Faculty Senate


Faculty Officers
Faculty Senate
Faculty Manual
University Standing Committees
Faculty Assembly
Academic Unit Codes of Operation
University Calendars
Issues of Importance for Faculty





The fourth regular meeting of the 2004-2005 Faculty Senate was held on Tuesday, December 7, 2004, in the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room.


Agenda Item I.  Call to Order

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


Agenda Item II.  Approval of Minutes

The minutes of November 9, 2004, were approved as distributed.


Agenda Item III.  Special Order of the Day


A.  Roll Call

Senators absent were: Professors Zoller (Art), Watson (English), Fallon (Foreign Languages and Literatures), Long (History), Robinson (Mathematics), and Dobbs, Pofahl, and Willson (Medicine).


Alternates present were: Professors McIntyre for Allen (Chemistry), Eble for Deena (English), Estes for McGhee (Health and Human Performance), Kellogg for Fletcher (Medicine), Worthington for McMillen (Medicine), Pokorny for Eakes (Nursing), and Stone for Toppen (Technology and Computer Science).


B.  Announcements

1.         The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the November 9, 2004, Faculty Senate meeting:

04-30  Approval of the Fall 2004 Graduation Roster, including honors program graduates, subject to the completion of degree requirements.

04-31  Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the October 14, 2004, and October 28, 2004, University Curriculum Committee meetings.         

04-32  Addendum to be added as a preamble to both the face-to-face and online Student Opinion of Instruction Survey that reads: “As you evaluate this course, please concentrate solely on the performance of the instructor and NOT on any technological problems experienced during the semester. Course delivery and/or network access technologies that are NOT controlled by the instructor, such as failures like those experienced with Blackboard and/or network outage, should NOT influence your assessment of the instructor.

2.         Electronic access to the 2004-2005 Faculty Salary report (BD-119 / State funds) is now available via OneStop at:   under Tools, Employee, BD-119 EPA Personnel Roster. The Faculty Senate office also maintains paper copies of this information, dating back to 1990.

3.         Faculty interested in periodically receiving past copies of "The Chronicle of Higher Education" are asked to call the Faculty Senate office to place their name on a list for distribution. 

4.         February 24, 2005, is the last University Curriculum Committee meeting date for materials to appear in the 2005-2006 University Undergraduate Catalog.  Curriculum materials must be submitted to the Committee by 5:00 on February 10, 2005.

5.         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.  Faculty are strongly encouraged to participate in this component of shared faculty governance and return the volunteer form by February 15, 2005.  Faculty members have two ways to note their preference for service on the various standing University committees. 

1) At One Stop a faculty member signs in using his or her user name and password and after submitting that information, he or she clicks on “Faculty Committee Volunteer Form” under the Employee Section and completes the committee volunteer preference form.  This information is then submitted directly to the Committee on Committees via the Faculty Senate office.   


2) A faculty member may complete the volunteer preference form that is available on the Faculty Senate web site at and forward the completed form via email to the Faculty Senate office at

6.         Letters concerning unit elections for the 2004-2005 Faculty Senate representation will be mailed to unit code administrators in early January.  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.

7.         A special thanks was extended to Chancellor Steve Ballard for providing the additional food and wine for today’s meeting.


C.  Steve Ballard, Chancellor

Chancellor Ballard provided updates on three specific areas: enrollment, institutional priorities, and diversity. Concerning enrollment, he reported that Office of the President [OP] understands ECU handles Distance Education better than other system universities and this recognition we owe to the faculty and deans. Congratulations were extended to ECU for our progress. OP was optimistic that more money would become available for providing access to our state residents beyond what the campus can provide. We would need to establish a level of enrollment so that we would have adequate funding. Next, Ballard stressed the importance of establishing institutional priorities and the leadership at present continued to articulate and revise them. The purpose of these priorities is not to exclude programs or research, but to marry our strengths with our efforts and opportunities. Finally he stated that the opportunity exists to improve the diversity in our faculty with the current 225 searches being conducted. He pledged monies to improve the recruiting/hiring process and upfront costs. Dr. Ballard also mentioned the 2005-2006 Critical Funding Needs for Campus-Initiated Tuition Increase. 


Brown (Education) asked what the “best” distance education rating was based on, enrollment or quality? Ballard replied that these courses must be of intellectual quality and infrastructure exists to continue providing first-rate courses equal in rigor to our campus-based courses.


D.  Jim Smith, Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Interim Vice Chancellor Smith noted, in terms of DE, that the “best” rating referenced ECU as a leader in numbers, institutional change, and quality, including faculty support and compensation, delivery and student evaluation. OP sees this not as an add-on at ECU but as a sign of institutional change. Smith then reported that the search committee for the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences was being formed; the faculty of A&S had chosen 6 members and he would be appointing an additional 4, including 2 chairs from the college as members, as well as the Chair of this committee from outside the college. Monies have been made available for start up costs and other recruiting and hiring issues.


Scott (Academic Library Services) noted that long ago librarians were considered teaching faculty and that now they are considered non-teaching EPA faculty. He asked if there was a way that librarians could be considered again as teaching faculty.  Smith replied that he was open to discussing this issue and would look into it.


Allred (Psychology) asked how the $710,000 startup funds were distributed and to how many people.

Smith responded that the money would be spread out, although he couldn’t give exact figures. 


Rigsby (Geology) asked if there had been a review and evaluation of startup packages at other universities so that we had a goal. Smith responded that he would be continuing to explore the issue, but that the majority of start up funds would be in the sciences.


Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) asked how well the anticipated growth would be managed, what resources have been assigned, and if they are distributed fairly. He also asked if there was a plan to secure money for years to come and can the money be used to develop in-house computer support and invested into future systems. Smith assured that the positions and monies and resources to support them were permanent and distribution of operating costs was at the discretion of the deans. Managed growth would be a goal. For example, we would have the opportunity for 200 additional positions but have to consider the availability of office space and other resources. The “pie” – from the legislature – needs to be larger rather than each area getting a smaller piece of the pie.


E.  Catherine Rigsby, Chair of the Faculty

Professor Rigsby stated that first, she wanted to thank those who responded to her call for feedback and to let the Senators know that she has passed along their comments to the appropriate parties.  She noted that she still had confidence that communication, transparency, and collaboration was improving on campus and it was a good feeling. 


Professor Rigsby then reported on some of the ongoing collaborative activities and issues. The search committees for Provost/VCAA and VC for Research and Graduate Studies will start reviewing applications when the search consultant comes to campus with the first set of applications. She noted that this will be hard work, but was very important and the committees were dedicated to doing a good job.  Professor Rigsby noted that all of the finalists would come to campus and the faculty would have an opportunity to meet with them.  Once in the final stages, these will be completely open searches.


Professor Rigsby noted that the Faculty Welfare Committee was working hard on several tasks. The Serious Illness and Disability Policy was nearing completion.  When the policy is voted on by the committee, it will be e-mailed to faculty for feedback. The committee is working to put together a policy that provides the best possible coverage. They are also very aware of the urgent need to get the policy finalized as soon as possible.  Because of this urgency, they will be asking for feedback via e-mail. They will review feedback at their January meeting and, if all goes well, they will present the policy to the Senate in February or March, 2005.  The Faculty Welfare subcommittee on Faculty Mentoring also distributed a web-based survey to all faculty on their ECU mentoring experiences. The results from this survey will be available during the Spring semester.


Professor Rigsby noted that the Board of Trustees would consider ECU’s request for a campus-based tuition increase and that the request was summarized in a spreadsheet distributed at everyone’s seat.  She noted that she and various campus administrators had received much input on the commencement proposal – from individual faculty members, from Deans and Department Chairs, and from the Calendar Committee.  Based on that input, the Chancellor’s Cabinet decided to recommend to the Executive Council that the institutional commencement ceremony remain on Saturday (as is traditional) and that unit ceremonies be scheduled around that ceremony – on Friday, Saturday afternoon, and (if necessary) Thursday.


Finally, Professor Rigsby noted that she and Bob Thompson were putting together an “Administrator Training” program to be held in February, 2005.  The Faculty Manual requires all new administrators to be trained. Training sessions have been held sporadically over the years.  Sometimes, that uneven training was very apparent, for example, in the “procedural irregularities” that have come to the Faculty Senate for resolution.  The training sessions will include detailed instruction on the procedures outlined in the Faculty Manual for hiring, tenure, promotion, etc.; as well as other “standard” types of administrative training information (budgeting, the function of the BOT and BOG in the UNC system, internal ECU processes and regulations etc.).  She noted that Chancellor Ballard was very supportive of this program and has agreed to require ALL administrators to attend – not just the new ones. 


Estes (Health and Human Performance) asked when the proposed revisions to general education would be presented to the Faculty Senate? Rigsby reported that the proposal was in committee and should be on the January Senate agenda.


Christian (Business) asked if Saturday commencement, following final exams, was a permanent change?  Chair Rigsby replied yes.


Scott (Academic Library Services) asked if shared faculty governance could be discussed in the administrative orientation sessions? Chair Rigsby replied yes, it was an item for that agenda. Scott also asked when the change to commencement would take place and what the impact might be.

Rigsby replied that, according to the Senate resolution, Fall 2005 commencement would follow exams and, as far as she knows, no study had been done. Although Student Government Association acknowledged that students might not like the change, they also noted that, after a few years, it would become the norm. Ballard added that he was not aware of negative feedback.


F.  Dee Dee Glascoff and Mark Sprague, Visit with Brad Wilson, Board of Governors’ Chairman

Professors Glascoff and Sprague reported on the recent opportunity they, along with others, had to visit with Brad Wilson, Chairman of the Board of Governors, when he was on campus in November.  An overview of that visit is available in the Faculty Senate office.


Ciesielski (Technology and Computer Science) stated that he felt that Mr. Wilson deflected State employees’ concerns about healthcare insurance by asking us to go directly to our legislators. He asked if it were possible for a resolution to be drafted and to have someone champion our efforts.

Sprague responded that one of the problems was that the Health Plan exists as state law and any and all aspects of the plan had to go through the legislature and that the BOG itself must work with legislators. Glascoff added the Wilson was receptive to the comments and questions of the staff and faculty, but his position at Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina prevented him from being our representative.


Yalcin (Philosophy) asked if sabbaticals would be a part of the benefits package. Rigsby replied that yes, they should be and she has talked to administrators about that. Smith added that Gretchen Bataille of the OP’s office was discussing the issue and working toward some version of a sabbatical at the system level.


Ciesielski (Technology and Computer Science) commented that a Senate resolution in support of improving the benefit package, rather than letters from individuals, might be more appropriate for the legislature. Rigsby felt that would be possible and a resolution might be presented to Agenda Committee or another Senate committee.


G.  George Harrell, Senior Associate Vice Chancellor for Campus Operations

Associate Vice Chancellor Harrell addressed concerns that Faculty Senators had about various facility services.  Prior to the meeting, Chuck Hawkins, Interim Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance, provided a report to the Senators addressing various issues posed at the November Senate meeting.  Harrell reported, with the number of contractors and subcontractors working on campus, Facilities Services takes very seriously its responsibility to limit interruptions of classes. He added that name tags and identification were required of firms with standard contracts. 


Cope (Psychology) shared an episode that occurred in his classroom when the electrical power was accidentally turned off in Rawl and suggested that all electrical breaker boxes be locked.


Thomson (Education) noted that the basement in Speight was still not cleaned out which is a contradiction to the response given in Interim Vice Chancellor Hawkins’ report.  He asked if background checks were done on contractors and were their employees bonded?  He also asked if contractors document residence status of their employees? Harrell replied that procedures for checking green cards were in place as well as background checks for all employees, but with so many contractors working for the university, some of those checks were not possible. He would look into UNC system and state standards.


Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) stated that the explanation from Interim Vice Chancellor Hawkins on the cutting down of trees was not adequate.  He noted that the lighting near the new Science and Technology building was also not adequate and more effort was needed to ensure the safety of all individuals. Rigsby agreed that improvements were needed in lighting and safety.

Harrell replied that trees were inspected yearly by tree specialists and one tree recently cut down, in the middle of the mall, had been struck by lightning and destroyed in the center. He added that large trees were often lost to lightning.


Eason (Nursing) noted how well the housekeepers maintained the Rivers building.  She expressed a concern with the shift of housekeepers from evening shift to day shift.  She also noted that Public Safety did a good job of responding to calls when someone needs assistance when walking to their car at night. Harrell stated that police will respond to call for escorts and that not all housekeepers had been moved to the day shift and these changes occurred on a volunteer basis and with the agreement of Deans. Some housekeepers remained on the night shift and would be available for emergency spills, etc.


Sprague (Physics) expressed his concern with contractors disrupting classes with jack hammers and asked about the instructions they were given.  Harrell replied that general contractors were given instructions, but those instructions did not always get to sub-contractors. Instructors should call 6776 if their classes are interrupted.


McIntyre (Chemistry) asked is there was a lock out / tag out system to identify the effected users with gas, electricity, etc.? Harrell replied that there was a lock out on electrical.


Ciechalski (Technology and Computer Science) suggested that contractors and their employees wear colored throw-away vests when entering buildings to distinguish them from others. Many commented that this was a good idea. He also recalled an incident last winter when a chunk of ice fell off the Science and Technology Building and could have hurt someone. Harrell agreed that with a building such as the Science and Technology Building with no plantings next to the building, they monitored potentially harmful situations.


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. 


Cope (Psychology) stated that ECU is in direct competition with UNC Charlotte for graduate students and stated that we need more funding for out of state graduate students.  He asked John Lehman, Interim Vice Chancellor for Research, about tuition waivers for ECU students. Lehman replied that tuition waivers continued to be a priority, but more monies were needed and external funding would have to increase.


Given (Foreign Languages and Literatures) asked Interim Vice Chancellor Smith where the request for a daycare facility stood?  Dr. Smith responded that it was at the Academic Council level.


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

A.  University Curriculum Committee

Tim Hudson (Mathematics), Chair of the Committee, presented the curriculum matters contained in the minutes of November 11, 2004, Committee meeting.  There was no discussion and the curriculum matters were approved as presented.  RESOLUTION #04-33


B. Agenda Committee

Mark Sprague (Physics), Chair of the Committee, presented the proposed 2005-2006 Faculty Senate and Agenda Committee meeting dates.  There was no discussion and the report was approved as presented.  RESOLUTION #04-34 


C.  Educational Policies and Planning Committee

Worth Worthington (Medicine), a member of the Committee, presented first, for information only, a notification of intent to plan a MS in Construction Management.  There was no discussion.  Professor Worthington then presented a request to merge two coded units (formerly School of Industry and Technology and Department of Computer Science) with the newly drafted College of Technology and Computer Science unit code.  He noted that the new college code had not yet been forwarded to the Academic Unit Code Screening Committee for review.  Once that was done, the code would be presented to the Faculty Senate for approval. 


Pravica (Mathematics) asked if faculty in Technology and Computer Science had any comments.

Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) replied that it was approved by Computer Science. Ciesielski (Technology and Computer Science) added that Industry and Technology supported the merger.


Scott (Academic Library Services) asked if the various departments within the College of Technology and Computer Science would have unit personnel committees? Carol Collins, a faculty member within the College responded that yes, there would be separate unit personnel committees.


Following discussion, the proposed request to merge two coded units (formerly School of Industry and Technology and Department of Computer Science) with the newly drafted College of Technology and Computer Science unit code was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #04-35     


Agenda Item VI.  New Business

Bob Morrison (Chemistry) presented a resolution on smoking in designated areas.  He noted that in the United States there are about 400,000 deaths per year attributable to smoking.  There are over 160,000 deaths due to lung cancer, most of those attributable to smoking.  One of the pillars of this institution is regional health care.  As an institution we have a responsibility to improve the health of the citizens in this region.  One of the primary causes of ill health in our region is the use of tobacco products.  ETS, the smoke inhaled by nonsmokers, causes 65,000 deaths a year in the US and approximately 1,500 in North Carolina.


Professor Morrison stated that several other UNC campuses already have nonsmoking policies.  These include UNC Wilmington, Appalachian State University, UNC Pembroke, UNC Chapel Hill.  Orange county where Chapel Hill is located has a nonsmoking ordinance in all public buildings, except federal buildings.  UNCW has a smoking ban in their buildings as well as within 25 feet of their entrances.  On their website where this policy is located they say there is a $25 fine for the first offense and $50 for the second offense.


Professor Morrison noted that the last smoking resolution to come from the Faculty Senate was in 1984 when interim vice chancellor Jim Smith was Chair of the Faculty.  That resolution recommended that there be no smoking in classrooms and in meeting rooms.  The resolution passed the senate with 19 in favor and 15 against.  The chancellor accepted the ban in classrooms, but not the ban in meeting rooms.  He thought the majority should rule in meetings, as it had in the senate.  Professor Morrison stated that the proposed resolution would restrict smoking to designated areas away from building entrances.  He noted that he hoped the University would develop attractive, well-lit designated smoking areas. The resolution had been reviewed by members of the Student Government Association and the Staff Senate and he noted that both groups had offered good questions on the implementation.  Some of the questions posed by the groups included: 1) How many feet away from building entrances? 2)  Would there be places for smokers to smoke, and would those places be lit at night for safety?, 3) How would the policy be enforced?, and 4) What percentage of the people on campus smoke?  Professor Morrison also noted that a suggestion was made to include, in conjunction with this policy, a wellness program that encourages people to quit smoking.


Hanrahan (Medicine) stated that this resolution leaves out other illnesses that are also caused by smoking.  He noted that he did not think that the Faculty Senate should support smoking by designating “smoker areas”. Rigsby noted that the resolution could be amended or sent back to committee. Hanrahan suggested that additional statistics be added in an additional “Whereas” statement. Morrison accepted this as a friendly amendment.


Jones (Criminal Justice) asked who would enforce the no smoking policy and what would be the penalty for those that continued to smoke in doorways, etc.


Estes (Health and Human Performance) expressed his support for the intent of the resolution.  Allred (Psychology) stated her support and noted the problems she had encountered in the entranceway of the Wright Place.


Lamson (Child Development and Family Relations) expressed her concern with people smoking outside the child development lab, although signs are posted prohibiting smoking near children.


Pravica (Mathematics) asked if there was any legislation that required the university to provide designated smoking areas. Morrison replied that, according to state law, 20% of an area should be reserved for smoking.


Reisch (Business) stated his endorsement of the proposed resolution and noted that smoking near entrances of buildings and the child development lab should be prohibited 75 feet from entrances.

Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) stated his support of the resolution but noted that the University should be respectful of those that do smoke. 


Pravica (Mathematics) stated that smoking is addictive and asked if State laws force the University to have smoking designated areas?  Morrison responded that the State requires that 20% of building space be available for those who smoke.


Shannon O’Donnell, SGA President, stated that the student body supports the smoking resolution and asked if a task force could be formed to help administration formulate the policy in a respectful nature.


Yalcin (Philosophy) stated that he failed to understand that entering a building with smoke can hurt someone.  He was not sure that one whiff of smoke when entering or leaving a building was problematic. Reisch (Business) responded that it was not a one time occurrence, it was continuous.

Jones (Criminal Justice) stated that the University is trying to create an environment that is conducive for stopping smoking.


Sugar (Education) made a motion to add an additional “be it further resolved” that included a minimum of x number of feet from a building entrance. Morrison explained that his resolution was not intended to include implementation. The motion failed.


McIntyre (Chemistry) made a motion to remove the second “be it further resolved” that read: Be it Further Resolved, that the University designate smoking areas well away from high traffic areas with signage that states “designated smoking area”. 


Sprague (Physics) responded that signage is needed to spell out the implementation. Morrison repeated that this was intended as a resolution to support development of a policy, not to determine its implementation. With a standing vote, the motion to remove the second “be it further resolved” failed.


Hanrahan (Medicine) again noted that it was not good for the University to go on record in support of smoking and spoke in favor of the amendment.


Ciechalski (Technology and Computer Science) suggested that links to the statistics noted in the resolution be included.  Morrison agreed and offered to provide those internet links before the final resolution was submitted to the Chancellor for consideration. 


Niswander (Business) made a motion to add an additional “be it further resolved” to read: “Be It Further Resolved, that the Chancellor establish a Task Force, to include the Chair of the Faculty, the Staff Senate Chairperson, and the Student Government Association President, to work with administration to further implement this resolution.”  The motion passed.


Following a lengthy discussion, the smoking resolution, as amended, was approved by the Faculty Senate.  RESOLUTION #04-36     


There was no further business to come before the Faculty Senate, the meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,


Janice Tovey                                                                         Lori Lee

Secretary of the Faculty                                                        Administrative Officer          

Department of English                                                          Faculty Senate





04-33  Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the November 11, 2004, University Curriculum Committee meeting. 

Disposition:  Chancellor


04-34  2005-2006 Faculty Senate and Agenda Committee meeting dates as follows:

       Agenda Committee will meet:         Faculty Senate will meet:

August 30, 2005

September 13, 2005

September 27, 2005

October 11, 2005

October 25, 2005

November 8, 2005

November 22, 2005

December 6, 2005

January 17, 2006

January 31, 2006

February 7, 2006

February 21, 2006

March 7, 2006

March 21, 2006

April 4, 2006

April 18, 2006


April 25, 2006
Organizational Meeting


Disposition:  Faculty Senate


04-35  Approval of a request to merge two coded units (formerly School of Industry and Technology and Department of Computer Science) with the newly drafted College of Technology and Computer Science unit code. 

Disposition:  Chancellor


04-36    Smoking Resolution as follows:


Whereas,       Cigarette smoke contains over 4,700 chemicals, over 200 poisons, and over 50 human carcinogens; and


Whereas,       The Environmental Protection Agency has classified environmental tobacco smoke as a “Group A” Carcinogen – a substance known to cause cancer in humans; and


Whereas,       In 2004 there will be about 173,770 new cases of lung cancer in the United States: 93,110 among men and 80,660 among women.


Whereas,       In 2004 about 160,440 people will die of this disease: 91,930 men and 68,510 women; and


Whereas,       The Center for Disease Control and Prevention estimates at least 440,000 deaths attributable each year to cigarette smoking; and


Whereas,       Lung cancer kills more people than breast cancer, colorectal cancer, and prostate cancer combined; and


Whereas,       More than 20,000 nonsmokers, predominantly female, are diagnosed with Lung Cancer in the United States every year; and


Whereas,       Secondhand smoke is the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States; and


Whereas,       The five-year survival rate for someone diagnosed with Lung Cancer is 15%; and


Whereas,       Exposure to the hazards of environmental tobacco smoke can be prevented by appropriate smoking regulations.


Therefore Be it Resolved, that East Carolina University adopt a campus-wide nonsmoking policy that would prohibit smoking in high traffic areas including entrances to buildings, all exterior stairwells, stairs, stairwell landings, elevator landings, and partially enclosed corridors outside of classrooms such as those in the new Science and Technology building.  Such areas should have no-smoking signs, and faculty, staff and students should be made aware of nonsmoking policies.


Be it Further Resolved, that the University designate smoking areas well away from high traffic areas with signage that states “designated smoking area”.  


Be It Further Resolved, that the Chancellor establish a Task Force, to include the Chair of the Faculty, the Staff Senate Chairperson, and the Student Government Association President, to work with administration to further implement this resolution.



Link to theCenter for Disease Control and Prevention


Link to the American Cancer Society 


Link to the Women Against Lung Cancer


Disposition:  Chancellor