EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE
FULL MINUTES OF JANUARY 29, 2002
The fifth regular meeting of the 2001-2002 Faculty Senate was held on Tuesday, January 29, 2002, in
the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room.
Agenda Item I. Call to Order
Bob Morrison, Chair of the Faculty called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m.
Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of December 4, 2001, were approved as distributed.
Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll Call
Senators absent were: Professors Albright (Allied Health Sciences), Schumacher (Economics), Sugar (Education), Watson (English), Toppen (Industry and Technology), Vice Chancellor Feldbush, and Past Chair of the Faculty, Killingsworth.
Alternates present were: Professors Tovey for Wilentz (English), Saad for Ciesielski (Industry and Technology), Gilliland for Engel (Medicine), Worthington for Wooden (Medicine), Pokorny for Tranbarger (Nursing) and Jones for Bass (Social Work and Criminal Justice Studies).
B. Announcements
- The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the December 4, 2001, Faculty Senate meeting:
01-35 Procedures for the Annual Lifetime and Five-Year University Research/Creative Activity Awards
01-38 Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of October 11, 2001 University Curriculum Committee meeting.
· The Faculty Senate office and both the Joyner Library and Health Sciences Library have the current 2001-2002 Academic Salary Listing on file for interested faculty.
- A complete listing of the 2002-2003 Research/Creative Activity Grants awarded for this academic year has been made available for each Senator at his or her table.
- Thanks to the following Faculty Senate Alternates who agreed to serve as Tellers: Festus Eribo (Communication and Broadcasting), Dale Hutchinson (Anthropology) and Dale Knickerbocker (Foreign Languages and Literatures).
- The Committee on Committees has been charged to seek volunteers to serve on the various academic,
appellate, administrative, Board of Trustees, and student union committees. Volunteer information,
with brief descriptions of these University committees, have been e-mailed to all faculty. Faculty are strongly
encouraged to participate in this component of shared faculty governance and return the volunteer form by
Monday, February 11, 2002.
- In order to have curriculum changes included in the 2002-2003 Undergraduate Catalog, the Committee Chair (cucsubmissions@mail.ecu.edu) must receive the information no later than February 14, 2002. Final curriculum matters for inclusion in the catalog will be considered at the February 28, 2002, University Curriculum Committee meeting.
- Letters concerning unit elections for the 2002-2003 Faculty Senate representation have been mailed to unit
code administrators. In accordance with the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix A, elections are to be held
during the month of February. Please call the Faculty Senate office if you have any questions.
· The Faculty Information Technology Committee has agreed to get involved in the selection process of faculty proposals for grants funded by Student Technology fees. This involvement will require developing granting guidelines and selection procedures. The Committee on Committees will be asked to revise the Committee’s charge to include this new responsibility. Further information on the availability of such grants will be announced at a later date.
C. William Muse, Chancellor
Chancellor Muse began by updating his activities since the last Senate meeting. His Hometown Tours continued with a trip to New Bern, where Tom Bayliss, a member of ECU’s Board of Trustees, is Mayor, and was helpful in arranging meetings and facilitating discussions. Wilmington will be the next Hometown Tour. Chancellor Muse spent two days in Charlotte, hosted by UNC-Charlotte Chancellor Jim Woodward. During this visit he met with NC Speaker of the House Black and former UNC President Spangler. Chancellor Muse has continued his campus visits with Eastern AHEC and the School of Music. He stated that these visits are giving him a good picture of what we accomplish here. One topic in the news in the last few weeks is the possibility of tuition increases next fall. The Board of Trustees discussed this at length at their last meeting. It looks as though campus-based tuition increases will be considered at the March meeting of the Board of Governors. He expressed concern that this may be the only source of additional revenue increase for next year because of the state economy. A major story in the Raleigh News and Observer stated that we may be facing a 900 million dollar deficit this year, so the reversion may go up to 4%. Faculty hiring and compensation will probably have to come through tuition increase. As before a substantial portion will go into student financial aid to hold harmless those students who are on financial aid so they won’t be hurt by the increase. Dr. Laura Lindsay (who will chair the SACS visit) reported that her preliminary visit went exceptionally well. Chancellor Muse stated that things are in order for the visit and thanked Brenda Killingsworth and the SACS Steering Committee for their hard work. The report is about ready to be mailed. He also asked that departments continue to look at assessment issues; we need to be able to show as much progress as possible by the time of the visit. Chancellor Muse stated that we have completed the NCAA self-study and thanked Jim Smith and the NCAA Self-study Steering Committee for their work. Chancellor Muse hoped that all had the opportunity to read about the administrative changes being implemented this spring. Search committees have been appointed for both positions (Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs and Provost/Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs). Both committees have met and begun their work. Early registration will occur during the week of both the SACS and NCAA visits. Early registration has been extended to help avoid computer overload. Chancellor Muse asked for special cooperation during this busy time. Finally, as customary, the annual report on faculty employment categories was provided to each Senator.
Hall (Psychology) asked if the Chancellor had any comments on a report in the Raleigh Sunday paper about the possibility of extending the Research Triangle geographically and in terms of industrial composition. Chancellor Muse noted that the original Research Triangle focused on technology; incorporating more traditional industry would help diversify the economic base. He was not certain about how the boundaries were drawn, including several counties east of I-95, but not Pitt County. He added that we need to carve own niche and determine what our goals for economic development should be.
Ferrell (History) stated that a colleague asked if there is a better way to communicate major decisions to faculty other than through the newspaper. Chancellor Muse stated that he would appreciate suggestions and would look into a possible email network for faculty as suggested by Ferrell.
Schneider (Business) stated that as the university has grown some faculty and students have wondered about the size of the Career Services Office. Only a small handful of people are trying to serve 19000 students. We really need people who can be on the road soliciting employers. Schneider asked if the placement function could be expanded to adequately serve the study body, especially since placement should be an important outcome measure. Chancellor Muse acknowledged that we should all want to help our students find employment and stated that he would look at the patterns in terms of utilization, success rate, and future needed improvement.
D. Bob Thompson, Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
VC Thompson stated that teaching grants were signed this morning. He was able to put a little more money in this year than last year. He also thanked faculty for their tremendous work on the assessment issue. The comments from Jim and Karen Nichols were very positive; they believe that we are in good position to demonstrate our efforts. There have been many positive comments from units and faculty. One item in the campus-based tuition budget is about 100K to help cover the cost of assessment.
Ferrell (History) asked who chairs the Provost/VCAA search committee and if faculty will have the opportunity to interview candidates. Chancellor Muse responded that VC Feldbush is chairing the committee and that 3-5 candidates will be brought to campus to be interviewed.
E. Bob Morrison, Chair of the Faculty
Professor Morrison reported on the Board of Trustees meeting on December 7th, 2001. The Academic Affairs committee had questioned the number of schools and colleges at ECU compared to other institutions. VCAA Thompson reported that among 31 other institutions, the average is 9.1 (10.7 at institutions with medical schools). UNC-CH has 13 (ECU has 13). Almost all institutions have both large and small schools. ECU is considering a research and technology park as a way to promote economic development. VC Feldbush presented a report on these parks. RTP has the largest space in world, 7,000 acres. Other UNC institutions are planning or moving forward with research parks. The Executive and Audit Committee discussed ongoing building projects. At the afternoon meeting, the Board approved a revised schematic design of the Rivers Building expansion and approved a student fee increase of $62. The UNC Non-tenure track Faculty Committee on which Morrison served has nearly finished with its report, which has detailed recommendations about employment of faculty in non-tenure track positions. Last week, Morrison, VCAA Bob Thompson, Dean Marilyn Sheerer, Associate VC Rita Reaves, and Professor Patricia Anderson attended the AAHE 10th Annual Conference on Faculty Roles and Rewards, which focused this year on the Scholarship of Engagement. We are developing a clearer picture of what constitutes scholarship when we are engaged in solving social problems. One session focused on the changing nature of doctorate education. The Carnegie Foundation has begun a study on broadening doctorate education in three facets of the discipline: Generation, Conservation, and Transformation of Knowledge (into powerful pedagogies of engagement, understanding, and application). As we examine utilization this approach at ECU, we will study closely what other institutions have done. It will be a slow and deliberate process, 10-12 years for some, though Morrison stated that he believes ECU can accomplish it more quickly.
Wall (Philosophy) asked if there is more information on the Community of Scholars concept and what faculty input will be. Morrison responded that no decisions about this would be made without coming through the Senate. A committee has not yet been formed, but will probably be a mixture of administrators and faculty. Any details on promotion tenure must come through the Senate.
Rigsby (Geology) asked if there will be an attempt to represent the spectrum of points of view on the topic, and how might this be done. Morrison stated that he hopes so. VCAA Thompson added that they haven’t gotten to this yet because they’ve been busy on other issues, but that it would be essential to represent diverse points of view.
Ferrell (History) asked if we should check with Chapel Hill before going ahead. VCAA Thompson stated that he has spoken with Gretchen Battaille. UNC VP for Academic Affairs, who indicated that as long as we spell out our criteria and the basis for them, such a proposal would be considered.
F. Worth Worthington, SACS Self Study Assistant Director
Professor Worthington stated that they are in the last stages of getting report ready go, and that it should be in the mail by the end of the week. We are ahead of deadline. The full report will be available on CD. The visitors expect that people will be able to meet with them on short notice, so faculty should be prepared and available. He also reported that the Steering Committee was pleased with the visit with Dr. Lindsay.
G. Jeff Huskamp, Chief Information Office, Division of Administration and Finance
Mr. Huskamp gave a presentation on a proposed student computer requirement. The Faculty Information Technology Committee has voted to recommend some form of student computer requirement and should have a report to the Senate in the near future. He gave a brief history of the project and discussed some of the ongoing issues, such as affordability, assistance for students on financial aid, campus computer support, and identification of a viable configuration that will last 4-5 years.
Schneider (Business) asked if there is a possibility that a pilot project could be started with some subset of students. Huskamp responded that it was possible; the School of Art has been requiring a computer for several years and has effectively served as a sort of pilot. Feedback has been positive. Schneider stated that students may want to select their own and asked if students will be asked to purchase through a campus vendor? Huskamp replied that they would probably provide a list of minimum specifications; they can bring their own, but on-campus support won’t necessarily be available. Schneider noted that having 19000 computers that will require maintenance and repair is a major undertaking. Huskamp replied that they hope vendors will help. At NCSU, several major vendors have a presence on campus to help with warranty repairs. He also stated that they wouldn’t do away with student computer labs. The issue really is access, not ownership.
Jones (Social Work and Criminal Justice Studies) asked about enforcement. Isn’t the computer requirement just a suggestion since there’s no way to enforce it? He also noted that this might spawn more campus thefts and the need for more public safety officers. Huskamp agreed that at present there is no proposal for enforcement.
Rigsby (Geology) asked if individual schools and departments can already require a computer, why do we need a university-wide policy, why not leave it up to units. Huskamp stated that that is one option, but that the departments will be faced with support issues.
Tabrizi (Computer Science) asked what percentage of students already have computers. Huskamp replied that, according to the Sophomore Survey, it is 91%. Tabrizi then asked if the 9% are those who can’t afford to purchase a computer. What about making surplus computers available? Huskamp said that there are a very limited number of those and probably couldn’t handle the demand. He added that a good system is available for $700-800, or lease payments of only $30-35/month.
Godbold (Communication & Broadcasting) asked if we have looked into partnerships with businesses, for example, Fullerton in Winterville. Huskamp replied that we haven’t done that in the past but that those possibilities do exist. Companies are looking for volume, so that will influence what we can do.
Cope (Psychology) asked if we require students buy computers, are we obligated to support those computers with staff to do repairs. Huskamp replied that that is a tricky question. Also, can we use state funding to repair computers that are not state owned? Probably not. What we want to do is get vendors engaged to do that and get us out of the loop. Cope added that the experience with the computer lab in Psychology has shown how much damage can be done. It will generate a lot of work for someone. Huskamp replied that there is a psychological difference between damaging your own machine or someone else’s
Jones (Social Work and Criminal Justice Studies) noted that Duke decided to implement a computer requirement but abandoned it. It might be worth asking them why. Huskamp replied that every university is different but that we should probably ask them.
Rigsby (Geology) stated that at Duke, the proposal was voted down by the Faculty Senate. She also noted that if over 90% now have computers, how will a requirement that will involve more expense impact academics. Huskamp replied that that we will be able to require things that we can’t currently require because we can’t be sure of access. He acknowledged that the only data to suggest that labs are currently sufficient is anecdotal.
Gemperline (Chemistry) observed that the Chemistry labs have the ability to record some kinds of information into a computer. It would be wonderful if students could collect data in lab, then go home and do the analyses. A major issue will be system reliability.
H.Question Period
Faculty are encouraged to participate in the Question Period of the Faculty Senate meeting. This period allows faculty an opportunity to ask questions of administrators and others present relating to activities of the administration or Faculty Senate committees. Yarbrough (Political Science) asked for the names of the search committee members? Morrison replied that the names would be listed in the press release this week. Palumbo (English) asked what the senate position is on spousal employment? Morrison replied that there isn’t one that he knows of. Markowski (Human Environmental Sciences) stated that she is one whose spouse is in the same school, and it works well. She’s willing to provide information if anyone needs it.
Agenda Item IV. Unfinished Business
There was no unfinished business to come before the Faculty Senate at this time.
Agenda Item V. Report of Committees (Link to full Faculty Senate Agenda that includes the Committee reports)
A. University Curriculum Committee
Dale Knickerbocker, Chair of the Committee, presented the curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the November 8, 2001, Committee meeting. There was no discussion and the curriculum matters were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #02-01
Henry Ferrell (History), Chair of the Committee, first presented the nominees for three delegates and two alternates to the UNC Faculty Assembly Delegation. There were no nominations from the floor. The following were elected to serve as the University’s Delegation.
To fill the 2000-2003 unexpired term - Delegate David Pravica (Mathematics).
2002-2005 Delegates - Bob Morrison (Chemistry) and John Cope (Psychology)
2002-2005 Alternates – Mark Taggart (Music) and Michael Duffy (Art)
Professor Ferrell then presented the proposed revisions to the Administrative University Athletics Committee charge. Following discussion, the revised Administrative University Athletics Committee charge was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #02-02
Professor Ferrell then presented the editorial revision to the Academic Standards Committee charge. Following discussion, the editorially revised Academic Standards Committee charge was accepted as presented.
C. Educational Policies and Planning Committee
George Bailey, Chair of the Committee, presented first a Request for Permission to Plan for a Great Books Minor. Then he presented a Request for Permission to Establish a Clinical Audiology Concentration within the Communication Sciences PhD program. Last, Professor Bailey presented a Request for Authorization to Establish a Masters of Public Health. Professor Bailey gave an overview of the approval process by the Committee. There was no discussion and the three requests were accepted as presented. RESOLUTION #02-03 (Copies of these requests are available in the office of the Division of Academic Affairs.)
D. Faculty Governance Committee
Dee Dee Glascoff, Chair of the Committee, presented first the proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI., Section VIII. Frequently Asked Questions About Faculty Personnel Records. Martinez (Foreign Languages and Literature) asked if we are going to include what the approved university offices are? Glascoff replied that there will be a checklist on the inside of each file showing where these files are. The list is not included in the Faculty Manual because it differs for different units, especially the School of Medicine.
Hanrahan (School of Medicine) noted that student opinion surveys are included and asked if this can include remarks from angry students? Glascoff replied that individual comments go to the professor. Pravica (Math) stated that it seems vague to say “approved university offices”. Can we amend it to be more specific? VCAA Thompson stated that question 6 refers to question 4 which will refer to the checklist.
Martinez (FORL) from colleagues asked if the deletions in #6, made the question irrelevant to the answer? Should we change the question to fit the answer? Glascoff replied that the word “No” should not have been deleted. Niswander (Business) moved to amend to retain the word “No” at the beginning of the answer. The motion passed. Scott (Academic Library Science) moved to amend the question to state, “Is there any truth to rumor about the existence of secret files and what is the status of anonymous materials?” The motion failed.
Following discussion, the proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI. Section VIII. Frequently Asked Questions About Faculty Personnel Records were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #02-04
Professor Glascoff then presented the proposed addition to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D., Section II. Faculty Appointments. Rigsby (Biology) asked if it is the unit that pays most of the salary or where the person is assigned to tenure line that is 51%. VCAA Thompson replied that the 51% occurs where the tenure line is.
Following discussion, the proposed addition to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D., Section II. Faculty Appointments was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #02-05 (Following approval by the Chancellor, Board of Trustees and Office of the President, this section of the ECU Faculty Manual will be revised.)
Professor Glascoff then presented the proposed revision to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D., Section IV.A.3.b. Composition of Personnel Committee. She noted that there are occasions when personnel issues come before a personnel committee where those on tenure track would be privy to those at same level in their department. This can present a conflict of interest. The proposed changes eliminate that conflict.
VCAA Thompson stated that this proposal has a variety of implications. He moved to postpone consideration of the proposed revision to allow different units to consider the impact of the proposed change on their operations. The motion passed. Following discussion, action on the proposed revision was postponed until the February 26, 2002, Faculty Senate meeting. This postponement will allow Senators more time to discuss this issue with colleagues.
There was no new business to come before the Faculty Senate at this time.
The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Allred Lori Lee
Secretary of the Faculty Faculty Senate office
Department of Psychology
FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE JANUARY 29, 2002, MEETING
02-01 Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the November 8, 2001, Committee meeting.
Disposition: Chancellor
02-02 Revised Administrative University Athletics Committee charge.
Disposition: Chancellor
02-03 Request for Permission to Plan for a Great Books Minor - Request for Permission to Establish a Clinical
Audiology Concentration within the Communication Sciences PhD program - Request for Authorization to Establish a Masters of Public Health. (Copies of these requests are available in the office of the Division of Academic Affairs.)
Disposition: Chancellor
02-04 Revised ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI. Section VIII Frequently Asked Questions About Faculty Personnel Records.
Disposition: Chancellor
02-05 Revised ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D., Section II. Faculty Appointments.
Disposition: Chancellor, Board of Trustees, Office of the President
