EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE
FULL MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2003
The eighth regular meeting of the 2002-2003 Faculty Senate was held on Tuesday, April 22, 2003, in the Mendenhall Student Center, Great Room.
Agenda Item I. Call to Order
Bob Morrison (Chemistry), Chair of the Faculty, called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m.
Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of March 25, 2003, were approved as presented.
Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll Call
Senators absent were: Professors Conner-Kerr (Allied Health Sciences), Wilentz, (English), Ciesielski (Industry and Technology), Dobbs and McMillen (Medicine), Varner (Administrative Council Rep), and Vice Chancellor Feldbush.
Alternates present were: Professors McIntyre for Gemperline (Chemistry), Droes for Williams (Nursing), and Childers for Hall (Psychology).
B. Announcements
1. The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the March 25, 2003, Faculty Senate meeting:
03-15 Spring 2003 Graduation Roster, including honors program graduates, subject to the completion of degree requirements.
03-16 Items 1-12 of the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003.
03-17 Revisions to the requirements for the BA in Mathematics as noted in the University Curriculum Committee minutes of February 27, 2003.
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.
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.”
03-20 Revised Department of Physics’ Unit Code of Operation.
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”.
03-22 Rename the School of Health and Human Performance the College of Health and Human Performance.
03-24 Move the minor in International Studies and its director from the Office of International Affairs to the College of Arts and Sciences.
2. The 2004/2005 Research/Creative Activity Grant Applications and Teaching Grant Applications are now available in the Faculty Senate office (140 Rawl Annex) and on the Committees’ web sites as noted below. These grants will be evaluated in Fall 2003, with funding to begin Summer 2004.
Research Grants: http://www.ecu.edu/fsonline/AcademicCommittees/rg/researchgrants.htm
Teaching Grants: http://www.ecu.edu/fsonline/AcademicCommittees/tg/teachinggrants.htm
3. The Annual Teaching Awards Ceremony is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, April 30, 2003, in the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room. Chancellor Muse will host a reception immediately following the ceremony. Please make plans now to attend.
4. A preliminary call for nominations for the Board of Governors Award for Excellence in Teaching, Board of Governors Distinguished Professor for Teaching Award, Alumni Award for Outstanding Teaching, and University Award for Outstanding Teaching will be distributed soon to all academic unit heads. Copies of the different award nominating procedures are available in the Center for Faculty Development (124 Ragsdale). The nomination materials will be due in September 2003, with the award winners recognized in Spring 2004.
5. Professor Morrison stated that this past year several faculty members had passed away. They were: John C. Edwards (Business), Helga Eva-Maria Hill (Foreign Languages and Literatures), William R. Spickerman (Computer Science), Keith C. Hudson (Education), and Joseph A. Fernandez (Foreign Languages and Literatures). A moment of silence was held in their memory.
Chancellor William Muse stated we have come through the year successfully, although there have certainly been very significant budgetary problems that we have had to handle. We will continue to confront budgetary challenges as we approach the next academic year. We must remain focused on our primary mission and we will work to ensure that our message is heard in the general assembly. The Governor’s budget and what we have seen thus far in the legislature seem to show an appreciation for education and for the role education plays in economic development and quality of life. If we encounter hurdles that we do not anticipate, as the end of the academic year approaches and the general assembly finalizes its budget, we will seek information from the University Budget Committee and attempt to solve the problems. With budgetary issues in mind and the notion that we will have to rely more on private support, I am pleased to announce that Dr. Bill Shelton has agreed to join us as the new Vice Chancellor for Institutional Advancement, effective July 1st. He has a broad background in higher education administration and is a veteran developmental officer as well as being an experienced University leader. He served as the President of Eastern Michigan University for about eleven years. With our three foundations working in concert towards the betterment of the University we will maximize our fundraising potential. Once Dr. Shelton is on the campus the Chancellor will introduce him to the Faculty Senate.
Dr. Muse addressed another issue that is underscored by our budgetary problems, that concerns the seeking of additional benefits for our employees and their families wherever possible. Dr. Muse has written to President Broad and has suggested that reduced tuition for University Dependants and expanded benefits for employees is a matter that we should consider and pass on to the Administrative Council for discussion. He also asks the Senate [at ECU] to consider sending a related resolution to the UNC Faculty Assembly. Dr. Muse noted that an idea like this, which has support from both the administration and the faculty, is likely to receive more serious consideration.
Dr. Muse stated that he just finished reading the report from the Commission on Scholarship and he commended Dr. Morrison and Dean Horns, who co-chaired this commission, for a job well done. He also expressed his thanks for all who served on this body. The recommendations of this commission warrant our careful consideration, as well as a review by the Department Chairs and Deans. To achieve greater recognition as a research University and to possibly qualify for a Research-Extensive status, we must become more productive in this arena. This means that our expectations of, and our standards for, those who want to be advanced on the basis of performance in research must be raised. At the same time we need to provide clearer alternative routes and performance criteria for those who want to apply their resources and who develop their scholarship primarily in the areas of teaching and education. Dr. Muse stated that neither teaching nor engagement should be seen to be of lesser importance to the University. ECU must be able to excel in all three arenas. Effective teaching leading to adequate preparation of our graduates for the responsibilities that they will encounter in their lives and careers should be of primary concern to all of us. Finding ways to enhance the region in which we are located, by engaging ourselves and our students in meaningful learning experiences on and beyond the campus will increasingly characterize public Universities that have public support.
Wall (Philosophy) expressed concern for proposals contained in the report from the Commission on Scholarship that might lead to the watering down of traditional research by substituting the term “scholarship” for the term “research”. Dr. Wall noticed that the definition of scholarship was very broad, and he was concerned that this report proposed to change Appendix C by watering down the standards of research. Dr. Wall did not believe terms such as “the scholarship of discovery and engagement” were adequate substitutes for traditional research.
Dr Muse replied that the discussion that we are having on this campus is part of discussions that are going on in Universities all over the Nation. The Commission on scholarship reviewed a lot of that literature and focused on other Universities that had more recently provided for clearer definitions of scholarship and non-traditional areas such as engagement, prior to bringing forth their recommendations. There has been a tendency in this institution, as well as others, to define scholarship in a narrow perspective that advocates traditional research and publishing articles in refereed journals. Universities today are aware of the fact that, while that is important, there are many other things that are valued by society. Public Universities are increasingly being asked to do things that are valuable to the State that may not fall conveniently into traditional definitions. We need to have better definitions. We need to have better processes as to how to measure scholarship, and recognize that scholarship can exist in more than one definition.
Professor Morrison (Chair) stated that the Commission on Scholarship will present their findings in the fall and that the Senate would have an opportunity to debate the issues at that time.
Pravica (Mathematics) was also concerned about quality issues involved with alternative definitions of scholarship as they might effect development of new Ph.D.s, which are down this year (about 12).
Dr Muse underscored the point made by professor Morrison that this was not the time to debate this particular issue, but only to recommend that senators go to the various hearings and attend to the committee’s report. Dr. Muse noted that we as an institution are attempting to establish additional Ph.D. programs, and that he has sat in on some of the sessions at the Board of Governors where new programs are discussed. There are two primary issues that came to the surface: 1) the demand for the program in the field (as compared to how many other such programs exist in the State, how many students there are enrolled in other programs, the number of subsequent jobs for graduates, etc) and 2) the capability of the Institution to offer a program at the doctoral level (e.g., qualifications of its faculty, their credentials, etc.). We have to remember that these kinds of issues are going to continue and confront us, and when we come out with a proposal we need to make sure that we have adequately documented the demand and our capability.
D. Provost’s Report
Provost Swart stated that on May 21st and 22nd the Deans and Directors would hold a retreat to discuss a variety of items that will be of interest. As you know, this year we have taken the enrollment increase budget and have rationalized our budgets to the various units through what we are calling an activity based budgetary system, where the more that you contribute to the budget the more that you will get back in returns. Although we have looked at the enrollment increase piece of the budget, we have not gone back and asked the same questions about the continuing budget. At some point in time the continuing budget was set based on the needs of the University. We have not looked at the continuing budget lately and are asking if it still reflects the realities of the University. We will be discussing the possibilities of looking at our continuing budget from a zero-based point of view, and reallocating that budget based on overall activity levels. We will have to ask the question, is our total budget, both continuing and enrollment increase, consistent with what we are generating and with our activity levels. There has been a comment that if you are going to look at activity levels based on the generation of student credit hours, are we going to have problems with quality. The research shows that students and faculty understand the notion of quality. Giving good grades in order to generate student credit hours should not be a problem. Dr. Swart indicated that the faculty controls quality, and we should be able to have quality academic programs and at the same time have a fair system where everyone knows what the rules are and how they are to be interpreted.
Provost Swart stated that we would begin thinking of the possibility of developing an integrated program-based management system. The goal would not be to set individual faculty levels of performance. Dr Swart indicated that he would develop goals for the college, and the colleges would then develop goals for the departments. It would be up to departments to refine and develop goals for faculty performance based on their own needs. We would be getting away from the fact that everyone would have to do the very same thing.
Dr. Swart stated that he has asked Dr. Feldbush to channel all of the overhead reimbursements through the Provost’s Office. He underscored the word ”channel”. By that I mean that these funds will come through my office and will be flowing back to the individual PIs and the departments. In the past, one of the issues we have been concerned with is a lot of the overhead returns go back to the individual in rather small amounts. The idea would be to create an overall pot in the colleges and departments that can then be used at the discretion of the chair and the faculty. We would have the opportunity to develop more purchasing power for larger tickets items. This would conserve smaller amounts in order to provide larger amounts for the greater good of the unit. We would enter into discussions with faculty, department chairs and with deans as to how we might be able to create more purchasing power with the overhead funds being generated.
The reorganization of the academic units has been approved by the ECU Board of Trustees and remains to be approved by the Board of Governors on May 15th. At this point in time we will have a College of Business, a College of Education, a College of Health and Human Performance, a College Human Ecology, a College of Technology and Computer Science, a College of Fine Arts and Communication and a College of Arts and Sciences.
On the administrative front, Dr Swart indicated that we have joined Recruitment and Retention under one unit; Housing and Dining under one unit; Student Unions and the Student Recreation Center under one unit; and the Health Center and Counseling under one unit. We have created an Office of Student Professional Development, with Career Management, Co-op, Internship, Volunteering, and Work-study all under one roof, and we have created an Office of Diversity and Equity. Dr. Swart also reported that the Air Force and Army ROTC would report to the new Director of Military Affairs.
Dr Swart has challenged the Deans, Department Chairs and faculty to go out and find the absolute best faculty candidates available. He was happy to announce that we have hired Dr. David Edgell (an expert in Tourism), Dr. Betsy Sutherland (a specialist in radiation from Brookhaven National Laboratories), and Dr. Ruth Kempf (an expert in US/Russian non-proliferation treaties). We have also hired the new Dean for Industry and Technology.
Dr. Swart also noted that we have partnered with the Medical School to form a program that will tentatively be called an “MD in 7” program. We will be able to recruit the best students into a track where the 4th year in their bachelor’s program will serve as their first year in Medical School. The combined program will only be with undergraduate programs that choose to participate.
On April 28th the Office of the President will be on campus for visit. On April 30th the ECU community will meet to review our accomplishments and have ice cream.
Sprague (Physics) noted several examples of how relatively small amounts of overhead dollars can go a long way toward maintaining grant based projects and repairing vital equipment, and expressed concern that those funds may be lost. Dr. Swart indicated that he was a firm believer in the entrepreneurial system where you get back part of what you generate. The intention is not to eliminate these funds, but to maintain the entrepreneurial process and at the same time help provide for larger contingencies.
Wilson (Pediatrics) applauded the early-entry program that Dr. Swart outlined above and wondered if it this was being extended only to ECU or if it extended to other campuses elsewhere in the State? Dr Swart stated that frankly the end he had in mind was to get as many Blue Chip High School seniors as possible to come to ECU that might not normally come here.
Glascoff (Health and Human Performance) asked what types of majors might be involved with the overlapping 4th year in the program just described. Dr Swart noted that Dr. Cathy Hall has taken the lead in identifying and developing programs where various majors might be involved; some such as Mathematics may not fit the usual patterns of traditional premed majors.
Martinez (Foreign Language) asked for an elaboration of what was meant by the term “Performance Based Management? Dr. Swart noted that performance standards would be different across different colleges and departments. Each unit is being asked to describe an aspirational model in their own discipline to be use as a model. The role of refereed publications, research, and etc would be based on what best describes the optimal performance standards of each area.
Ulffers (Music) noted that although we are trying to go after top students there are still persisting stories where top-ranked students have been turned away due to the failure to fill out a form correctly or other technical problems. Dr. Swart indicated that the Department of Admissions is one of the departments that has been reorganized and that we are trying to learn from our mistakes.
Rigsby (Geology) remarked that Dr. Swart had indicated that goals would be set at the College and Unit level and that Department Chairs might meet overall Unit goals by setting different goals across different faculty. She was concerned that this might not be flexible enough to account for the fact that faculty may have different goals at different times during their careers. Faculty should not be locked into being thought of as a provider of only one type of productivity across an entire career.
E. Bob Morrison, Chair of the Faculty
Chair Morrison noted that the Board of Trustees met on March 28, 2003. At that meeting they approved the Senate’s revision to Appendix L that changed the quadrennial vote on unit administrators from the Fall to March, so that it will coincide with the administrative review process. The Board approved a new parking ordinance and new parking fees. At that meeting Chair Charles Franklin appointed an ad hoc committee to review certain aspects of the Faculty Manual. Members of the committee are Vice Chair of the Board James Talton, Secretary of the Board Stephen Shofety, Chancellor Muse, Provost Swart, Vice Chair Niswander, and Chair Morrison. Although the committee was orally charged to review academic program development procedures, the intent of the Board may be to look at other issues as well. The Committee will probably get a more specific charge when they meet. The ad hoc committee was asked to report after July 1. Provost Swart presented his reorganization plan, and received accolades to his plan from the Board. The Commission on Scholarship has about concluded their work. Their report is available on the Faculty Senate web page. The Commission has held two open forums and received a number of comments and questions from the people who attended the forum. The Commission on Scholarship will make a report to the Faculty Senate in the Fall. Chair Morrison also noted that the University was in the process of forming transition oversight committees for the new Colleges of Human Ecology, Fine Arts and Communication, and Technology and Computer Science. Appendix L calls for appointing committees to oversee the transition when code units change, such as they have under the new reorganization. Each committee will have a faculty member appointed by the Chancellor, one by the Educational Policies and Planning Committee, and one by the Chair of the Faculty. The primary issues will be the development of new codes, but if other issues come up, these committees will be a good resource for the new units. Finally he wanted to recognize the faculty senators who were finishing their terms on the senate this year and who won’t be back next year. He thanked them for their work this year. Shared governance is not easy. Chair Morrison stated that careful consideration and debate of the issues make it work and that he was proud of their accomplishments this year.
F. Question Period
Rigsby (Geology) noted that under our discussion of the performance based management Dr. Swart mentioned that two of the factors that might be important were research dollars and the number of publications. Dr. Rigsby hoped that we would also consider grant proposals to be equally important and noted that this was not being done now consistently across Units. Dr. Swart stated that we have not made all of these decisions yet and that he would welcome faculty input on this and other topics.
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
Dale Knickerbocker (Foreign Languages and Literatures), Chair of the Committee first presented the curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the March 27, 2003, University Curriculum Committee meeting. There was no discussion and the minutes were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #03-25
Professor Knickerbocker then presented the curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the April 10, 2003, University Curriculum Committee meeting. There was no discussion and the minutes were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #03-26
Professor Knickerbocker then presented a proposed revision to the University Undergraduate Catalog, Section 5: Academic Regulations, Subsection: Double or Second Major. There was no discussion and the revision was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #03-27 (The catalog revision is included in the list of resolutions at the end of this report.) Chair Morrison also thanked Dr. Knickerbocker for his hard work on behalf of the University Curriculum Committee.
B. Admission and Retention Policies Committee
C. Educational Policies and Planning Committee
George Bailey (Philosophy), Chair of the Committee, first presented the proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Section III. Curriculum Development. Following discussion and some editorial changes to the document, the proposed revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Section III. Curriculum Development was approved as amended. RESOLUTION #03-29
Professor Bailey then presented for information the Committee’s approval of the following:
Request for Permission to Plan an Undergraduate Minor in Worksite Health Promotion within theSchool of Health and Human Performance; Request for Authorization to Establish a PhD Program in Technical and Professional Discourse within theEnglish Department; Request for Authorization to Plan a PhD Program in Health Psychology within thePsychology Department; and Request for Authorization to Plan an Undergraduate Minor in Art History within the School of Art. Bailey noted that the Committee had already notified the Chancellor of their approval of these plans. Dr. Morrison thanked Dr. Bailey for his long and dedicated years of service to this committee.
D. Faculty Governance Committee
Dee Dee Glascoff (Health and Human Performance), Chair of the Committee, first presented a proposed revision to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section IV.
Taggart (Music) and Sprague (Physics) offered an amendment to delete “of the unit” from the fifth bullet under the Description of “voting faculty”. The amendment passed.
Scott (Academic Library Services) offered an amendment to delete “normally” from the last bullet under the Description of “voting faculty”. The amendment passed.
Pravica (Mathematics) offered an amendment to change “one half or more” in the sixth bullet under the description of “voting faculty” to read “more than one half”. The amendment failed.
Following discussion, the proposed revision to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section IV. was approved as amended. RESOLUTION #03-30
Professor Glascoff then presented a proposed new section to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part II. The new section VI. entitled Guidelines for Organizing into Code Units was being provided to assist faculty who democratically decide to organize into self-governing autonomous units at the department, school, or college level. These guidelines will be placed on the Faculty Governance Committee’s web site and included in the ECU Faculty Manual. There was no discussion and the proposed addition to Part II. of the ECU Faculty manual was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #03-31
Martinez (Foreign Languages) noted that the resolution did not make it clear that it was referring only to non-merit increases and asked if we could adjust the language to reflect that we were referring to procedures relevant to non-merit increases and not merit-based pay.
Morrison (Chair) noted that he was going to send a memo to the Unit Code Screening Committee that will be requesting faculty input.
Nasea (Health Sciences Library) noted that currently unit code screening had been stopped in order to consider these issues. She felt that this resolution probably should go through the Faculty Governance Committee as suggested above, but was concerned that further considerations should not be allowed to stop the process of unit code screening again. Professor Morrison noted that he would mention this point in his upcoming memo to the Unit Code Screening Committee.
Wall (Philosophy) made a motion to take from the table the motion that read: “Recommend that ECU develop a random number system to identify students, with periodic reports to the Faculty Senate on the progress of that project.” The motion to take this motion from the table was accepted.
Tovey (English) asked if a new random identifier would not also prove to be a problem if it were tied to grades, and if we should also consider doing this for faculty and staff? Professor Wall noted that such a system would not be tied to other types of personal identifiers.
Rigsby (Geology) noted that although an identification system that cannot be tied to other personal situations is important, the University is already looking into ways of doing this with the Banner system for both students and faculty. She also noted that several committees and administrative offices are currently working on this problem, and that it might be redundant to consider this motion at this time.
Following a lengthy discussion, Toppen (Industry and Technology) moved to have the entire motion and amendment tabled. The motion to table was accepted.
Niswander (Business) offered a commendation for Robert C. Morrison, current Chair of the Faculty.
There being no further business to come before the Faculty Senate, the meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
John Cope Lori Lee
Secretary of the Faculty Faculty Senate office
Department of Psychology
FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE APRIL 22, 2003, MEETING
03-25 Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the March 27, 2003, University Curriculum Committee meeting.
Disposition: Chancellor
Disposition: Chancellor
“The number of hours applicable toward a second major should not be limited.”
Disposition: Chancellor
Disposition: Chancellor
03-29 Revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Section III. Curriculum Development.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-30 Revision to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section IV.
Disposition: Chancellor, Board of Trustees, UNC General Administration
03-31 New section VI. to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part II. entitled Guidelines for Organizing into Code Units.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-32 Editorial revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix L, Section C and Section D
Disposition: Faculty Senate
03-33 Interpretation #I03-18 to the ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section IV.A.3. Personnel Committee.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-34 Resolution on Principles of Salary Adjustments as follows:
Whereas, the Faculty Welfare Committee is charged with reviewing policies related to faculty salaries and fringe benefits, and
Whereas, Chancellor Muse received a correspondence (dated October 11, 2002) from Gretchen Bataille, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs detailing the Principles of Salary Adjustments, and stating that the criteria for the distribution of salary funds must be clearly understood by the faculty, and that such decisions on the distribution of funds should be based on discussions of the criteria and the process by the faculty in the departments with the final criteria recommended by the chair and the dean.
Therefore Be It Resolved, that the Faculty Welfare Committee recommends that each academic unit develop processes for faculty to have input in future salary increases and report those processes to the Provost/Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
Be It Further Resolved, that new and revised unit codes of operation include a provision for committee action on salary increases within the unit’s committee structures.
Be It Further Resolved, that the Unit Code Screening Committee revise their code review procedures to incorporate a provision for committee action on salary increases.
This resolution was referred to the Faculty Governance Committee for implementation into the current governance documents.
Disposition: Faculty Governance Committee
03-35 Revised College of Business Unit Code of Operation.
Disposition: Chancellor
03-36 Commendation for Robert C. Morrison, current Chair of the Faculty as follows:
Whereas, Robert C. Morrison has served the faculty well during his tenure as Chair of the Faculty from 2000-2003, and
Whereas, he participated in many committee discussions, which produced over 112 Faculty Senate resolutions, including changes to unit codes, University Academic Calendars, course curriculums and the ECU Faculty Manual, and
Whereas, he was instrumental in forming a Commission on Scholarship, with a goal to re-examine University scholarship, and
Whereas, he enhanced communications at Faculty Senate meetings by adding a monthly report from the Chair of the Faculty to keep faculty informed of issues being discussed among the Board of Trustees and other top administrators and by adding a “question period” to allow Senators an opportunity to ask questions of anyone present at a meeting.
Whereas, he was instrumental in re-organizing the Academic Committee structure, and
Whereas, he assisted in organizing the Max Ray Joyner Award and Oliver Max Gardner Award to accommodate concerns of both the faculty and administration, and
Whereas, he fairly represented the faculty on the Chancellor’s Search Committee and Provost Search Committee, and
Whereas, during his tenure as Chair, has strived to resolve misunderstandings and misinterpretations among and between his peers and the administration, and
Whereas, he encourages the University community to question the usual way of doing things in order to grow and improve the University, and
Whereas, his work as Chair has reflected a sincere interest in the faculty and the ever-growing challenges of faculty governance and academic freedom, and
Whereas, under his leadership the relationship between faculty and administrators has improved and the faculty governance structure has grown stronger.
Therefore Be It Resolved, that we, the members of the East Carolina University’s Faculty Senate, hereby express our appreciation to Robert C. Morrison for his outstanding work as Chair of the Faculty and commend him for his leadership and dedication to the University.
Disposition: Faculty Senate
