EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE
FULL MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2003
The seventh regular meeting of the 2002-2003 Faculty Senate was held on Tuesday, March 25, 2003, in
the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room.
Agenda Item I. Call to Order
Rick Niswander (Business), Vice Chair of the Faculty, called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m. Professor Niswander noted Chair Bob Morrison’s absence due to an illness and wished him a fast recovery.
Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of February 25, 2003, were approved as presented.
Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll Call
Senators absent were: Professors Twarog (Art), Robbins (Biology), Wilentz (English), Decker (Health and Human Performance), Ciesielski (Industry and Technology), Fletcher and Meredith (Medicine), Ulffers (Music), Chancellor Muse and Chair Morrison.
Alternates present were: Professors Robinson for Pravica (Math), Gilliland for Dobbs (Medicine), Droes for Tranbarger (Nursing) and Carpenter-Aeby for Ferreira (Social Work and Criminal Justice Studies).
1. The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the February 25, 2003, Faculty Senate meeting:
03-07 Curriculum matters contained in the February 13, 2003, University Curriculum Committee minutes.
03-09 Revised Spring 2004 University Calendar.
03-10 Revised Guidelines for Setting University Calendars, Guidelines for Scheduling Lecture and Discussion Classes, Guidelines for Scheduling 11-Week Summer Session Courses.
03-11 2004-2005 University Calendar, including an 11-Week Summer Session.
03-13 Revised ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI. Subsection I.A Appointment.
03-14 Revised ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI. Subsection I.I. Salary Policies.
2. The Chancellor and Mrs. Muse will host their annual Faculty Senate reception in their home on Tuesday, April 22, 2003, from 6:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Formal invitations to all Faculty Senators and Alternates are forthcoming.
3. The annual Teaching Awards Ceremony is scheduled for Wednesday, April 30, 2003, at 11:00 a.m. in the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room. A reception will follow afterwards. Faculty awarded for their teaching achievements will be recognized at this event. All faculty are welcome. Please make plans now to attend.
4. Academic Committee Chairs are reminded that Committee Annual Reports are due in the Faculty Senate office by Thursday, May 1, 2003.
5. Weekly reports on undergraduate admissions are available on the Admission and Retention Policies Committee web site at: http://www.ecu.edu/fsonline/AcademicCommittees/ad/reports.htm.
6. Activities of the Commission on Scholarship are available on the Faculty Senate web site at:
http://www.ecu.edu/fsonline/CommissiononScholarship/Commission.htm.
7. Faculty interested in periodically receiving past copies of "The Chronicle of Higher Education" are asked to call the Faculty Senate office at ext. 6537 and place their name on a list for distribution.
8. The Faculty Senate office and both the Joyner Library and Health Sciences Library have the current 2002-2003 Academic Salary Listing on file for interested faculty.
9. Faculty members are reminded that April 1 Chancellor Muse will call for candidates for the prestigious 2003/2004 Max O. Gardner award.
Chancellor William Muse was unable to attend the meeting. On his behalf, Provost William Swart addressed the group and noted that the activities associated with Founders Day were in full swing with various events scheduled all week. Provost Swart stated that the report from the consultants, examining the feasibility of new Engineering programs, recommended that UNC Asheville and Western Carolina develop joint programs with North Carolina State. It was also recommended that East Carolina University explore options with State. Yet, the Office of the President has gone against the recommendations of the consultants and has allowed us to continue to plan our own program.
The reorganization of the Administrative Units is proceeding smoothly. The new Dean of Industry and Technology has been brought on board and a new Assistant Provost for Communication has been hired. One of the duties of this person will be to work with the faculty in administrating the Oliver Max Joyner Award and to assist them with the documentation and portfolios associated with various teaching awards.
Robinson (Mathematics) stated that extra academic support for students who were celebrities is important but wanted to know if this level of support could be provided for other non-celebrity students. Professor Robinson noted that the Math Department was currently under pressure to discontinue the joint remediation program that we have with Pitt Community College, and asked why this was necessary. Dr Robinson also indicated that the Math Department was under pressure to discontinue its use of Math Placement Testing. He indicated that the goal of the Math Department was to graduate every student we accept and they needed an infrastructure in place to help students, celebrities or not. Dr Swart responded that through the process of reorganization of Student Support Services, we are attempting to bring a variety of functions relevant to admission and retention under one roof. Henry Peele will follow up on these concerns.
D. Vice Chancellor's Report
Michael Lewis, Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences discussed the fact that the Learning Village process was on track to relocate the school of Allied Health and Nursing to the West Campus along with the addition of a new Library complex. Funding is already available from an earlier bond referendum, property (150 acres) has been acquired, and current plans call for ground breaking in the spring. The completion date will be in 2006.
In regards to the Nursing program, we have the largest BSN program in the State, with the highest pass-rate for 1st time takers of the Nursing Boards (97%).
Dr Lewis discussed a medical education event that has occurred over the past week involving what is referred to as “Match Day”. This is a process where senior medical students are matched with hospitals at which they will become medical residents. ECU has traditionally done very well in matching students with their first and second choices, at a rate higher than most other medical schools in the country. Also 62% of the graduate students are staying in North Carolina. The best indication of where a student will end up in practice is where they do their graduate training.
Dr Lewis also talked about the impact of the Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act (HIPAA) that will affect all aspects of charting and client/patient records recorded on the East or West campus. The Act takes effect on April 14th. Failure to follow these Federal guidelines can result in restriction or elimination of Federal funding and fines up to $250,000, as well as criminal penalties.
One issue that was raised last month with the Board of Trustees concerned how the Faculty Practice Plan could be tailored to serve the faculty by providing discounts etc. Due to very strict laws and rules covering the provision of these services, discounts are not an option. We are exploring ways to improve scheduling and services and are looking into things like free health screening and other prevention programs.
Scott (Academic Library Services) asked about the status of the Ph.D. program in Nursing. Dr. Lewis remarked that there were two current students in the program and we were currently recruiting for next year.
E. Bob Morrison, Chair of the Faculty
Professor Morrison was unable to attend the meeting. There was no report given on his behalf.
F. Paul Spence, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Non-Tenure Track Faculty
Professor Spence (Medicine) discussed a report issued on March 6th, 2002 from the UNC Board of Governors. The report addressed issues relevant to non tenure-track faculty (NTTF). The initial Board of Governors’ committee was set up February, 2001 to initiate discussions regarding NTTF. The committee reviewed literature and multiple resources that describe how to best use NTTF in four-year institutions. They looked at survey data and information from regional focus groups as well as data based on National statistics. Dr. Spence noted that NNTF are traditionally divided into two groups; full-time and part-time.
Some of the findings were as follows:
Part-time NTTF went from 15% to 21% (1990-2000) (Low compared to National Standards)
Full-Time NTTF went from 19% to 23% (1990-2000) (National Average = 18%)
Tenure-Track Faculty dropped to 42%
Dr. Spence stated that there was a lot of variation in the different schools (e.g., faculty at the North Carolina School of the Arts are all non-tenured; Fayetteville State = 36% NTTF; UNC Asheville = 52% NTTF). One reason for having NTTF is in
response to changing demands and enrollments requiring increased flexibility. It is also due to problems of budgets, which can be uncertain from year to year. Units have used NTTF to try and deal with these issues. However, he noted that there are some unintended false economies that occur as a result of hiring NTTF. Hiring someone semester by semester requires someone else to administer and review the NTTF positions, which can add a significant burden. Additionally, NTTF are primarily hired to teach, and this may add extra burdens on the Tenure Track faculty (TTF)to do more advising, research, and other creative tasks.
As a result of this study, the Office of the President came up with eight recommendations [see handout], which are currently being reviewed.
Robinson (Mathematics) asked if we have data for both Full and Part-Time combined? He observed that when he first came here in 1994 that the Math department had about 40 TTF, and are now down to 17 TTF, with about the same number of NTTF. He asked if the University believes that this ratio is appropriate, given our consideration of an engineering program? Dr. Spence did not feel he had the capacity to answer that question.
Martinez (Foreign Languages) asked if multiple-year contracts for NTTF were allowed? Spence replied that there was nothing in the policies to prevent that and it is up to the administrators and deans as to how to handle that issue.
Ferrell (History) felt that the issue with the steady increase in NTTF was not one of numbers but concerned differences in preparation and other qualitative concerns. He was concerned that we may be developing two different standards. Dr Spence noted that the Task Force was aware of these concerns and was recommending that a smaller percentage of semester-to-semester fixed-term faculty be used (a total of 25% as opposed to the current total of 44%). The Task Force will also be addressing issues relating to quality control. Dr. Spence noted that although the recommendations are slanted toward tenure-track faculty, some divisions, such as Health Sciences, couldn’t survive without the use of Fixed-Term faculty. He noted vast differences between Academic affairs and the needs of Health Sciences.
G. James LeRoy Smith, Executive Assistant to the Chancellor
Professor Smith presented a report from the NCAA National Certification Committee concerning a draft response to the NCAA concerning our certification study. The self-study was submitted last year and was presented to the senate. We had our site visit in March of 2002, which was very successful. The report of the committee went to the National Certification Committee (55 member body) of the NCAA (in July), which has responded (by late summer, 2002) with five follow-up questions. [Draft responses to these questions were provided to senators via e-mail] Our responses to the five questions will be sent to the certification committee in May, 2003. A decision on certification from the committee should be available by the end of the summer.
Sugar (Education) noted that looking at the materials provided on page 3, it appeared that money for football equipment stood out in comparison to money applied to other sports. He asked if this ratio was the same in other schools? Dr. Smith did not have additional data from other programs.
Ferrell (History) asked how the Office of the President and the Board of Governors were currently looking at how exceptions were handled across different campuses. Dr. Smith responded that what you see in the Board of Governors and the Office of the President right now is the intent to make sure that we are all on the same playing field, so that people are dwelt with in a similar fashion across the different campuses.
H. Spring 2003 Graduation Roster
Senator James Toppen (Industry and Technology) moved the approval of the Spring 2003 Graduation Roster, including honors program graduates, subject to the completion of degree requirements. The motion carred. RESOLUTION #03-15
I. 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.
Martinez (Foreign Languages) asked Dr. Swart if the Administration was planning to offer multiple-year contracts to NTTF? Dr. Swart responded that this was usually done at the point of the Deans. Faculty slots were typically allocated to the Deans and, based on individual needs; the Deans determine how many slots go for NTTF, TTF, and Graduate Assistantships. Dr. Martinez then asked if Dr. Swart could nudge the Deans in this direction. He responded that this exchange would be in the minutes.
Provost Swart noted (in regard to issue of fixed term faculty) that another fundamental issue has to do with the definition of the faculty workloads. There is no uniform definition for what constitutes a full-time workload for a faculty when you take into account how much a distance learning course counts; how much a service activity counts, and other related issues. These are important decisions that we have to make before we can determine how many faculty we need. This is something that we are currently working on in the Council of Deans.
Rigsby (Geology) stated that she hoped that the Deans would take into consideration the changes that the faculty and the University were going through in order to become a research institution in regards to the workload. In some units the ratio of teaching to research expectations are totally out of whack. She also asked how faculty would be involved in this process. Dr Swart responded that we would have a discussion with the Deans starting up in May, where we will try to get everything we have together and make some sense out of it. Then the Deans can go back and review that with their faculty. This will be an iterative process where by we take a first shot at it and then it goes back down to Colleges and Departments for discussion. It will take several iterations.
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
Professor Dale Knickerbocker (Foreign Languages and Literatures), Chair of the Committee, presented the curriculum matters contained in the February 27, 2003, University Curriculum Committee minutes. He asked that the curriculum matters be divided into 3 separate actions by the group. First, Professor Knickerbocker presented items 1-12 of the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003. Following a brief discussion, items 1-12 of the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003, were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #03-16.
Professor Knickerbocker then presented item # 13 of the Committee minutes relating to revisions to the requirements for the BA in Mathematics. Following a brief discussion, the revisions to the requirements for the BA in Mathematics as noted in the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003, were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #03-17.
Professor Knickerbocker then presented a resolution contained in the committee minutes stating “The curriculum changes made by the Transition Committee (cross-listing 1067, 2282, 2775, 2935, 3166, 3239 courses) should be kept in effect for the fall 2003 and spring 2004 semesters; that the curriculum committees of Mathematics and Mathematics Education meet to work out revision of the six courses in dispute or write proposals for new courses to replace them in a way that would keep content courses in the Department of Mathematics; provide sufficient content courses and ensure the best
professional training in pedagogy for Mathematics Education majors; and fulfill all SACS and NCATE accreditation and licensure requirements. Both units would be required to submit these proposals directly to the University Curriculum Committee by the end of Fall 2003. Failure to meet this deadline would result in the imposition of a solution by the University Curriculum Committee, Faculty Senate and Chancellor.”
Robinson (Mathematics) noted that it has been very confusing for individuals in mathematics to understand the reasons for these changes. Dr. Robinson indicated that, although he appreciated the work of the University Curriculum Committee (UCC), he disagreed with its ultimate decisions. He noted that the UCC wanted the faculty of Math and Math Education to sit down and work out the differences, yet he felt that the Math Department has already done this and made their recommendations in June of last year. Dr Robinson did not feel that additional changes to the courses are needed. He did agree with the sentiment expressed by the UCC that content courses should remain in the Department of Mathematics. The position of the Math Department on this matter is that: 1) Content courses should remain in the Department of Mathematics; 2) Professional methods courses should be placed in the School of Education; and 3) Math Education faculty should be given “real” joint appointments.
Dr. Knickerbocker noted that the UCC felt that deciding the fine points of where math content stops and pedagogy begins should best be left up to the various experts and worked out among the units. Also, the UCC declined to consider the option of joint appointments because of the belief that it falls outside of the committee’s charge.
L’Esperance (Education) felt like there are many issues still in need of discussion and was therefore in favor of the motion. He also agreed with the UCC chair that we do not want to further the victimization of certain departments. It is very
important that the democratic process discussed a year ago should be continued so that unanswered questions can be worked out over the next several months.
Preston (Math Education) noted that their hands have been tied over the last couple of years as they try to find out what courses they have and don’t have to work with, and attempt to meet various State and Federal guidelines for teacher education. We would prefer that this process be done, but it is not, yet we want what is right for students. In regards to cross listing courses, we would prefer the courses to keep the Math prefix. Yet, we need the ability for Math educators to teach them. We see them as our courses, in that we developed them, created grants to develop them, taught them and administered them. In addition, we see the problem of content and pedagogy as being essentially the same thing. The courses are integrated and you don’t separate those two things out.
Carter (Math Education) stated that these issues must be worked out among the faculty to get a solution. A simple yes/no answer would not suffice. As far as quality is concerned the Math Education program is a good program, and is working to be the best program, not only in the Region but also in the Country. We need to be able to establish what will count as content, and it is good that the two committees can come together and work this out.
Following a lengthy discussion, the proposed resolution was accepted as presented. RESOLUTION #03-18.
Robinson (Mathematics) asked about the committee’s reason for why the new College of Human Ecology would be set up as a single code unit, where as the other colleges will be composed of several code units? Dr. Bailey replied that it was based on the wishes of the faculty in the units involved and that it could be changed down stream as needed. Finley (HESC) clarified that the Vestigial Code approved by the tenured faculty in CJSW included departments/schools as code units while the Vestigial Code approved by the tenured faculty in HESC included the college as the code unit.
Agenda Item VI. New Business
Professor Ed Wall (Philosophy) offered new business. Following an agreement with the body, he presented a motion that read as follows: “Motion to recommend that ECU develop a random number system to identify students, with periodic reports to the Faculty Senate on the progress of that project.”
Following a lengthy discussion, James Toppen (Industry and Technology) moved to have the motion tabled. The motion to table was adopted, thus the motion to recommend the development of a random number system was tabled.
There being no further business to come before the body at this time, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
John Cope Lori Lee
Secretary of the Faculty Faculty Senate office
Department of Psychology
FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE MARCH 25, 2003, MEETING
03-15 Spring 2003 Graduation Roster, including honors program graduates, subject to the completion of degree
requirements.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-16 Items 1-12 of the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-17 Revisions to the requirements for the BA in Mathematics as noted in the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-18 The curriculum changes made by the Transition Committee (cross-listing 1067, 2282, 2775, 2935, 3166, 3239 courses) should be kept in effect for the fall 2003 and spring 2004 semesters; that the curriculum committees of Mathematics and Mathematics Education meet to work out revision of the six courses in dispute or write proposals for new courses to replace them in a way that would keep content courses in the Department of Mathematics; provide sufficient content courses and ensure the best professional training in pedagogy for Mathematics Education majors; and fulfill all SACS and NCATE accreditation and licensure requirements. Both units would be required to submit these proposals directly to the University Curriculum Committee by the end of Fall 2003. Failure to meet this deadline would result in the imposition of a solution by the University Curriculum Committee, Faculty Senate and Chancellor.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-19 Revision to the ECU Undergraduate Catalog, Section 5: Academic Regulations as follows:
“Courses of Study
Students should refer to the requirements of their respective schools or department for information about their programs of study and confer with their advisers whenever problems arise. The student is expected to follow the program outlined as closely as possible, particularly in the first two years when satisfying basic degree requirements and prerequisites for advanced standing. Students may not be admitted to or change to a specified degree program before the degree program requirements have been published in the official catalog.”
Disposition: Chancellor
03-20 Revised Department of Physics’ Unit Code of Operation.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-21 Formation of 3 new colleges currently to be called “College of Human Ecology, College of Technology and Computer Science and College of Fine Arts and Communication”.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-22 Rename the School of Health and Human Performance the College of Health and Human Performance.
Disposition: Chancellor
Disposition: Chancellor
03-24 Move the minor in International Studies and its director from the Office of International Affairs to the College of Arts and Sciences.
Disposition: Chancellor
