FACULTY SENATE
FULL MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2008
The eighth regular meeting of the 2007-2008 Faculty Senate
was held on Tuesday, April 22, 2008, in the Mendenhall Student Center Great
Room.
Agenda Item I. Call to Order
Mark Taggart, Chair of the Faculty called the meeting to
order at 2:10 p.m.
Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes
of March
18, 2008,
were approved as distributed.
Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll Call
Senators absent were: Professors Levine (Medicine) Grymes
(Music), Rose (Nursing), and Chancellor Ballard.
Alternates present were: Professors
B. Announcements
The
Senate recognized a moment of silence prior to the start of the business for all
those within the University community who have died during the academic year.
A special thanks was extended to
Interim Vice Chancellor Phyllis Horns and Associate Vice Chancellor John Toller
for their efforts to provide the 2007/08 EPA Salary data online.
The Chancellor has approved the
following resolutions from the February 19, 2008, Faculty Senate meeting.
08-04 Report regarding the planning of a new PhD program in the
Department of Economics, a new
concentration
in Atlantic World History in the Department of History’s MA in History, a new
Graduate
Certificate in Geographic Information Science and Technology in the Department
of
Geography,
and a new Interdisciplinary Minor in Leadership Studies in the
Sciences.
Excerpt from Chancellor Ballard’s
letter: “While it is generally known
around campus that the academic planning rules from the General Administration
have changed, I do want to reinforce the necessity that all plans for new
programs address the state need for the program, the relevance of the program
to UNC Tomorrow, and the sources of revenue necessary to ensure excellence in
the new program.”
08-05 Revised Health Sciences Library Unit Code of Operations (with
exceptions).
Excerpt from Chancellor Ballard’s
letter: “is approved, with the exception
of Section VI.C (Unit Administrator Evaluations) and Section VI.D (University
Administrator Evaluations), which I am remanding to the Faculty Senate for its
resolution consistent with the Board of Trustees’ Appointment and Review of
Administrative Officers at ECU policy. I
look forward to your quick turnaround of this matter.”
08-06 Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the January 24,
2008, Committee Meeting
08-08 Series of transitional problems with the
Student Opinion of Instruction Survey (SOIS) results for Fall 2007
Unit administrators and all online
program coordinators are asked to please
complete the Distance Education Administrator’s Survey,
which can be accessed by the link below. This
survey was developed by
Faculty interested in periodically
receiving issues of The Chronicle of
Higher Education are asked to call the Faculty Senate office at 328-6537
and place their name on a list for distribution.
C. Steve
Ballard, Chancellor
Chancellor Ballard was out of town and unable to return in
time to attend the meeting.
D. Deirdre Mageean, Vice Chancellor
for Research and Graduate Studies
Vice Chancellor Mageean began her remarks by thanking the
Vice Chancellor Mageean then discussed the Carnegie
Classification on the
Professor Martinez (Foreign
Languages) stated that her specialty was medieval languages and that in
relation to the aggressive pursuit of the Carnegie Classification as an
E. Mark
Taggart, Chair of the Faculty
Professor Taggart stated that it had been an honor
for him to represent the faculty the past two years and to learn more about the
University. He stated that every day that he has been in the position, his
respect for ECU faculty have grown. It has been a pleasure to discover that
faculty members who, after joining ECU, become dedicated to providing students
with rich, distinctive undergraduate and graduate experiences. He noted that he appreciates the
contributions that each of the Senators have made to ECU, whether it was in the
classroom, the lab, or in service. ECU faculty members have taken our motto,
“to serve,” to heart, and their service through education, research and
creative activity, leadership and partnership remains exemplary. Faculty have
contributed in making ECU the wonderful place that it is. It doesn’t mean that the Faculty Senate’s
work is done, however. The Faculty
Senate will need to manage the expected increases in enrollment in the coming
years. Chair Taggart stated that we, the
faculty need to continue the discussion of planning for undergraduate and
graduate programs. We also need to
continue our conversation regarding the combination of the divisions of
academic affairs and student life. And,
in light of recent changes in policy, faculty members and the Faculty Senate
will need to continue its work on best practices in the hiring and evaluating
of ECU’s administrators.
Chair Taggart also took the opportunity to thank his
officers. He was grateful for the opportunity to work with Vice Chair Deedee
Glascoff, Secretary Marianna Walker, and Parliamentarian Dale
Knickerbocker. He also expressed thanks
to all of the faculty who had served on the various standing University
committees this past year. He thanked
them for their hard work and dedication to shared governance. Chair Taggart also gave a special thanks to
Lori Lee, who was invaluable in helping keep everything running seamlessly and
smoothly.
F. John Cope,
Faculty Assembly Delegate
Professor Cope provided the following written comments on
the April 4, 2008, Faculty Assembly meeting.
Chair’s
report: Dr. Brenda Killingsworth reported changes in the UNC Code dealing
with Post tenure review. After lengthy
discussions the document provided solid performance reviews and wa based around
faculty development planning at the unit level. She also talked about the
current push from GA to lower student costs for education. Specifically she
mentioned programs related to textbook costs.
A rental system was not currently being considered in the Report on the Cost of Textbooks
submitted with the Campus-based Tuition and Fee Increase Requests for
2008. However, the emphasis was
definitely on measures that might be effective in lowering the cost of
books. She talked about how a guaranteed
buy-back program might work and reminded all to submit textbook orders early in
order to allow bookstores to search for lower cost used books.
President
Erskine Bowles reiterated comments by Dr. Killingsworth regarding student costs
and the price of books in particular. He
was careful to note that the GA was being careful not to jump to conclusions
about undue costs but that they (he) was also very serious about examining all
components in the system toward a goal of holding the line against unnecessary
cost increases. He also restated the
issues relevant to submitting book orders in a timely manner, and noted that
this data was going to get close attention. President Bowles Spoke about how
the middle class was currently taking the brunt of the cost for education. In addition, President Bowles discussed three
basic areas of focus: The UNC Tomorrow
progress review, Budgetary Concerns, and Problems with the most recent Joint
Education Board meeting; which he felt was not making good progress toward
coordinating the K-12, Community College and UNC systems (link to full minutes http://uncfacultyassembly.northcarolina.edu/html/minutes/index.htm
for details).
As to the
budget, Need-based Education was considered the first priority with advancing
faculty pay being the second priority. Approximately $70 million was being
earmarked for a tentative 4% across the board raise, $72 million toward the
goal of reaching the 80th percentile rank across faculty, $7 million
for distinguished professorships, and about $5 million for equity cost
adjustments and discretionary money for retention etc.
Professor Cope referenced a
resolution passed by the Faculty Assembly on April 4, 2008, then offered a
similar one for Senate consideration:
Whereas, faculty input has been widely recognized
as necessary for the success of UNC Tomorrow.
Therefore be it resolved, that ECU’s Response to the UNC Tomorrow Report be
provided to the Faculty Senate prior to May 1, 2008.
Be it further resolved, that the Chair of the Faculty solicit a reaction to the
campus’ response to the UNC Tomorrow Final Report from the faculty of the
institution and submit it to Faculty Assembly by May 30, 2008.
Be it further resolved, that ECU’s Response and
Faculty Senate’s response be posted on ECU’s Faculty Senate website and the
Faculty Assembly website.
Be it further resolved, that the General
Administration actively involve the UNC Faculty Assembly Executive Committee as
it reviews and acts on these reports.
There was
no discussion and the proposed resolution on the UNC Tomorrow Report was
approved as presented. RESOLUTION #08-17
Professor Tovey (English) asked if
anyone knew if President Bowles was aware that the bookstore did not always
order the books in a timely fashion even though the faculty may get the orders
in early. Cope replied no.
Professor Robinson (Math) asked Dr.
Killingsworth what changes were discussed in Faculty Assembly about the
University post tenure review process.
Professor Killingsworth (Faculty Assembly Delegate, Business) stated
that GA approved what was sent forth regarding post tenure review. She reported
that they did not make any changes to what the faculty delegates proposed.
Professor Killingsworth reported that the faculty assembly is now working on
fixed-term faculty issues.
G. Question Period
Professor Jones (Criminal Justice) discussed a particular
website that asked for students to rate their professor(s) and wondered if
administrators were using the data on this to evaluate faculty members.
Professor Niswander (Business) stated that all of that was useless information
on the referenced website and that he would doubt any University administrator
utilized that data.
Professor Zoller (Art and Design)
stated that her unit had lost three graduate students this year due to the late
applications received and wondered if changes were now in place within the
Dr. Judi Bailey (Senior Executive Director of
Enrollment Management) stated that she thought that this issue had been
resolved. She stated that it was her understanding that there was a place on
Banner for an advisor and student to do this electronically. She stated that she would address this in her
staff meeting and talk with Angela Anderson (Registrar). She stated further that there were
constraints in how questions are received and then answered. Dr. Bailey stated that she would try to
resolve the issue. Some of the
questions/issues involve a retooling of the system, which cannot be resolved
during the registration period.
Professor McCammon (Health and Human
Performance) asked about length of time in processing senior summaries. He stated that the time line was too long. Dr. Judi Bailey (Senior Executive Director of
Enrollment Management) stated that she was aware of the problem and that Mary
Beth Corbin was now working with the Registrar to decrease the time and
increase the efficiency in processing senior summaries.
Professor Wang (Geography) asked Judy
Bailey about Banner registration and relayed the experience he had when he was
unable to assist a student in dropping the last course. Dr. Bailey stated the student may have to wait until the
next day to drop a course. Professor Wang (Geography) stated that that this did
not resolve the issue.
Professor Robinson (Math) asked
Interim Provost Sheerer about the rotational 5-year unit evaluation and
wondered why this was still not being done across campus. Interim
Provost Sheerer responded that Professor Weismiller (Medicine) and the SACS
review team would explore this issue, especially in the area of assessment.
Professor Weismiller (Medicine) responded that student outcomes, quality
assessment, and performance management assessment were all helpful in program
review.
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
Awards Committee
Professor Patricia Dragon (Academic
Library Services), Chair of the Committee, presented the Committee’s response
to the UNC Tomorrow Report. There was no discussion and the Committee’s
response to the UNC Tomorrow Report was approved as presented. RESOLUTION
#08-18
B. Academic
Standards Committee
Professor Linda Wolfe
(Anthropology), Chair of the Committee, first presented a substitute motion to
the Committee’s earlier proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix C. Section III. in reference to the
Student Opinion of Instruction Survey. Professor Vail-Smith (Health and Human
Performance) asked if these were in ranked order, or could a faculty member do
one or the other?
Professor Rigsby (Geology)
referenced the Faculty Governance Committee’s proposed substitute resolution
and asked why the Committee had now decided to go a different way. Professor
Bailey (Philosophy), member of the Academic Standards Committee, replied that
he had suggested, after hearing the discussion with the Faculty Governance
Committee to put the SOIS third in the order because of all of the problems,
and combined with peer reviewing and other methods that the units are currently
utilizing.
Professor Jesse (Nursing) moved to
have the wording changed to read: “The quality of teaching must be evaluated
using multiple methods that are listed in ranked order as follows:” Professor
Lillian (English) spoke against that idea.
Professor Dosser (Child Development and Family Relations) stated that
methods of peer review should not be used in this way. Professor Jenks
(History) stated that this was contradictory and that if faculty want multiple
methods to be utilized, then we should prioritize the list of multiple methods.
Professor Romack (Chemistry) stated that that may be inappropriate.
Professor Sprague (Physics) offered
a friendly amendment to delete the text that refers to lists in ranked order so
that it reads “The quality of teaching must be evaluated using multiple
methods.” Rigsby (Geology) spoke against
the friendly amendment. Professor Lillian (English) offered another friendly amendment
to change the wording to read “The quality of teaching must be evaluated using
multiple methods chosen from among the following:” Professor Zoller stated that
the friendly amendment did not work to address the issue being discussed. Niswander asked who would choose the methods.
Lillian responded that the same problem was there even without her amendment.
Professor Romack (Chemistry) stated that this was a good starting point with
nothing ranked higher than anything else. Professor Lillian’s friendly
amendment passed.
Professor Martinez (Foreign
Languages and Literatures) moved to have this report returned to the Academic
Standards Committee and Faculty Governance Committee for further consideration
by both committees. Professor Rigsby (Geology) stated that this was very much
needed and that the manual revision needed to be clear and state who makes the
choices of what methods to use, i.e. peer review is required for new
faculty. All of this needs to be reviewed
collaboratively with both the Academic Standards Committee and Faculty
Governance Committee. Professor
Gopalakrishnan (Technology and Computer Science) stated his support for
returning the item to the committee noting that units should not be allowed to
set their own procedures as referenced in “d. other procedures provided for in
unit codes”.
Following discussion, the proposed
revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual
were referred to the Academic Standards Committee and Faculty Governance
Committee for further review.
RESOLUTION #08-19
Professor Wolfe then presented a
proposal for posting Student Opinion of Instruction Survey results on the web.
Professor Sprague (Physics) stated that the unit administrator would be able to
obtain information for all faculty members, but not specific comments addressed
to the faculty members. Professor Stapleton (Education) asked if this
information could be downloaded. Professor Lillian (English) spoke against the
proposal stating that all of the data should be easily downloaded and
transferred to the faculty members’ annual evaluation and annual report form.
Professor Martinez offered an
amendment to the title to read: Proposal for faculty access to student opinion
of instruction survey information on the web. The motion passed. Professor Roberts (Philosophy) moved to amend
the first line editorially to hyphenate “turn-around”. Professor Robinson
(Math) asked what the summary report meant.
Wolfe replied that the summary report excluded any comments about the
faculty member.
Following discussion, the proposal
for posting Student Opinion of Instruction Survey results on the web was
approved as amended. RESOLUTION #08-20
Professor Wolfe then presented
revised Guidelines for Outcome Assessment of Foundations Courses. Professor
Lillian (English) offered an editorial amendment to add “her” to all “his”
references. There was no further
discussion and the revised Guidelines for Outcome Assessment of Foundations
Courses was approved as presented. RESOLUTION
#08-21
C. Admissions
and Retention Policies Committee
John Kerbs (Criminal Justice), Vice
Chair of the Committee, presented first a resolution on Undergraduate
Retention. Professor Jones (Criminal Justice) asked about the mandatory
attendance reference and mandatory study skills workshops and the enforcement
of this resolution. Study skills workshops are beneficial but it shouldn’t be
mandatory. COAD 1000 incorporates study
skills into that class. Professor Corbett (Geology) stated that more focus
should be on retaining students.
Professor Zoller (Art and Design) asked about the goal for the retention
rate increase by Fall 2011.
Professor Lillian (English) stated
that she liked to see a report’s references and that she had not seen any
research on why ECU’s students leave. Does such research exist and if so she would
like to see what ECU students need so that resources can be focused on those
particular issues. Professor McCammon (Health and Human Performance) stated
that a problem he is aware of is the time between classes is so limited that
students do not have time to get from Minges to Brewster, etc. which causes
students to miss classes.
Professor Wilson (Sociology) spoke
in favor of the resolution on Undergraduate Retention stating that introductory
students don’t have study skills and that this effort would be welcomed in
order to provide students with what they needed to be successful. He stated
that ECU is going to have to help students in dealing with the various
first-year college problems or misconceptions.
For example, he stated that he changed his attendance policy, to
actually have one, because students were interpreting that if a faculty member
did not have an attendance policy, that they need not attend class.
Professor Vail Smith (Health and
Human Performance) stated that workshops were good ahead of time, when we can
flag their records but where does it end.
It will only become perfunctory to the students if we continue to just
front-load student activities.
Professor Sharer (English) stated
that in reference to the attendance policy, which fell under the purview of the
Admission and Retention Policies Committee, revisions to the current University
attendance policy were needed in order to gain broader faculty support of
actively promoting and encouraging class attendance. The committee will try to address this in the
Fall with a goal of emphasizing the importance of class attendance.
Professor Jones (Criminal Justice)
moved to delete the word “mandatory” from the motion and spoke about the two
meanings of “mandatory” and stated that the University should find out which
students need the mandatory study skills workshop. The motion passed.
Professor Schenarts (Medicine)
stated that there was no data referenced in the resolution to address key data
on ECU students that would make the efforts more specific. He asked about
distance education and the need for additional support for this growing
population.
Professor Robinson (Math) stated
that he got into trouble for having a remedial program in Mathematics although
the students performed better later, particularly in algebra. He stated that the unit was discouraged in
offering this program and were told to reduce the passing score on the
placement test, allowing students to be exempt from remedial classes due to the
lower required score on placement tests.
Professor Martinez (Foreign
Languages and Literatures) stated that this resolution did not address
admission standards and it was impossible to talk about retention without
talking about admission. Professor Tovey (English) stated that the English
department had two specific programs designed to support students.
Professor Brown (Psychology) spoke
in favor of the motion, stating that these issues affect faculty of all
disciplines and that although the resolution doesn’t address admissions it does
address attendance and study needs.
Students currently have a good academic support system and faculty
should encourage more students to utilize the opportunities already available.
Professor Felts (Health and Human
Performance) asked about requiring freshman students to live on campus and did
the University have actually enough dorms for this. Professor Sprague called
the question. Following discussion, the
resolution on Undergraduate Retention was approved as amended. RESOLUTION
#08-22
D. Continuing
and Career Education Committee
Jocelyn Nelson (Music), Chair of the
Committee, presented the Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow Report. There was no discussion and the committee’s report
was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #08-23
E. Educational
Policies and Planning Committee
Dale Knickerbocker (Foreign
Languages), Chair of the Committee, presented first a Request for a new
Concentration Area in Theatre for Youth, School of Theatre and Dance, College
of Fine Arts and Communication; Request for a Name Change of the Minor being
offered, from “Management of Recreation and Facilities Services” (MRFS) to
“Recreation and Park Management” (RPM), Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies,
College of Health and Human Performance; Notification of an Intent to Plan a
Master of Science in Sustainable Tourism, North Carolina Center for Sustainable
Tourism, Division of Research and Graduate Studies; Request to add Graduate
Certificate programs in Health Care Administration and Health Informatics
within the Department of Health Services & Information Management’s,
College of Allied Health Sciences; Request to add new certificates in Global
Understanding and Global Understanding with Distinction within International
Studies’, College of Arts and Sciences; Request
to change the title of the Ph.D. in
Bioenergetics to Bioenergetics and Exercise Science within the Department of
Exercise and Sports Science, College of Health and Human Performance; Request
to add a Graduate Certificate in Deaf-Blindness within the Department of
Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education; Request to establish new M.A.
concentrations in English Studies, Creative Writing, Linguistics, Literature,
Multicultural and Transnational Literatures, Rhetoric and composition,
Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages [TESOL], and Technical and
Professional Communication within the Department
of English, College of Arts and Sciences; Request to establish new
minors in Architectural Design Technology and Mechanical Design Technology
within the Department of Technology Systems, College of Technology and Computer
Science; Request to establish a minor
in Recreational Therapy within the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies,
College of Health and Human Performance.
There were no questions and the academic unit requests were
approved as presented.
RESOLUTION #08-24
Professor Knickerbocker then
presented the Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow Report. There were no
questions and the committee’s report was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #08-25
F. Faculty
Governance Committee
Puri
Professor Martinez then presented a
substitute motion to the Committee’s earlier proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part XII.B.2.a. to
also include a revision to Part XII.B.3.a.
by adding “tenure” and “promotion” to clarify what the vote is on. Professor Niswander (Business) asked what
does “vote” mean, then offered an editorial amendment to include vote “on
tenure” and vote “on promotion” to Part XII.
Professor Zoller (Art and Design)
asked if in large academic units like hers, could the unit decide to allow a
smaller group to get together to draft the cumulative report, and then present
it for approval to all eligible to vote. Professor Sharer (English) asked who approved
the evaluation report and would the committee vote on the wording of the
cumulative evaluation and the actual vote on the faculty member.
Professor Lillian (English) asked
when did the cumulative letter change from being a draft to a final report.
Professor Sharer (English) stated that she thought that the term “evaluation”
was confusing. Professor Walker (Allied
Health Sciences) called the question. Following discussion, the substitute
motion was approved as amended. RESOLUTION #08-27
G. Unit Code Screening Committee
Garris Conner (Nursing), Chair of the Committee, first
presented proposed revised Communication and Medicine Unit Codes of
Operation and a new Department of Hospitality Management Unit Code of
Operation. There was no discussion and the unit codes were approved as
presented. RESOLUTION #08-28
Professor Conner then presented a proposed revised Health
Sciences Library Unit Code of Operation. There
was no discussion and the unit code was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #08-29
Professor Conner then presented proposed revisions to the General
Guidelines for Writing and Revising A Unit Code of Operation. There was no
discussion and the proposed revisions were approved as presented.
RESOLUTION #08-30
H. University
Budget Committee
Ralph Scott (Academic Library
Services), Chair of the Committee, presented the Committee’s response to the UNC
Tomorrow Report. Professor Jenks (History) stated that he was disturbed by the
focus on scholarship of engagement and did not want money diverted from
traditional education. VC Mageean stated that she was not requesting or
planning to divert money from other funds to cover something else. The plans
were to have seed money to jumpstart them and that the scholarship of
engagement should be external funding and not cause anyone to have to divert
money away.
Professor Lillian (English) moved to
insert the “Faculty Senate request” in all four resolution texts. There was no
objection. Professor Rigsby (Geology)
moved to change the second resolve statement about developing a reward model,
because it refers to promotion and tenure, to read “that the Faculty Senate in
cooperation with the Chancellor and Board of Trustees”. There was no objection.
Professor Sharer (English) asked
about the reference to the $50 million and wondered if the money shifting from
that campaign would affect the scholarships, etc. set up for students.
Professor Roberts (Philosophy) spoke
against resolution and echoed the concerns on the scholarship of
engagement. He stated that, having
reviewed NC State’s approved application, this was taking the University outside
of traditional standard of scholarship. VC Mageean stated that this discussion
was getting away from the UNC Tomorrow Report and the response.
Professor Brown (Psychology) stated
that he encouraged the development of initial funding but that the University
needed to work directly with VC Mageean and not through the Chancellor and
Board of Trustees.
Chair Rigsby (Geology) moved to
delete the second resolve referencing $50 million and change the resolve above
that to read that the Faculty Senate encourages the Chancellor and Board of
Trustees to allocate initial funding for seed grants. The amendments were
accepted as presented.
Professor Roberts (Philosophy)
stated that the Carnegie designation was a confirmation that a particular
institution indeed engages in scholarship engagement. If so, doesn’t this mean
that if the UNC Tomorrow Report references it, then we really have the Carnegie
designation. Professor Brown (Psychology) stated that the Scholarship of
Engagement was not equal to the Carnegie designation.
Following discussion, the amended
University Budget Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow Report was approved
as amended. RESOLUTION #08-31
Professor Scott then presented a proposed resolution on the
Transparency of the so-called “BD-119”. It was moved to delete the word “staff”
from the resolution. There was no objection and the resolution was approved as
amended. RESOLUTION #08-32
I. University
Curriculum Committee
Jane Manner
(Education), a member of the Committee, presented first the curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the March 27,
2008 and April 10, 2008 committee meetings. There was no discussion and the
curriculum matters were approved as presented.
RESOLUTION #08-33
Professor Manner then presented the
Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow Report. There was no discussion and
the report was approved as presented. RESOLUTION
#08-34
J. University Environment
Committee
Charles Hodson
(Medicine), Chair of the Committee, presented the Committee’s response to the
UNC Tomorrow Report. Bill Koch, a member of the Committee, spoke on the summary of energy
conservation and other sustainability initiatives, in addition to the new
sustainability website under environmental health and safety and the new grant
received to do a “retro” on the Technology and Computer Science building to
check the sensors in the system. Mr.
Koch stated that the University was engaged in energy conservation and had
plans to decrease the campus use of petroleum.
Following discussion, the report
was approved as presented. RESOLUTION
#08-35
Agenda Item VI. New Business
There was no new business to come before the body at this
time. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Marianna Walker Lori
Lee
Secretary of the Faculty Administrative
Officer
College of Allied Health Sciences Faculty Senate
FACULTY SENATE
RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE APRIL 22, 2008, MEETING
08-18 Academic Awards Committee’s
response to the UNC Tomorrow Report, as follows:
As requested by the Chair of the Faculty, the Academic
Awards Committee at our meeting on March 6, 2008, discussed the UNC Tomorrow
Report and formulated this response to the areas of the report that were
related to our charge.
Our discussion centered on recommendation 5.3:
“UNC should lead the campuses in a refinement and adjustment
of the tenure, promotion, and incentive system to place greater value on
faculty involvement and engagement in applied research and outreach that will
enhance the state’s competitiveness without decreasing support for teaching,
basic research and scholarship.”
Viewing our committee as part of the incentive system for
faculty, we had a discussion of how the scholarship of teaching, learning, and
engagement is evaluated in the existing awards.
The committee agreed that the creation of a new award(s) for
scholarship of engagement (in the sense of applied research and teaching)
should be pursued in order to give faculty incentive to be productive in this
area. However, in order to preserve
support for basic research and scholarship, the committee felt that existing
criteria for research awards should remain as they are.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-19 Referred the
proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty
Manual, Appendix C. Section III. Evaluation in reference to the Student
Opinion of Instruction Survey to the Academic Standards Committee and Faculty
Governance Committee for further consideration.
Disposition: Academic Standards Committee and Faculty
Governance Committee
08-20 Proposal for faculty access to Student Opinion of Instruction
Survey information on the Web, as follows:
In an effort toward conservation and to facilitate reporting the results of the
SOIS, IPRE would like to implement online access to SOIS data for faculty
members. This would allow a more secure way of handling this sensitive
information and provide easy access for faculty to review the results for all
their courses in one location and ultimately across numerous semesters.
Providing online access to the results would also allow for a quicker
turn-around time thus enabling faculty to utilize the feedback in a more timely
fashion.
The most important issue is safeguarding access to the results. For Fall 2008, the instructor reports (and
comments) would be available for access online so that instructors can see
their own results and comments. The supervisor would be enabled to access the
instructor reports only (but not the comments). In the future summary reports
would also be accessible online to the appropriate administrator with
comparable security safeguards in place.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-21 Guidelines
for Outcome Assessment of Foundations Courses
Disposition: Chancellor
08-22 Resolution
on Undergraduate Retention
Disposition: Chancellor
08-23 Continuing and Career Education Committee’s response to the UNC
Tomorrow Report, as follows:
According to its charge, the Continuing and Career Education Committee
addresses issues relating to 4.1 (Global readiness), 4.2 (Citizen access to
higher education), and 4.3 (Improving public education) of the UNC Tomorrow
document.
This statement specifically addresses the following points:
4.2.1 (Citizen access to higher education)
The Continuing and Career Education Committee takes pride in
4.2.3 (UNC as a model for accommodating persons with
disabilities)
4.3 (Improving public education)
ECU’s Office of Teacher Education has established the Walter
and Daisy Carson Latham Clinical Schools Network. This is a partnership between
Disposition: Chancellor
08-24 Request for a new Concentration Area in Theatre for Youth, School of
Theatre and Dance, College of Fine Arts and Communication; Request for a Name
Change of the Minor being offered, from “Management of Recreation and
Facilities Services” (MRFS) to “Recreation and Park Management” (RPM),
Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, College of Health and Human
Performance; Notification of an Intent to Plan a Master of Science in
Sustainable Tourism, North Carolina Center for Sustainable Tourism, Division of
Research and Graduate Studies; Request to add Graduate Certificate programs in
Health Care Administration and Health Informatics within the Department of
Health Services & Information Management’s, College of Allied Health
Sciences; Request to add new certificates in Global Understanding and Global
Understanding with Distinction within International Studies’, College of Arts
and Sciences; Request to change the
title of the Ph.D. in Bioenergetics to
Bioenergetics and Exercise Science within the Department of Exercise and Sports
Science, College of Health and Human Performance; Request to add a Graduate
Certificate in Deaf-Blindness within the Department of Curriculum and
Instruction, College of Education; Request to establish new M.A. concentrations
in English Studies, Creative Writing, Linguistics, Literature, Multicultural
and Transnational Literatures, Rhetoric and composition, Teaching
English to Speakers of Other Languages [TESOL], and Technical and Professional
Communication within the Department of
English, College of Arts and Sciences; Request to establish new minors
in Architectural Design Technology and Mechanical Design Technology within the
Department of Technology Systems, College of Technology and Computer Science; Request to establish a minor in Recreational
Therapy within the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, College of
Health and Human Performance.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-25 Educational Policies and Planning Committee’s response to the UNC
Tomorrow Report, as follows:
The Educational Policies and Planning Committee (EPPC) considers relevant to
our charge part 5.2 of the UNC Tomorrow Report, which states the need to
“streamline the academic planning process”, “eliminate unnecessary
duplication”, and create seamless UNC articulation or "integration"
of course credit.
The EPPC
believes that curriculum and program development is a faculty responsibility.
Any system-wide changes to the planning process must reflect that principle. In
addition, if programs are to be reviewed for elimination on grounds of
productivity or duplication, the EPPC will need to draft formal guidelines on
what criteria other than productivity statistics will be used to draft our
recommendation to the chancellor on such matters. Furthermore, any articulation
of course credit or degree requirements must be achieved through faculty
committees, respecting each institution's mission and the strengths and goals
of individual academic units.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-26 Faculty Governance Committee’s response to the UNC
Tomorrow Report, as follows:
We have determined the extent of our
involvement in response to the UNC
Tomorrow Report according to the timeline that we received when asked to
write the present document. It should be noted that according to that timeline,
Faculty Governance should be/have been involved in the following:
Phase I
·
Preliminary
Information for Development of a 10-Year Enrollment Plan—Due February 2008
·
Final
Draft on 10-Year Enrollment Plan—Due March 2008
·
Report
on Plans to Respond to Outreach and Engagement Recommendations—Due May 2008
·
Report
on Proposed Changes to Internal Policies and Processes—Due May 2008
Phase II
·
Report
on Faculty and Staff Recruitment and Retention—Due December 2008
·
Report
on Review of Tenure and Rewards Systems—Due December 2008
Impact on Faculty Governance
Committee Charge
The UNC Tomorrow Report does not affect our charge. However, it will
have an impact on the management of the committee’s responsibilities and
workload. The tight timelines established for Phases I and II for responses to
the report clearly indicate that there will be short reaction/action times. In
order for Faculty Governance to respond adequately to the request from General
Administration and our own campus, the following will be necessary:
1.
Involvement
of Faculty Governance in all the stages of the creation of the different
reports. However, as indicated
below, Faculty Governance has not been involved in any of the activities that
ECU has conducted to regarding Stage I.
If this is not resolved, then it will not be possible to fulfill step
number 2.
2.
Timely
response from Faculty Governance in the drafting of policies. If Faculty
Governance does not respond in a timely manner policies could be developed or
implemented without Faculty Governance, or even without seeking Faculty Senate
approval.
Faculty Governance Committee and
Phase I
·
10-Year
enrollment plan
While the Faculty Governance Committee, per se has not been involved in the
Strategic Enrollment Management Task Force, the Chair of the Faculty and
multiple other faculty members have been involved and are expected to provide
the appropriate linkage and communication with the Faculty Governance
Committee. As this Task Force proceeds, matters related to faculty workload;
retention and recruitment of faculty; promotion and tenure; and balance of
fixed term and tenure-track faculty will be of concern to the Faculty
Governance Committee.
·
UNC
Tomorrow Report on Outreach and Engagement Recommendations
Vice Chancellor Mageean informed Faculty Governance of the need for our
committee to work on this during the Fall of 2007. While this happened
regarding the “
·
Proposed
changes to Internal Policies and Processes
We anticipate that the Faculty Governance Committee will be contacted very soon
and will be involved in any aspects of this report. The Chair of the Faculty
and multiple other faculty members have been involved and are expected to
provide the appropriate linkage and communication with the Faculty Governance
Committee. We are aware of the existence
of a Task Force on University Policies and Procedures, but we have not been
asked to cooperate with it. The future involvement of Faculty Governance in
this issue was detailed in the February 18 Joint statement by Chancellor
Ballard and Chair of the Faculty Taggart. Point 3.a. reads: “We share a
commitment that faculty leaders, the Governance Committee, and top
administrators will work together expeditiously to develop a University
Policies and Procedures manual that will provide clear guidance on areas in
which policies are needed to ensure that the ECU operates effectively and
transparently.” Point 3.b reads: “The Governance committee will participate in
development of campus policies that are pertinent to faculty responsibilities.”
Our involvement was further reaffirmed in the Faculty Senate meeting of March 19,
2008 when Chair Taggart, with the consent of Chancellor Ballard, clarified that
all policies pertinent to faculty responsibilities would go to Faculty
Governance and then to Faculty Senate for approval. We expect that Chancellor
Ballard (or his representative) will provide us with a timeline and a list of
duties in the near future.
Faculty Governance Committee and
Phase II
·
Faculty
and staff recruitment and retention
The Faculty Governance Committee will be involved in generating this
report. Faculty Governance has already addressed the following areas:
Recruitment and Retention of Faculty - Faculty Governance has actively
participated in the past in workshops and information sessions regarding
recruitment and retention of faculty, and we will continue to do so. We,
together with the Chief Diversity Officer, are in the early stages of planning
a workshop(s) for hiring diverse faculty. While participation in these
workshops is not part of our charge, we view it as essential in maintaining one
of the basics tenets of shared governance: hiring of faculty is a faculty
responsibility.
Joint Appointments - Potentially,
revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual
regarding joint appointments could have an impact on faculty recruitment and
retention. Faculty Governance has been working on this since Spring of 2006. In
Fall of 2007 we formed a sub-committee to study the matter. Due to our heavy
agenda, the sub-committee has not been able to report. This academic year, but
joint appointments remain in our agenda for next academic year.
·
Report
on Review of Tenure and Reward Systems
Please see Outreach and Engagement Recommendations in Phase I regarding this
issue and Faculty Governance. This semester we added to our agenda for the Fall
2008 revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual
regarding post-tenure review.
Conclusion
The UNC Report will have no effect
on our charge, but underlines the need to speed our work regarding the Tenure
and Reward Systems, especially regarding Outreach and Engagement. The committee
accepts this responsibility and looks forward to active participation.
Disposition: Chancellor
#08-27 Revisions to ECU
Faculty Manual, Part XII.B.2.a. and Part XII.B.3.a. to read as follows:
(addition
noted in bold print, deletion noted
in strikethrough):
“The Personnel Action Dossier shall include the following
items:
A. ….
B. Recommendations
1. For reappointment:
…….
2. For tenure:
a. One cumulative
evaluation in narrative form of the candidate's teaching, research, service,
and any other relevant duties, prepared by the unit Tenure Committee. A draft
of this cumulative evaluation, to be completed after the candidate turns in the PAD,
should be available for discussion by the entire Tenure committee before the
vote.
A cumulative evaluation in narrative form of the candidate’s
teaching, research, service, and any other relevant duties, prepared by the
unit Tenure Committee.
b. A
cumulative evaluation in narrative form of the candidate’s teaching, research,
service, and any other relevant duties, prepared by the unit administrator.
c.
Unit
Tenure Committee's recommendation, signature of the chair of the unit Personnel
Committee, and date
d.
Unit
administrator’s recommendation, signature, and date
e.
Dean's
recommendation, signature, and date
f.
Provost/Vice
Chancellor’s recommendation, signature, date
3. For promotion:
a.
One cumulative evaluation in
narrative form of the candidate's teaching, research, service, and any other
relevant duties, prepared by the unit Promotion Committee. A draft of this cumulative
evaluation, to be completed after the candidate turns in the PAD, should be
available for discussion by the entire Promotion committee before the vote.
A cumulative evaluation in narrative form
of the candidate’s teaching, research, service, and any other relevant duties,
prepared by the unit Promotion Committee.
b. ……..
Disposition: Chancellor
08-28 Revised School
of Communication and School
of Medicine Unit Codes of Operation and new Department
of Hospitality Management Unit Code of Operation.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-29 Revised
Health Sciences Library Unit Code of Operation.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-30 Revised General
Guidelines for Writing and Revising A Unit Code of Operation.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-31 University Budget Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow Report,
as follows:
WHEREAS, the Scholarship of Engagement is a key component of the
WHEREAS,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate request
that the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees develop an adequate funding and
reward model for the Scholarship of Engagement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate encourages
the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees to allocate an initial funding of
$300,000 annually for Seed Grants for Engagement ($30K to 10 faculty).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate, in
cooperation with the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees, develop a reward
model for those who participate in the Scholarship of Engagement (with emphasis
on tenure, promotion and merit as the primary reward mechanism).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate request the
Chancellor and the Board of Trustees develop a better tracking model so that
Disposition: Chancellor
08-32 WHEREAS, the so-called “BD-119” has provided EPA employees of
WHEREAS, this information is a public record; and
WHEREAS, this was made available in the past to EPA
employees; and
WHEREAS, this information has not yet been provided on a
stable platform for the academic year 2007-2008; and
WHEREAS, this information for 2007-2008 was made briefly
available to some staff and not other the week of March 17th, 2008;
and
WHEREAS, a key component of confidence in an administration
is transparency of information.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate, through
its delegates to the University of North Carolina Faculty Assembly, urge the
President of the University of North Carolina to request the Chancellors of the
17 constituent institutions of the University of North Carolina make available
to their EPA employees the salary information that was formerly released in the
so-called “BD-119” in a timely and transparent manner. It is requested that the
President should also note that such timely and transparent release is a key
component of confidence in the administration.
Disposition: UNC Faculty Assembly
08-33 Curriculum
matters contained in the minutes of the March
27, 2008 and April
10, 2008, committee meetings.
Disposition: Chancellor
08-34 University Curriculum Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow
Report, as follows:
There are a number of items in the UNC Tomorrow Report which
relate to the structure and development of curricula in the programs of
We would consider it worthy and consistent with our best
purposes to include in our considerations, i.e. to ask faculty to include in
their justifications, some information about how their various proposals
address these stated objectives of the UNC
Tomorrow Initiative (when in their final form they may be elevated to the
level of University policy). In recent years, an important feature of the
University Curriculum Committee’s operations has been the establishment of our
Liaison Program, whereby each academic unit has a Liaison trained to optimize
proposals for curriculum changes and to facilitate their passage through the
Committee. It occurs to us that, in support of these objectives, we could
inculcate an appreciation for these long-term objectives in the training of the
liaisons, and incorporate an opportunity for a statement of having considered
those objectives in the justification requested of the faculty. In addition,
the UCC has been working alongside the GCC and the Office of Academic Programs
to provide regular curriculum development workshops for interested faculty.
These workshops might also be a place where additional training and focus could
be given to the UNC Tomorrow Initiative.
By working with the liaisons and continuing in the development of the
workshops, the development of curriculum at ECU can continue in a “bottom up”
manner while reinforcing the goals of the UNC
Tomorrow Initiative.
Disposition:
Chancellor
08-35 University Environment
Committee’s response to the UNC Tomorrow Report, as follows:
The University Environment Committee recommends that ECU pursue the following
initiatives, which accord with the recommendations of the UNC Tomorrow Report, pp. 32-34, § 4.6 to 4.6.3 "Our
Environment":
1. Approve and
distribute to students, faculty, and staff the sustainability and conservation
survey created by Dr. Shereif Sheta and Dr. Robert Chin.
2. Develop a website
detailing sustainability practices and initiatives at ECU and feature this site
prominently on the ECU homepage.
3. Create an Office
of Campus Sustainability under the direction of Facilities Services and hire a
full-time sustainability coordinator with administrative staff to publicize existing
practices and coordinate new initiatives. This Office should perform the
following:
·
promote
energy and natural resource conservation, as well as energy efficiency projects
·
promote
public awareness of conservation issues, along with campus conservation
initiatives
·
serve
as a liaison with the City of
conservation and the environment
·
help
plan and design energy-efficient buildings and transportation links
·
promote
recycling across campus
·
educate
the university community about how to reduce energy and resource consumption
·
relay
student staff and faculty suggestions to university departments that can
implement changes
o
periodically
report on conservation, energy efficiency improvement efforts, recycling
efforts, and
other sustainability efforts to the
university and the public
·
maintain
a sustainability website to educate the university community about
sustainability
4. Establish a
Sustainability Committee to focus on education and research. This committee
should promote the inclusion of sustainability issues in the curriculum, as
well as faculty research in areas related to sustainability. The committee
should monitor efforts in both areas and report progress to the university.
5. Continue to
replace old windows, doors, etc. and to insulate campus buildings to decrease
campus energy consumption.
6. Construct all new
buildings to at least LEED-silver standards.
7. Purchase more hybrid
buses and hybrid or electric maintenance/parking vehicles.
8. Work with
Greenville Utilities to install wind and solar power generation on campus in
order to supply the relatively small amounts of electricity needed to heat
water and operate lights.
9. Preserve existing
mature trees by designating a list of significant trees across the ECU Campus,
thereby ensuring that they will not be removed or destroyed in future
construction projects.
10. Encourage Aramark and ECU Dining Services to purchase
local,
11. Include plans for expansion of sidewalks, bike lanes, and
greenways in the upcoming ECU Campus Master Plan. ECU planners should maintain
contact with the City of
12. Set up more recycling bins around campus to encourage
recycling.
13. Explore the possibility of recycling water from sinks
into toilets to conserve water, at least in new buildings that will be
constructed.
14. Launch a campus-wide initiative to reduce use and waste
of plastic bottles.
Disposition: Chancellor