2008-2009 FACULTY SENATE
The eighth regular meeting of the
2008/2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009, at 2:10 in the Mendenhall Student Center Great Room.
FULL AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II.
Approval of Minutes
March
31, 2009
III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll
Call
C. Steve
Ballard, Chancellor
D. Phyllis
Horns, Interim Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences
E. Janice
Tovey, Chair of the Faculty
F. David Weismiller, Associate Provost for
Institutional Planning,
Assessment, and Research
Written
report on the SACS-COC Fifth Year Interim Report, VSA - The College
Portrait, and Assessment of ECU Strategic Direction – “Education for the 21st
Century”
(ECU’s
Global Perspective).
IV. Unfinished Business
V. Report of Committees
A. Academic Standards Committee, Linda Wolfe
Approval
of ENGL
3290 Asian American Literatures as a Foundation
Curriculum
Course for
Humanities.
B. Continuing and Career Education Committee, Elaine Seeman
Proposed Revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V.I.K. Office Hours
(attachment 1).
C. Educational
Policies and Planning Committee, Sandra Warren
1. Discontinuation of the following degree
programs:
a. EdS
in Counselor and Adult Education,
b. CAS
in Library Science,
c. BSBE
in Marketing Education,
d. Master
of Music Therapy,
2. Elimination
of BS in Accounting, College of Business
3. Renaming of the following programs:
a. Bachelor
of Fine Arts in Dance to Bachelor of Fine Arts in Dance Performance,
b. Certificate
in Distance Instruction to Certificate in Distance Learning and Administration,
c. BSBA
in Management Accounting to BSBA in Accounting, College of Business
E. Unit
Code Screening Committee, Andrew Morehead
1. Revised Department of Biology (draft document) Unit Code of Operation.
2. Revised Department
of Anthropology (draft document) Unit
Code of Operation.
Curriculum
matters contained in the minutes of the March
26, 2009 and April
9, 2009, committee meetings.
VI.
New
Business
Joint Statement Resolution Recommending a Hiring Freeze to Avoid Laying Off
Teaching Faculty (attachment 4).
April 21, 2009
Attachment 1.
CONTINUING AND CAREER EDUCATION
COMMITTEE REPORT
Revision to Part V.I.K.
Office Hours of the ECU Faculty Manual
Revise ECU Faculty Manual, Part V, Section
I, Subsection K. Office Hours to read as follows:
(Deletions are noted in strikethrough and
additions are noted in bold print)
“K. Office Hours
In addition to teaching, each member of the
faculty must maintain office hours five hours during a work week
to be available to advisees and to campus and distance education students
who wish to consult with him or her. It is strongly recommended that the
adviser be available daily either on campus or online in the office at least one hour
each day. The office hour availability schedule is to be posted on the
faculty member's office door and/or online course website, and included in
the syllabus so that students may make arrangements for individual
consultations conferences. Each unit administrator is to have a
complete schedule of the office hours of all faculty of the school or
department. Except during assigned instructional hours, faculty members must be
available to students during registration, early registration (except when
assigned to registration duties elsewhere) and drop-add periods.”
April 21, 2009
Attachment 2.
EDUCATIONAL POLICIES AND PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT
Proposed Revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic
Information,
Section III. Curriculum Development
Noted below are proposed revisions to the curriculum
development procedures that were approved by the
“Rationale: Of particular concern is the stated process
throughout the document in which both the University Curriculum Committee “and”
the Graduate Curriculum Committee consider items for approval of new degree
programs; new minors, certificates, or concentrations; and moving
programs. Given that both committees are
being asked to approve requests, the process at ECU needs to be in checked for
agreement with SACS criteria for curriculum approval with particular attention
to the process of approval of curriculum matters going to both undergraduate
and graduate curriculum when the matter pertains to either the undergraduate or
graduate level only. It is also
important to review standards of major accrediting bodies with regard to this
dual approval process as well as to determine how other institutions in the UNC
system approve curriculum matters.”
Revise Part V. Section III.
Curriculum Development to read as
follows:
(Deletions are noted in strikethrough and additions are noted in bold
print):
The Academic
Program Development Collaborative Team, an advisory body to the Academic
Council, collaborates with units to strengthen program proposals and informs
the Educational Policies and Planning Committee of its recommendations to the
Academic Council and to the dean of the
A. Definitions
1. Degree Programs
A degree program is a
program of study in a discipline specialty that leads to a degree in that
distinct specialty area at a particular level of instruction. All degree
programs are categorized individually in the University's academic program
inventory at the twelve-digit CIP code level. As a general rule, a degree
program requires coursework in the discipline specialty of at least 27 semester
hours at the undergraduate level and 21 semester hours at the doctoral level. A
master’s-level program requires that at least one-half of the total hours be in
the program area. Programs with fewer hours are designated a concentration
within an existing degree program. Degree programs require the approval of the
GA and the Board of Governors (BOG). Minors and concentrations receive final
approval at the campus level.
2. Certificate of Advanced Study Programs (CAS)
These programs usually
require one year of study beyond the master's degree and provide a higher level
of licensure for public school teachers and administrators. The licensure
requirements for public school teachers and administrators are defined by the
State Board of Education. It is the policy of the BOG to use the designation
certificate of advanced study with respect to all sixth-year programs
established for public school personnel and to authorize no EdS (specialist in
education) degree programs beyond those now in existence. All CAS programs are categorized individually
in the University's academic program inventory at the twelve-digit CIP code
level.
3. Other Certificates
Certificates other than
the CAS combine specific degree-credit courses at the graduate or undergraduate
level to provide professional development. Certificates do not require
4. Teacher Licensure Areas (TLA)
These are specific
course clusters which meet licensure requirements of the State Board of
Education but do not lead to the conferral of a particular degree or a
certificate of advanced study. These may be at the entry level or advanced
level of teacher licensure. When an institution receives authorization from the
State Board of Education to offer a TLA, the
senior vice president for academic affairs of UNC-GA must be notified. A
current inventory of teacher licensure programs approved by the State Board of
Education is available from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.
B. Curriculum
Approval Process
Curriculum development includes developing courses and
requirements for new academic programs, and
developing and revising courses and requirements for existing programs.
The
following is the order for seeking campus approval for undergraduate curriculum
changes (1000-4000-level):
§ Curriculum committee of dept/school
in which the program is/will be housed;
§ Voting faculty of dept/school in
which the program is/will be housed;
§ Academic Standards (if requesting Liberal
Arts Foundations Curriculum Credit);
§ Writing Across the Curriculum
Committee (if requesting Writing Intensive credit);
§ Communicate with units and programs
that may be directly or indirectly affected by the curriculum;
§ Chairperson/director of dept/school
in which the program is/will be housed;
§ Curriculum committee of the college
in which the program is/will be housed and TLA proposals to Council on Teacher Education;
§ Dean of the college in which the
program is/will be housed;
§ University Curriculum Committee;
§
§ Chancellor
The
following is the order for seeking campus
approval for graduate curriculum changes (5000-level
and above):
§ Curriculum committee of dept/school
in which the program is/will be housed;
§ Voting faculty of dept/school in
which the program is/will be housed;
§ Communicate with units and programs
that may be directly or indirectly affected by the curriculum;
§ Chairperson/director of dept/school
in which the program is/will be housed;
§ Curriculum committee of the college
in which program is/will be housed and TLA proposals to Council on Teacher
Education;
§ Dean of the college in which the
program is/will be housed;
§ Graduate Curriculum Committee;
§
§ Chancellor
C. Program Development Approval Process
Program
development includes developing new academic degree programs, minors,
certificates, and new concentrations within existing degree programs, as well
as requesting degree title changes, and moving or discontinuing programs.
1.
New Degree Programs
Proposals for new academic degrees must include a list of all UNC and
private in-state institutions that offer the same or a similar
degree. Program planners are expected to contact those
institutions regarding their experience with program productivity
(applicants, majors, job market, placement, etc.). To facilitate this
portion of the planning process, the UNC-GA Division of Academic Affairs
provides a link to the UNC Academic Program Inventory and a link to program
inventories for other in-state institutions. In addition, proposals
must include the Classification of Instructional Programs code under which
the proposed program is to be classified. Faculty should allow ample time
for review of proposals at all levels.
The approval process to plan or establish new undergraduate or graduate
degree programs involves three distinct steps:
Step I: Notification of Intent to Plan (NIP) for
bachelor's or master's; Request for Authorization to Plan (RAP) for doctoral
Step II: Program
Requirements/Course Approval
Step III: Request for
Authorization to Establish (RAE)
In Step I, the
appropriate planning document (NIP for bachelor's or master's; RAP for
doctoral) is submitted in the following order for seeking campus approval:
§
Consultation with Academic Program Development
Collaborative Team
In Step II, the approval
of new degree requirements and courses is completed as specified above in
“Curriculum Approval Process” for undergraduate and graduate programs.
In Step III, a request
for authorization to establish a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral program is
submitted in the following order for
seeking campus approval:
§
Consultation
with Academic Program Development Collaborative Team;
§
Curriculum
committee of dept/school in which the program is/will be housed;
§
Voting
faculty of dept/school in which the program is/will be housed;
§
Chairperson/director
of dept/school in which the program is/will be housed;
§
Curriculum
committee of the college in which the program is/will be housed; TLA proposals
to Council on Teacher Education;
§
Dean
of the college in which the program is/will be housed;
§
University
Curriculum Committee and or Graduate
Curriculum Committee as appropriate for
degree level;
§
External
review (master's and doctoral programs only);
§
Graduate
School Administrative Board for master's or doctoral programs;
§
Educational
Policies and Planning Committee;
§
§
Chancellor
2.
New Minors, Certificates, Concentrations; Degree Title Changes; Teacher Licensure Areas; and Discontinuing
Degree Programs
The following is the order for seeking campus approval for undergraduate
or graduate minors, certificates, concentrations, degree title changes, teacher
licensure areas, and discontinuing a degree program. (Discontinuing minors, certificates, concentrations,
and teacher licensure areas are considered curricular actions.)
▪ Curriculum committee of dept/school in
which the program is/will be housed;
▪ Voting faculty of dept/school in which the
program is/will be housed;
§
Chairperson/director
of dept/school in which the program is/will be housed;
§
Curriculum
committee of the college in which the program is/will be
housed; TLA proposals to Council on
Teacher Education;
§
Dean
of the college in which the program is/will be housed;
§
University
Curriculum Committee and or Graduate
Curriculum Committee as appropriate for
degree level;
§
Graduate
School Administrative Board for graduate programs;
§
Educational
Policies and Planning Committee;
§
§
Chancellor
(Once new teacher licensure areas are
reported to UNC-GA and approved, the College of Education must report to and
receive approval from the North Carolina State Board of Education.)
3.
Moving Degree Programs
The following is the order for seeking campus approval for moving a
program.
▪ Curriculum committee of dept/school in
which the program is currently and will be housed;
▪ Voting faculty of dept/school in which the
program is currently and will be housed;
§
Chairperson/director
of dept/school in which program is currently and will be housed;
§
Curriculum
committee of the college in which program is currently and will be housed; TLA
proposals to Council on Teacher Education;
§
Dean
of the college in which the program is currently and will be housed;
§
University
Curriculum Committee and or Graduate
Curriculum Committee as appropriate for
degree level;
§
Graduate
School Administrative Board for graduate
programs (for graduate);
§
Educational
Policies and Planning Committee;
§
§
Chancellor
4. Process Completion
The proposing academic
unit, in collaboration with the office of Academic Programs, prepares the final
version of undergraduate and graduate program requests for the chancellor’s
consideration. Once the chancellor has made an affirmative decision, the office
of Academic Programs submits the new program request and chancellor’s
communiqué to
(Editorially
revised Section III.B. October 2003)
April 21, 2009
Attachment 3.
For
information and discussion only.
FACULTY GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
Implementation
Guidelines for Administrative Reviews in Accordance
with
Board of Trustees Policy
1. Guiding Principles
These procedures for the
five-year review of academic administrative officers apply to all direct
reports to the chancellor, academic deans (including the graduate dean and
deans of libraries), department chairs, and selected other leaders. Some direct
reports to the Chancellor who serve primarily in staff roles including the
chief of staff, the director of communications, the university attorney, and
others will be evaluated according to procedures established by the Chancellor.
The purpose of the
five-year review is formative. Specifically, the goals are to improve the
performance of the leader and to identify areas of leadership development. The
expected outcome is improved leadership for the enhancement of the institution,
and the review may lead the appointing officer to initiate a more comprehensive
summative review.
The five-year review
is the responsibility of the appointing officer, who shall determine its
conduct, processes, conclusions and necessary actions resulting from the
review. The review should be a collaborative endeavor involving students,
faculty, administration, and other campus constituencies, as appropriate. These
constituencies vary considerably by position and by unit; therefore, the review
process will vary accordingly.
The appropriate level
of faculty involvement in evaluation should be determined by the nature of the
administrative post (e.g., faculty input should be weighted more heavily in the
evaluation of deans and department chairs than in the evaluation of positions
above the level of dean).
2. Criteria for
Evaluation of Administrators
The
appointing officer will determine the expectations and demands of the position,
and will also determine the criteria for the evaluation. The criteria must
include the following:
a. Leadership - Promotes high
standards in the areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service;
communicates priorities, standards, and administrative procedures effectively;
articulates a vision for the future; communicates ideas in a clear and timely
fashion to faculty, staff, and other University administrators; demonstrates
listening skills; provides national and statewide visibility and recognition
for the constituency;
contributes
to the leadership of the University and effectively advocates for all relevant
constituencies.
b. Administration and Management - Oversees the recruitment
and appointment of highly qualified faculty and staff; provides support for the
successful recruitment and retention of administrators, faculty, staff, and
students;
manages the administrative office effectively; seeks input and accepts
responsibility for decisions; provides for effective budget management; works
effectively with other administrative officers; makes decisions in a timely
fashion.
c. Diversity - Encourages diversity and implements
mechanisms for attracting and retaining underrepresented groups; is responsive
to cultural, ethnic, and gender diversity; demonstrates and encourages respect
for all persons in the constituency and the University.
d. Collaboration – Sound practices of collaboration,
openness and shared governance are essential.
In addition, the
following criteria are suggested but optional to the appointing officer:
e. Planning - Works effectively with faculty, staff and
other relevant constituencies in identifying appropriate short-term and
long-term goals, in setting priorities, and in focusing resources across all
constituencies.
f. Development - Within the context of the administrative
office, works to identify and pursue philanthropic support for the constituency;
develops public and constituency support for the University.
g. Personnel Development - Provides guidance, support and
resources for faculty and staff development, particularly in promotion, tenure
and evaluation; demonstrates equitable judgment and action. .
h. Assessment - Effectively evaluates or assesses the units
under his/her administration, acknowledges areas of excellence, and recommends
areas where improvement is needed.
i. Academic Freedom - Supports and defends academic freedom
as defined in the ECU Faculty Manual and in the Code of the Board of Governors
of the
j. Teaching - Supports and fosters a climate that promotes
excellence in teaching.
k. Research/Creative Activity - Supports and fosters a climate
that promotes excellence in research/creative activities.
I. Patient Care - Supports and fosters a climate that
promotes an excellence in patient care.
m. Service - Participates and encourages service activities
related to the fulfillment of the University's mission.
3. Timeframe
The appointing
officer shall inform the internal constituencies of the need for a Review
Committee by September 1 of the 5th year of the administrator's appointment and
solicit names from the constituencies to be considered for the committee. The
appointing officer will select the review committee of 3-7 members which will
include, but not limited to, faculty from within the unit/constituency. The
Committee will present its final report to the appointing officer by February
15 of that academic year.
4. Structure
The appointing
officer will determine the process and guidelines for the review, following
appropriate input from constituencies. Each process depends on the expectations
of the position, input from constituencies and the needs of the institution.
For instance, there is significant variation among units and this variation
directly affects the constituency participation. Input from
5. Procedures
The Appointing
Officer is responsible for determining the procedures to be followed in the
review, consistent with the principles of openness, collaboration and shared
governance. The Appointing Officer and the Review Committee also must ensure
that all relevant constituencies have an opportunity to offer input during the
review. The entire process is collaborative among the Appointing Officer and
members of the unit, including, for instance, faculty, associate/assistant
deans, staff, and students. For the review of chairs/directors of
schools/departments, faculty should constitute the majority of the committee.
Role of the Review
Committee:
6. Report of Review
Before the final
report is given to the appointing officer, a draft of the report will be given
to the administrator under review. It is appropriate to invite the
administrator under review for an informal discussion of the findings. He or
she shall be invited to prepare a written response. If he or she should choose
to do so then any such response should be included with the final written
report. After meeting with the administrator under review, the Review Committee
will provide its final report to the appointing officer.
The report should
a. Describe the main premises governing the report.
b. State the results of the survey instrument. The results
will be analyzed as to the views of each 'group of faculty (tenured, tenured-track,
fixed term.
c. State what information was used, and the sources of this
information in assessing performance in relation to the ~standards of
evaluation.
d. Provide a description of the strengths and the weaknesses
of administrator, make suggestions for improvement, and recommend actions
ranging from commendation to termination.
ATTACHMENT
The administrative
portfolio for the Review Committee may include the following documents and
statements:
1. Documents
a. updated CV
b. unit strategic planning progress reports during the
review period;
c. annual reports for the unit during the review period;
d. administrator's annual report during the review period;
e. annual administrator evaluation survey results during the
review period (if such surveys are conducted for the officer under review) i.e.
IDEA survey;
f. annual personnel evaluations by the supervisor of the
officer under review performed during the review period.
2. Statements
The
administrative portfolio may include a reflective statement describing the
officer under review.
a. personal leadership development plan
b. administrative and leadership philosophies, strategies,
and methodologies;
c. attempted innovations and assessment of their
effectiveness;
d. statement of objectives for the future of the
administrative unit;
e. written summary statement prepared by the officer under
review that documents his or her performance during the review period. The
summary statement shall address the evaluation standards referenced in Section
2 above.
April 21, 2009
Attachment 4.
NEW BUSINESS
Joint Resolution Recommending a
Hiring Freeze and the Elimination of Administrative Stipends to Avoid Laying
off Teaching Faculty
Whereas, the mission of ECU is to serve as
a national model for public service and regional transformation in this
poverty-stricken part of the state, and
Whereas, the March 20 Value Statement of
the UNC Board of Governors unequivocally calls on all constituent institutions to
give academic instruction the top priority in the present circumstances, and
Whereas, ECU is planning to eliminate as
many as 147 teaching faculty and staff positions, and
Whereas, there has been a lack of
transparency in how the administration has arrived at its priorities and
decisions, and
Whereas, the present faculty and staff have
performed commendably in driving an increase both in enrollment and in research
productivity over the last period;
Therefore be it resolved that the ECU Faculty Officers and
the ECU-AAUP recommend that ECU eliminate administrative stipends, which cost
the university approximately $4 million per year, and
Be it further resolved that the ECU Faculty Officers and
the ECU-AAUP call on the administration and the ECU Board of Trustees to
immediately implement a (faculty, staff, and administrative) hiring freeze,
with the only exception being to hire to replace current faculty vacancies in
order to preserve the quality of instruction in active degree programs, and
Be it further resolved that the ECU Faculty Officers and
the ECU-AAUP request that the ECU administration clearly state the university’s
budget-cutting priorities and actively involve faculty in budgetary decisions
by following the in-place shared governance procedures and policies outlined in
the ECU Faculty Manual, the UNC Code, and the UNC Board of Governors Value
Statement, and
Be it further resolved that the ECU Faculty Officers and
the ECU-AAUP request that the Board of Trustees and the ECU administration
bring their budgeting priorities in line with the March 20 Values Statements of
the Board of Governors and that the Board of Trustees and ECU Administration
affirm that financial exigency be used only as a last resort.