, -1012, -1013, -3014, -3703, -4044, -4045. There was no
discussion and the request for Removal
of Foundation Credit “FC” designation from ALL BUT the following School of
Theatre and Dance courses: THEA 1000, -1010, -2001, -4066; DNCE 1001, -1002,
-1003, - 1011, -1012, -1013, -3014, -3703, -4044, -4045 was approved as
presented. RESOLUTION #09-17
B.
Academic
Standards Committee and Admissions and Retention Policies Committee
Professors Linda Wolfe (Anthropology) and Wendy Sharer
(English), Chairs of the Committees, presented a joint response to the
Strategic Enrollment Management Task Force recommendations on Academic Policy
Changes (section 2.8 of the SEMTF report). This
was provided to the Senators at this time for information only.
Professor Rigsby (Geology) thanked the Committee for working
on this and asked what was next for all of the other recommendations from the
Strategic Enrollment Task Force.
Professor Tovey responded that she will need to sit down and come up
with a timeline to handle all of the recommendations from the Task Force.
Professor Matthews (Anthropology) asked about the drop date
and stated that the old drop date schedule may have worked to stop the
revolving door and increase student retention. Now, if students do not drop, it
could still hurt retention so why now no drop date and not just a shorter one. Professor Sharer responded that a student
does not know until halfway through the semester if you are doing well in
class. In the past, there was an understanding that faculty should give at
least one exam prior to the drop date period.
Professor Lillian (English) expressed her support in extending the
deadline of a drop date because of the tight timeframe.
Professor Glascoff (Health and Human Performance) asked if
the Committee had considered how this would affect financial aid for
students. Judi Bailey responded yes and
that those who have more feedback on their course success do better and have
less financial aid.
Professor Brown (Psychology) stated that as Chair of the
Student Academic Appellate Committee, there were many students who complained
because they did not have enough time to know their progress in the course
before dropping. The academic standard
has now been changed too which does aid the students.
C. Calendar
Committee
Professor Shanan Gibson (Business),
Chair of the Committee presented the proposed Summer 2010 – Spring 2011
University Calendars. She stated that the Committee had added in dates by which
students must apply for summer graduation, last day to pay fees without penalty
and a reference to “late” registration, drop, etc. The date for late drop was deleted where it
caused confusion. The final exam
schedule had also been addressed because of problems in the past due to
possible overlapping.
Professor Lillian (English)
expressed concerns with faculty meetings and registration all on one day. Professor Gibson stated that the rationale
was to not have faculty meetings on a Friday. Professor Lillian asked than why
not start on Tuesday. Professor Gibson
replied because the Committee could foresee a potential nightmare.
Professor Glascoff (Health and Human
Performance) drew attention to the dates for deadlines for applying for
graduation and asked how faculty could help the registrar’s office in this
effort. Judi Bailey (Enrollment Management)
asked all advisors to complete senior summaries prior to the last
semester. Professor Vail Smith (Health
and Human Performance) said that they send those things in but do not hear back
from the Registrar in a timely manner and that faculty need to actually receive
a confirmation. Professor Bailey agreed
and stated that she would speak with Angela Anderson, University Registrar.
Professor Gibson (Business) stated
that since the move of the University Commencement ceremony to Friday, the
Committee was unable to use Fridays as exam days, so that backs everything else
up a day and forces a start on Monday with a combination of activities.
Professor McKinnon (Interior Design
and Merchandising) asked if there would still be recognition ceremonies within
units in light of the budget crisis and now
Professor Matthews (Anthropology)
asked why are we graduating faculty on Friday and forcing units to hold
departmental ceremonies on Saturday when a lot of faculty will be gone. Provost Sheerer responded that it is being
done in an attempt to have more participation in the University commencement
and reverse the practice of more students attending the unit ceremonies and not
the University-wide commencement.
Following discussion, the proposed Summer 2010 –
Spring 2011 University Calendars were approved as presented. RESOLUTION
#09-18
D. Faculty
Governance Committee
Professor Puri Martinez (Foreign
Languages), Chair of the Committee, presented the proposed revisions
to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix
C. Personnel Policies and Procedures for the Faculty of ECU. These revisions
were proposed to make matters better for fixed term faculty.
Professor
Lillian (English) moved to remove Section V. Reemployment of Fixed Term Faculty
Members pending consultation with persons responsible for the hiring and
staffing decisions in every academic hiring unit within the University stating
that there are specifications in this section that may tie the hands of those
involved in the units and could be used unfortunately to push out faculty.
Professor Roberts (Philosophy) asked
what was the problem with the current language and wasn’t there at least one
administrator on the Fixed Term Faculty Task Force. Professor Martinez (Foreign
Languages and Literatures) stated that yes, there were 3 Vice Chancellors, Arts
and Sciences Dean, Philosophy Department Chair, fixed term faculty, and
Academic Standards Committee members participating on the Fixed Term Faculty
Task Force.
Professor Lillian (English) stated
that when faculty are hired for a position, it may not be suitable down the
road to place them in a tenure position.
With 57 fixed term faculty position in her unit, she tries to recognize
those with terminal degrees but not at the expense of those without terminable
degrees but performing well. She
expressed concern that this language in the manual could cause a class
situation because it may be too sweeping.
Professor Sprague (Physics) spoke
against the motion stating that the proposed language was meant to prevent the
abuse of fixed term faculty members.
Professor Glascoff (Health and Human Performance) stated that she saw no
language that precluded what Lillian was stating, particular the last line and
that the language was actually written to protect fixed term faculty against
abuse. Professor Martinez (Foreign Languages and Literatures) responded that
this recommendation came straight from the Fixed Term Task Force
recommendations, which was approved in 2006.
Professor Rigsby (Geology) spoke
against the motion and stated that the Task Force recommendations had been
vetted by the Task Force and top ECU administration and followed the General
Administration’s directives. Professor
Lillian (English) responded that she does support the notion of protecting
fixed term faculty but simple asked that we delay the consideration of this
particular section of Appendix C until more groups can take part in the
discussion. She stated that small things
could have big, big percussions.
Professor Gilliland (Medicine)
called the question and once the vote was held, the motion to amend the
proposed revisions to Appendix C failed.
Professor Fraley (Communication)
asked what the Chancellor had rejected earlier. Professor Martinez (Foreign
Languages and Literatures) replied that the two issues of concern for the
Chancellor were 1) reference to the word “contract” and that Academic Affairs
request to streamline the contact process and 2)
he wanted the code of conduct
included for all employees. For now, she
stated that all had agreed to remove that language until the code of conduct
for the University could be drafted .
Following discussion, the proposed revisions
to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix
C. Personnel Policies and Procedures for the Faculty of ECU were approved as
presented. RESOLUTION #09-19
Professor
Martinez then presented a proposed addition to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section V.
Procedure for Review of Notice of Non-Reappointment or
Non-Conferral of Permanent Tenure. She
stated that this one sentence had been accidentally left off of the document
presented to the
Professor Lillian (English) made a
motion to change the wording of the proposed sentence to read:
“Within 14 days before the hearing,
the complainant and respondent will submit documents and a list of witnesses,
and at least 7 days before the hearing, the complainant and respondent will
submit supporting documents to be used in the hearing.”
Professor Coleman (Medicine) asked
that the motion to change be split apart. Professor Tovey agreed and stated
that the body could handle the sentences included in the motion separately.
Professor Glascoff (Health and Human Performance) asked for a point of
clarification about the 14 days and stated wasn’t it consistent with other
procedures in the manual. Professor Martinez stated that the committee had
looked through all of the stated deadlines to make sure that the impact would
not be hurtful for either side.
Professor Rigsby (Geology) stated
that the Faculty Governance Committee had had many meetings with the various
appellate committee chairs and the current Hearing Committee members, along
with past Faculty Officers, and that this recommendation was based on the
recommendations of those closely involved in the appellate process.
Professor Jenks (History) asked if
the split in time requirements were meant to provide more time for the parties
involved in the hearing. Professor Martinez replied yes and that the Committee
had looked at everything prior to placing this on the agenda for consideration.
Professor Sprague (Physics) called
the question and the motion to revised the sentence failed.
Professor Niswander (Business)
offered a friendly amendment to add the following to the sentence “no later
than 14 calendar days before the hearing”.
The friendly amendment was accepted. Professor Wang (Geography) offered
another friendly amendment by adding “calendar” after 14. There was no objection.
Following
discussion, the proposed addition to ECU
Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section V.
Procedure for Review of Notice of
Non-Reappointment or Non-Conferral of Permanent Tenure was approved as
amended. RESOLUTION #09-20
E. Unit Code Screening Committee
Professor Andrew Morehead (Chemistry), Chair of the
Committee, presented the proposed revised Department
of Psychology Unit Code of Operation, Department
of Geography Unit Code of Operation, and Department
of English Unit Code of Operation. There
was no discussion and the revised unit codes were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #09-21
F. University
Curriculum Committee
Professor Jane Manner
(Education), a member of the Committee, presented the curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the February
26, 2009, meeting. There was no discussion and the curriculum
matters were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #09-22
Agenda Item VI. New Business
There was no new business to come before the body at this
time and the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Hunt McKinnon Lori
Lee
Secretary of the Faculty
Department of Interior Design and Merchandising
FACULTY SENATE
RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE MARCH 31, 2009, MEETING
09-16 Spring 2009 Graduation Roster,
including honors program graduates, subject to the complete of degree
requirements.
Disposition: Chancellor, Board of Trustees
09-17 Removal
of Foundation Credit “FC” designation from ALL BUT the following School of
Theatre and Dance courses: THEA 1000, -1010, -2001, -4066; DNCE 1001, -1002,
-1003, - 1011, -1012, -1013, -3014, -3703, -4044, -4045.
Disposition: Chancellor
09-18 Summer 2010 –
Spring 2011
University Calendars.
Disposition: Chancellor
09-19 Revisions to the
ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix C.
Personnel Policies and Procedures for the Faculty of ECU.
Disposition: Chancellor, Board of Trustees
09-20 Addition to ECU Faculty
Manual, Appendix D, Section V. Procedure for Review of Notice of
Non-Reappointment or Non-Conferral of Permanent Tenure, as follows:
V. Procedure for
Review Appeal of Notice of Non-Reappointment or Non-Conferral of
Permanent Tenure.
….
D. Procedures for the
Hearing.
1. Time and Date of Hearing
If the request for a hearing is validated, the committee
shall provide a complete copy of the request for a hearing to the
individuals named in the request for a hearing. The committee shall set the
time, date, and place for the hearing. The date for the hearing must be
within 30 42 calendar working
days of the notification to the complainant that the request for a hearing was
validated, except under unusual circumstances such as when a hearing request
is received during official university breaks and holidays and despite
reasonable efforts the hearing committee cannot be assembled. The
committee shall then notify the complainant, the respondents, the chair of the
faculty, and the chancellor, of the time, date, and place of the hearing.
At least 15 21 calendar working
days before the hearing, the complainant shall notify the committee, the
respondents, the chair of the faculty, and the chancellor of the identity of
the complainant’s advisor, if any, and whether or not the advisor is an
attorney. (“Attorney” is defined as anyone with a Juris Doctor, or other
recognized law degree, regardless of whether or not that person is licensed to
practice law in the State of
Disposition: Chancellor, Board of Trustees, UNC General
Administration
09-21 Revised Department
of Psychology Unit Code of Operation, Department
of Geography Unit Code of Operation, and Department
of English Unit Code of Operation.
Disposition: Chancellor
09-22 Curriculum
matters contained in the minutes of the February
26, 2009, meeting.
Disposition: Chancellor