MENU
 
Faculty Senate



blank


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


EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY

FACULTY SENATE

FULL MINUTES OF APRIL 19, 2005

 

The eighth regular meeting of the 2004-2005 Faculty Senate was held on Tuesday, April 19, 2005, in the Mendenhall Student Center, Great Room.

 

Agenda Item I. Call to Order

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

 

Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes

The March 22, 2005, meeting minutes were approved as presented.

 

Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day

 

A.       Roll Call

Senators absent were: Professors Wang (Geography), Robinson (Mathematics), Funaro (Theatre and Dance), and Varner (Administrative Council Representative).

 

Alternates present were: Professors Stavarakas-Hodson for Painter (Allied Health Sciences), Capehart for Kalmus (Biology), Bullington for Tropf (Communication), Stapleton for Sugar (Education), Hodge for Thomson (Education), Hodson for Fletcher (Medicine), and Worthington for Willson (Medicine).

 

B. Announcements

The Chancellor has approved the following resolutions from the March 22, 2005, Faculty Senate meeting:

05-13    Spring 2005 Graduation Roster, including honors program graduates, subject to the completion of degree requirements.

05-14    Curriculum matters contained in the February 24, 2005, and March 10, 2005, University Curriculum Committee minutes.

05-15    2006-2007 University Calendar.

05-17         New University Athletics Committee charge.

05-19    Revised ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix A. By-Laws.

05-21         ECU Serious Illness and Disability Policy.

05-22         Addition to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. relating to Mace Bearer.

05-24    New College of Technology and Computer Science Unit Code of Operation.


The Chancellor would like to do a use study by retired faculty before reaching a decision on the following resolution:

05-23         Revision to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI. relating to parking privileges for retired faculty.

 

A special thanks was extended to Chancellor Steve Ballard for covering the cost of refreshments throughout the year for the Faculty Senate meetings.

 

2006-2007 applications for both Research/Creative Activity Grants and Teaching Grants are now available on the Committees‰ web sites noted below and in the Faculty Senate office, 140 Rawl Annex. 

 

Research/Creative Activity Grant Applications - due 12:00 noon on Wednesday, September 14, 2005. http://www.ecu.edu/fsonline/AcademicCommittees/rg/researchgrants.htm

 

Teaching Grant Applications - due 12:00 noon on Monday, October 3, 2005.

http://www.ecu.edu/fsonline/AcademicCommittees/tg/teachinggrants.htm

 

Faculty interested in periodically receiving issues of The Chronicle of Higher Education are asked to call the Faculty Senate office at 328-6537 and place their name on a list for distribution.

    

Congratulations to Leslie Omoruyi (Political Science) who was selected as the first "UNC in Washington Faculty-in-Residence."  We are pleased that an ECU faculty member was chosen from the system-wide search. His year-long appointment will begin this month in Washington, DC.  For further information on this new program, please contact Dorothy Muller at 328-1426.

 

Tovey (English) took a moment to thank the Faculty Senate and fellow officers for their support and patience over the year as she served in her role as Secretary of the Faculty. She noted that it had been a wonderful experience.

 

Following the announcements, Chair Rigsby requested a moment of silence in memory of those faculty members and administrators who had passed away during the year.

 

C.       Steve Ballard Chancellor

Chancellor Ballard explained that his installation speech was a broad, long term view of what ECU might look like in the future,a global perspective, rather than a specific, detailed plan. The strategic planning would continue and would most likely take at least another 6 months and would involve the entire campus. He had two purposes for his installation speech: one, to send a message to the state of North Carolina about the quality of ECU, and, two, to think creatively about the future, highlighting 6 possibilities.

 

Next, he distributed the most recent version of the report of the Joint Appropriations Sub-Committee of the General Assembly. Ballard expressed his concern about the line item approach to the budget; he feels that should be a local decision. Essentially it‰s a proposal that demands that the University system become self-funding. Size of the impact was also alarming and reflected higher cuts than anticipated. He encouraged faculty who have connections with legislators to talk to them and let them know of the severe impact this budget would have. He also stated that ECU must make a commitment to look at the fund raising capabilities, and we must make dramatic improvements in our fund raising.

 

The Chancellor distributed a copy of the Draft Joint Appropriations Subcommittee on Education Budget proposal. Pravica (Math) asked, in reference to the Education Budget proposal what ,RŠ and ,NŠ meant. Chancellor Ballard responded ,recurring and nonrecurringŠ funds.

Lamson (Child Development and Family Relations) asked about the status of the University Childcare Center. Provost Smith responded that this item was on the list for consideration of funding and that VC Seitz was aware of the need. They would keep working toward implementation.

 

Allred (Psychology) asked what the implications of the budget were on the new academic programs being proposed. Ballard responded that his fear was that budget cuts would be large and would require everyone to look at their priorities with both old and new programs. Given (Foreign Languages) asked how many positions might be cut at ECU. Ballard responded that he had no specific numbers, but that the cuts likely would be prorated throughout the system.

 

D.       Kevin Seitz, Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance discussed various budget issues, and some of the challenges he faces. He has spent time on research infrastructure, including meeting with Interim VC Gilbert to identify solutions and has also looked at the bond programs and begun planning for future projects. He has met with the Faculty Senate budget committee and Dr. Rigsby, and stated that he appreciated the opportunity to talk to the Senate.

 

Pravica (Mathematics) asked about the problem of effort reporting. Seitz stated that at present we did not have the resources to support the researchers and the effort reporting was one item that needed attention.

 

Rigsby (Geology) asked for an update on the Mendenhall Student Center renovations that Vice Chancellor Moore is overseeing. Seitz reported that the Mendenhall renovation was a self-liquidating project, one that would be paid for with internal revenues, would cost 30-35 million dollars, and would be financed through bonds. The building would provide multi-use rooms, food service, and technology. Construction was slated to begin by end of 2006.

 

E.       George Harrell, Senior Associate Vice Chancellor for Campus Operations reported on the parking system and the 1.1 oversell ratio for A1 parking: 1221 spaces available with 1343 permits sold (10% oversell). Excluding the Chancellor‰s parking space, 31 reserved parking permits had been issued, including 8 at the Health Sciences campus and 8 off campus. Standard practice for reserve space parking (available on web site) for VCs and Deans to receive reserved permits had been approved by the Executive Council and Chancellor and some were allowed by specific instruction. Procedures allow for individuals vacating spaces to buy an A1 permit.

 

Rigsby (Geology) asked what happened to the resolution passed by the parking and Traffic Policies Committee a few years ago that requested a study of the parking situation. Harrell responded that he recalled the discussion but no resolution. Rigsby offered to get him a copy of the resolution.

 

Morrison (Faculty Assembly Representative) stated that in 2002/2003 the Faculty Senate endorsed the new parking system with two exceptions: A zone parking for retired faculty and a study combining city/university mass transit system. Morrison asked about the study of the parking by retired faculty.

Harrell reported that he was continuing to collect data on retired faculty, but that counts had not been sufficient.

 

Scott (Academic Library Services) stated that he had heard from various retiring faculty who want to park near the library. He then asked about the space designated for the University Attorney.

Harrell noted that the spaces near the library dedicated to retired faculty have not been well used. The sign designated as the former University Attorney‰s space had been removed and his sticker downgraded to A1 parking permit.  

Niswander (Past Chair of the Faculty) stated that if the number of retiring faculty was very small, why not allow them an A-1 parking decal since the impact would be so low. Harrell added that the faculty on phased retirement who were still teaching, and on campus on a regular basis, had an impact on how retired faculty use permits.

 

Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) stated his concerns for housekeepers having to park off campus and leaving late at night. Harrell reminded Senators that A1 parking areas were open to other permits at various times beginning around 4 pm, which would allow for staff who worked late or overnight hours. He had not heard this complaint.

 

Worthington (Medicine) stated that in his contractual agreement for phased retirement, the parking privileges were different than what was told to him at the Parking and Transportation Services office.

Harrell responded that, based on the opinion from the University Attorney, faculty in phased retirement have ,rights and privileges of a retired faculty,Š which now include a B1 permit and the right to upgrade to an A1 permit.

 

Sprague (Physics) stated that the Faculty Senate was not as concerned about the crowding within A1 parking lots as much as wanting to make sure that retired faculty members were able to park on campus and have easy access to the various facilities. Harrell responded that he acted according to university policy and that if changes were made, he would enact and enforce policy. Rigsby pointed out that the Chancellor has asked for a use study before approving a resolution. Ballard added he would like to have a better understanding of use and impact.

 

Ulffers (Music) stated that the School of Music buys a special parking permit for the day and distributes them to the invited quests prior to an event. Allred (Psychology) stated that in reference to a phased fee structure, Professor John Cope (Psychology) has a lot of experience in parking issues and has conducted extensive research on this important issue.

 

F.        Catherine Rigsby, Chair of the Faculty

Professor Rigsby stated that Chancellor Ballard had spoke extensively about shared governance at the March Board of Trustees meeting. He began his report by defining shared governance then proceeded to tell the Trustees how it works and why it is important, and that he valued it and would do his best to infuse shared governance into all major university goings on. Rigsby stated that his remarks told her that all the hard work of the Faculty Senate, Faculty Senate committees, and all faculties who have actively participated in the governance of the university this year was completely worth the effort. Rigsby stated that she took the Chancellor‰s remarks as a challenge to remain active and vigilant and hoped faculty would too. The University Budget Committee has drafted a set of recommendations in anticipation of possible budget cuts and a copy has been provided to everyone. Any faculty member who has suggestions should contact the Chair of the committee, Henry Ferrell, noting that it was essential that the committee get its recommendations to the Chancellor as soon as possible.

 

Garrie Moore, VC for Student Life will be chairing a committee to coordinate ECU activities related to the development of the North Campus Recreation Facility. I know many faculty are interested in this facility and ask that any comments about it be forwarded to me so that I can bring them to Dr. Moore‰s and the Chancellor‰s attention at the May meeting of the Chancellor‰s Cabinet.

 

Finally, the new Diversity Officer (Dr. Sallye McKee) will join the University on July 1st. With this position and the position of VC for Research and Graduate Studies now filled, we will have an almost full administrative house when things start up again in the Fall. It should be exciting and it gives us a renewed opportunity to step up to the Chancellor‰s challenge to make sure we participate fully in the governance of the university.

 

Yalcin (Philosophy) asked what was the Chancellor‰s definition of shared faculty governance. Niswander (Past Chair of the Faculty) noted that the full remarks would be included in the minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting and that copies could be obtained from Linda June at junel@mail.ecu.edu.

 

G.       Brief Moment in History

Henry Ferrell (History) stated many of the problems facing ECU today are similar to those faced by the early administrations: budget, bonds to support construction as well as tuition increases. The first land owned by the university was the result of two bond issues sponsored by the people of Greenville and Pitt County. Following World War I, ECU became a four year school and needed more land. Legislature, with the help of active people from Pitt County and Greenville, appropriated funds and purchased land. Other lands, including College Hill and the stadium complex area out to Greenville Boulevard, were also purchased with the help of the city and county.

 

H.       Brenda Killingsworth, Faculty Assembly Delegate

Brenda Killingsworth (Business) reported on three Faculty Assembly resolutions and requested the Faculty Senate‰s endorsement. The Minimum Standards of Shared Governance of the 16 UNC Campuses had been presented to the group in February with a request to forward any comments or suggestions to the Faculty Assembly delegates. Various comments were received and, where appropriate, were incorporated into the present document. There was no discussion and the Minimum Standards of Shared Governance of the 16 UNC Campuses was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #05-28

 

Professor Killingsworth then presented a resolution from the Faculty Assembly‰s Budget Committee and requested the Faculty Senate‰s endorsement. The resolution stated:

 

WHEREAS, the Office of the President has articulated the significant budget reductions     and reversions of the past several years, that these budget reductions were exacerbated by the significant increases in the cost of living, and that opportunities lost during this period are enormous and will continue to have a negative impact on the experiences of UNC students, faculty, and staff for years to come; and

 

WHEREAS, budget cuts will be detrimental to the quality of education system wide, endangering both access to higher education and the national reputation of North Carolina‰s system of higher education.

 

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT Academics be the primary budget priority and sustain as small a budget cut as possible.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Office of the President disproportionately shield academic affairs throughout the system and historically minority students within the system; and

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, in the event that there are any budget reductions to the university system, the Office of the President and each campus be allowed ,management flexibilityŠ as pertains to budget cuts; and

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the decision making process at each campus include faculty input and faculty representation by the faculty governing body.


There was no discussion and the
Faculty Assembly Resolution on Proposed Budget Reductions was endorsed by the Faculty Senate as presented. RESOLUTION #05-29

 

Finally, Professor Killingsworth presented a Faculty Assembly resolution opposing North Carolina State Senate Bill 1139 that read as follows:

 

WHEREAS, academic freedom is necessary to advance all areas of human knowledge; and

 

WHEREAS, government control of university teaching and research is antithetical to the free exchange of ideas; and

 

WHEREAS, numerous protections for the academic freedom of both students and faculty alike are already substantively built into the codes, missions, and visions of the University of North Carolina; and

 

WHEREAS, the practical effect of Senate Bill 1139 would be to remove professional academic judgment as the standard for decisions about teaching and research in the University of North Carolina.

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT The University of North Carolina Faculty Assembly opposes Senate Bill 1139. Further, we urge the President of the University of North Carolina, the legislature, and the governor to oppose this bill.

 

There was no discussion and the Faculty Assembly Resolution on Opposition to the North Carolina State Senate Bill 1139 was endorsed by the Faculty Senate as presented. RESOLUTION #05-30

 

I.         Task Force on Economic Development

Rick Niswander (Business) presented a draft Report of the Economic Development Task Force. Estes (Health and Human Performance) asked about the source for the additional funding noted in the report. Niswander responded that it would probably have to come from new resources available to the university and amounts to about ½ of 1% of the institution‰s budget.

 

Yalcin (Philosophy) noted that the language in the draft report was ambiguous, especially related to the grid included in the report. Niswander expressed the view that this was a starting point, and not applicable to all disciplines.

 

Pravica (Math) asked in reference to the spin-off companies, how the money comes back to help the University. Niswander discussed the speech easy as an example and explained that the patent was licensed to company making the device with royalties coming back to the university.

 

J.        Question Period

Glascoff (Health and Human Performance) asked George Harrell, Senior Associate Vice Chancellor for Campus Operations, about the A-1 parking for administrators near Messick. Harrell responded that he has followed the guidelines and procedures and the number has remained fairly constant.

 

Sprague (Physics) asked Glen Gilbert, Interim Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Studies, for an update on the one-time grant proposals and where they were in the final approval stage. Gilbert responded that additional monies had been added to the original pool for a total of $550,000, which would fund 20 or more proposals. These will be announced next week.

 

Fallon (Foreign Languages) asked Interim Vice Chancellor Gilbert about the poorly publicized Women‰s Studies conference [Southeast Women‰s Studies Association] and since he was hosting the event, why had more publicity not been done. Smith responded that this lack pointed to the continuing need for integrated calendars so that various divisions could coordinate activities. Other important activities were also adversely affected by this lack of coordination and communication. Niswander added that this too was a part of the task force report and it‰s important to get the information out to the campus as well as to the community.

 

Kim (Art and Design) asked the Chancellor for more information about the North Campus Recreation Facility and how could faculty be involved. Rigsby explained that this facility was being developed northeast of campus at the intersection of Greenville Boulevard and Highway 264. Niswander added that this was 200+ plus acres that would have recreational activities and facilities, including soccer and softball fields, for example. Rigsby added that it would be discussed at the Chancellor‰s cabinet meeting at the beginning of May. She welcomed faculty input about the facility. Ballard added that he welcomed comments and pointed out that this was a positive move for the university.

 

Stone (Technology and Computer Science) asked George Harrell about the proposed parking lot in the green space area located at the corner of Charles Boulevard. Harrell commented that the particular area had been studied as a possible commuter parking lot. With constant increase in sale of decals, parking needs continue to be studied. Also, the possibility of parking for tournaments at the new baseball stadium was being considered. Rigsby added that the Parking and Transportation Committee has faculty representation and faculty should contact members of committee to express their views. The committee roster was posted on the Faculty Senate website.

 

Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) asked about the cost of parking decks and why had the University not seriously considered that as a solution to the continued parking problems. Harrell responded that they had studied the feasibility of parking decks but found the expense per space too costly,as high as $19000 per space,and would require a large hike in fees,to about $650 for an A1 permit.

 

Yalcin (Philosophy) stated to the Chancellor that university‰s targeted research level has not been fully defined: research intensive or extensive. Ballard responded that is a question that the university still has to answer with input from the entire university community. Progress is being made, but the strategic plan will need to address this issue to help us find the resources to build the infrastructure.

Gilbert also stated this question was almost impossible to answer. We must use our funding streams in the best possible way. One step has been taken; overhead funds were now being distributed differently.

 

Ballard added that he has requested that VC Seitz have his division work with the green space committee to determine best use of the southeast area.

 

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 the March 24, 2005, University Curriculum Committee meeting. There was no discussion and the minutes were approved as presented. RESOLUTION #05-31

 

B.       Admission and Retention Policies Committee

Christine Averanius (Anthropology), Vice Chair of the Committee, first presented the proposal that the ,University CollegeŠ admissions classification be removed from all University documents because of the development of the community college system, which is better prepared to meet the needs of these students. Once the students have successfully completed courses of study in community colleges or other institutions, they can then apply to ECU as transfer students. Removing this admission classification does not affect existing administrative structures. There was no discussion and the proposed removal of the ,University CollegeŠ admissions classification from all University documents was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #05-32

 

Professor Avenarius then presented a brief update on the Committee‰s review of the current policy on graduation with distinction, found in Section 4 of the ECU Undergraduate Catalog. The committee has determined that several policies were closely tied to this issue and to change this policy without considering the impact on other policies would not be possible.

 

Tabrizi (Technology and Computer Science) questioned why the Committee felt that they needed to wait before revising this policy. Avenarius reiterated that the committee‰s position: that a number of issues related to transfer credit must be considered since they are all tied to together.

 

Professor Avenarius then presented a proposed revision to Section 5 of the ECU Undergraduate Catalog relating to class attendance and participation regulations. Paragraph 3 contains the major revision and was an attempt to protect students.

 

McGhee (Health and Human Performance) made a motion to add #2 from the existing policy that states, ,Participation in activities directly related to university course work and part of the course requirementsŠ to the new proposed policy. There was no discussion and the motion was approved as presented.

 

Eason (Nursing) provided an example of the problem when Nursing students want to take advantage of the University policy and miss or have to make up missed days and how that affects her personal life when trying to arrange days on the weekend for students to make up missed class or clinical days. Avenarius responded that a teacher could specify what constitutes make up work.  Tovey (English) pointed out that the make up work refers only to excused absences -not any absence- and those are very limited. Eason (Nursing) explained that make up work due to any absence would be a problem.

 

Decker (Health and Human Performance) moved to delete the third paragraph in the proposed new policy that reads ,Excused absences accounting for a total of 10% or less of class meeting time should not lower a student‰s course grade, provided that the student, in a manner determined by the instructor, is able to make up the work that has been missed and is maintaining satisfactory progress in the course. If a student anticipates that he or she may miss more than 10% of class meeting time as a result of university-excused absences, the student is required to discuss this matter with the instructor at the beginning of the semester and may be advised to drop the course.Š Students with responsibility to athletic teams have no control over their schedules.

 

Fallon (Foreign Languages and Literature) pointed out that the language allows for adjustments, particularly in the words ,in a manner determined by the instructor.Š In some cases, the make up work would not be possible. Avenarius again pointed out that the committee was attempting to protect students.

 

Morrison (Faculty Assembly Delegate) spoke in favor of deleting this paragraph, especially in light of traveling requirements and conference scheduling. He reminded the Senate that they had voted to support the Coalition for University Athletics and the Senate recently reorganized the Athletics Committee as a Senate committee and encouraged us to work through that committee concerning the policy for athletes.

 

Allred (Psychology) spoke against the motion to remove the paragraph. Pravica (Math) spoke in favor of deleting the paragraph and the reference to 10% since that opens the door to those students who skip remaining classes. Sprague (Physics) spoke against deleting the entire paragraph because he likes having a statement of the student‰s responsibility in discussing the matter with the instructor. Taggart (Music) spoke in favor of deleting the paragraph noting that there were weeks when the faculty and students were involved in productions that kept them out of class. He also noted that he thought the proposed revision should be returned to the Committee for further deliberations.

 

Ciesielski (Technology and Computer Science) stated that it was really up to the professor to determine if the student had a full grasp of the course material.  Long (History) moved to have the report returned to the Committee for further discussion. Given (Foreign Languages) added that the Committee should consider medical emergencies too. Scott (Academic Library Services) called the question.

Following discussion, the proposed revision to Section 5 of the ECU Undergraduate Catalog relating to class attendance and participation regulations was returned to the Admission and Retention Policies Committee for further review. RESOLUTION #05-33

 

C.       Educational Policies and Planning Committee

Charles Hodson (Medicine), Chair of the Committee, first presented for information only the following requests for authorizations to establish a) a New Distance Education Degree Program with a Master of Arts in Health Education, b) a BFA concentration in Animation / Interactive Design, c) a BA in Art with a concentration in General Studio, d) a new Interdisciplinary Minor in Security Studies, e) a New PhD in Health Psychology, f) a MA in Communication. Professor Hodson also presented for information only an implementation of concentrations for the BS in Industrial Technology, and of two new concentrations for the BS in Engineering.

 

Professor Hodson then presented a request to change the name of the BS in Manufacturing to the BS in Industrial Engineering Technology. There as no discussion and the name change was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #05-34

 

D.       Faculty Welfare Committee

Melissa Nasea (Health Sciences Library), Chair of the Committee, presented a resolution on Faculty Salary Practices. A report showing examples of the of inversion, compression, and expansion was distributed to the Faculty Senators. Following the brief discussion, the resolution on Faculty Salary Practices was approved as presented. RESOLUTION #05-35

 

E.       Teaching Grants Committee

Harold Stone (Technology and Computer Science) presented proposed revisions to the 2006-2007

Teaching Grant proposal. Estes (Health and Human Performance) moved to amend #2 to read ,Proposals to both the Teaching Grants Committee and the Research/Creative Activities Grants Committee cannot be funded in the same year.Š Allred (Psychology) asked if faculty could receive both a research and teaching grant.

 

Rigsby noted that this year one person had to withdraw because you can‰t be funded by both grants during the same pay period; you would in effect be getting a double salary. Fallon (Foreign Languages) stated if the funding was not in the same time-frame, then they could have both. Estes explained that all funding was paid during first summer session. The amendment was approved as presented.

 

Hodson (Medicine) asked what ,subsequentŠ meant in #3. Stone responded that if you are funded one year, you cannot be funded the next year. Sprague (Physics) offered an editorial amendment to change ,theŠ to ,aŠ. It was accepted. Allred (Psychology) moved to reword #3 to read: ,Grant recipients cannot receive funding for a teaching grant in consecutive years.Š The amendment was approved as presented.

 

Following discussion, the revised 2006-2007 Teaching Grant proposal was approved as amended. RESOLUTION #05-36

 

F.        Unit Code Screening Committee

Garris Conner (Nursing), Chair of the Committee, presented the revised College of Education Unit Code of Operation. There was no discussion and the revised unit code was approved as presented.  RESOLUTION #05-37   

 

Due to the loss of a quorum, the meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

 

 Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Jan Tovey                                                      Lori Lee

Secretary of the Faculty                               Administrative Officer         

Department of English                                  Faculty Senate office

 

FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTIONS APPROVED AT THE APRIL 19, 2005, MEETING

 

05-28 Minimum Standards of Shared Governance of the 16 UNC Campuses

Disposition: Faculty Senate

 

05-29 Endorsement of a Faculty Assembly Resolution on Proposed Budget Reductions.

WHEREAS, the Office of the President has articulated the significant budget reductions and reversions of the past several years, that these budget reductions were exacerbated by the significant increases in the cost of living, and that opportunities lost during this period are enormous and will continue to have a negative impact on the experiences of UNC students, faculty, and staff for years to come; and

WHEREAS, budget cuts will be detrimental to the quality of education system wide, endangering both access to higher education and the national reputation of North Carolina‰s system of higher education.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT academics be the primary budget priority and sustain as small a budget cut as possible.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Office of the President disproportionately shield academic affairs throughout the system and historically minority students within the system; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, in the event that there are any budget reductions to the university system, the Office of the President and each campus be allowed ,management flexibilityŠ as pertains to budget cuts; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the decision making process at each campus include faculty input and faculty representation by the faculty governing body.

Disposition: Chancellor

 

05-30 Endorsement of a Faculty Assembly Resolution on Opposition to the North Carolina State Senate Bill 1139.

WHEREAS, academic freedom is necessary to advance all areas of human knowledge; and

WHEREAS, government control of university teaching and research is antithetical to the free exchange of ideas; and

WHEREAS, numerous protections for the academic freedom of both students and faculty alike are already substantively built into the codes, missions, and visions of the University of North Carolina; and

WHEREAS, the practical effect of Senate Bill 1139 would be to remove professional academic judgment as the standard for decisions about teaching and research in the University of

North Carolina.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT The University of North Carolina Faculty Assembly opposes Senate Bill 1139. Further, we urge the President of the University of North Carolina, the legislature, and the governor oppose this bill.

Disposition: Chancellor

 

05-31 Curriculum matters contained in the minutes of the March 24, 2005, University Curriculum Committee meeting.

Disposition: Chancellor

 

05-32 Removal of the ,University CollegeŠ admissions classification from all University documents.

Disposition: Chancellor

 

05-33 Proposed revision to Section 5 of the ECU Undergraduate Catalog relating to class attendance and participation regulations was returned to the Admission and Retention Policies Committee for further review.

Disposition: Admissions and Retention Policies Committee

 

05-34 Request to change the name of the BS in Manufacturing to the BS in Industrial Engineering Technology.

Disposition: Chancellor

 

05-35  Resolution on Faculty Salary Practices as follows:

Whereas, there are a number of cases of faculty salary imbalances such as compression, inversion and depression at East Carolina University; and

Whereas, the UNC-OP has indicated that such salary imbalances are not advisable; and

Whereas, such imbalances can lead to poor faculty morale and faculty retention problems; and

Whereas, the faculty realize that such imbalances are in many cases not the result of policy choices by chairs, directors, and deans at ECU, but are commonly due to market forces and salary directives from higher administration,

Therefore Be It Resolved that the Faculty Senate requests that each year the ECU Chancellor appoint a committee consisting of at least one member of the ECU administration and at least one member of the Faculty Welfare Committee to:

1.    Study the salary structure of all colleges/schools and departments at ECU.

2.    Compare that salary structure with our OP Peer universities and public PhD-granting universities in the United States.

3.    Determine which departments and schools have significant salary imbalances (as noted by comparisons that demonstrate highly compressed, inverted, or depressed salaries).

4.    Meet with the appropriate Deans about the salary situations in their schools to discuss the origins of the salary imbalances and decide which are most pressing to

     solve.

5.    Set aside a small percentage of salary money each year to solve the most pressing salary problems.

6.    Report annually to the Faculty Senate on progress in mitigating salary imbalances.

Disposition: Chancellor

 

05-36  Revised 2006-2007 Teaching Grant proposal.

Disposition: Faculty Senate

 

05-37 Revised College of Education Unit Code of Operation.

Disposition: Chancellor