NOTE: CALENDARS FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 1984-1985 ARE ATTACHED. MINUTES FACULTY. SENATE OF EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY EIGHTH REGULAR MEETING OF THE 1981/82 ACADEMIC YEAR 20 April 1982 The Faculty Senate met on Tuesday, 20 April 1982, at 2:15 p.m. in Room 221, Mendenhall Student Center. The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Thomas Johnson. The Secretary noted the following members were absent: Cheng, Mozley, Pories and Barakat (Medicine). Ex-officio members absent were: Dean Laupus, Vice Chancellor Maier and Faculty Assembly representative, William Byrd. Alternates present were as follows: Mayberry for Baro (Foreign Languages), Castellow for Tacker” (Psychology). *Tacker joined the session later. Agenda changes: A revised Fall Semester 1984 Calendar was substituted for the one included in the Agenda of this meeting. R. Woodside represented the Faculty Governance Committee. Agenda Item 2: Approval of the Minutes of March 16 and 18, 1982 The minutes were approved with the following corrections: Page 6, Senators absent: Dough* arrived later. Agenda Item 5A: third paragraph, "In calling";not "In called." Page 9, Agenda Item 6C: delete heading "Resolution from Math Department"; third line: Section V; not "IV." Page 10, fourth line: add "in rank" after subordinate. SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY Agenda Item 3A: Announcements Chair made the following announcements: 1. Thanked faculty members who have assisted him in his duties and res- ponsibilities as Chair of the Faculty. Reported that the ad hoc Committee on Faculty Grievance Procedures will report in the fall. Reminded faculty that Annual Reports are due as soon as possible. Announced resolutions approved by Acting Chancellor Howell: (82~8) 1982-1983 Senate and Agenda Committee Dates «2 Revisions in Appendix C: 82-9, 82-10, 82-11, 82-12, 82-13. (Please refer to February 17, 1982, Faculty Senate Minutes. pe Revised charge of the Student Recruitment and Retention Com- mittee. (82-15) Revised charge of Course Drop Appeals Committee (82-16) New charge of the Nominating Committee for Faculty Senate Officers i (82-17) University curriculum changes: B.S.B.E. teaching degrees, certificates, transfer from Technical Institutes program, Office Administration (non-teaching) and Bus. Ed. minor. Agenda Item 3B: Faculty Assembly Report C. Ayers, delegate, reported on the April 16, 1982, Faculty Assembly meeting (see attached). R. Hursey, delegate, read the recommendations of the Faculty Welfare Committee of the Faculty Assembly on Grievance/Appeal Procedures (see attached). Spc O-4 hg Ayers moved and J.L. Smith (Ghemistzy) seconded to adopt the following Resolution on Proposed Reductions in Federal Assistance to Students: WHEREAS, the social and economic well being of the nation is dependent upon an educated citizenry; and WHEREAS, the proposed reduction of federal support for education would severely affect individual students and could well limit or deny access to higher education even for students who are currently supporting their education through off-campus employment; and the proposed reductions would have a particularly adverse impact on minority and non-traditional students; therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate on behalf of the Faculty of East Carolina University requests that the Chancellor entreat the North Carolina Congressional Delegation to modify the budget proposal to maintain at least the current levels of funding for federal student financial aid programs. The motion passed. (Resolution 82-34) Agenda Item 3C: Chancellor Selection Committee R. Lao, member, reported that the Interview Committee met with candidates and then recommended to the full committee that four candidates visit the campus,and the full committee concurred. Interview schedules were arranged -3- in order to give faculty, staff, students, and community persons oppor~ tunities to meet the four candidates. Faculty, staff, and students were provided with rating scales. Chairman Ashley Futrell will made the Board of Trustees’ recommendation to President Friday, who will send his recommendation to the Board of Governors. The next scheduled meeting of the Board of Governors is May 14. Agenda Item 4A: Faculty Governance Committee R. Woodside, member, presented the second reading of three amendments to the Faculty Senate Constitution. The first amendment, including Howell's amendment, was seconded and approved. (Res. 82-35) The second amendment dealing with Section V. Organization of the Faculty Senate was seconded and approved. (Res. 82-36) The third amendment concerning Section VII. Officers of the Faculty ‘Senate was seconded and approved. (Res. 82-37) (Please refer to March 16, 1982, Senate Agenda and Minutes.) Agenda Item 5A: University Research Committee C. Adler, chair, presented the Committee's Evaluation Criteria Guidelines for review as mandated by the Committee's charge. R. Muzzarelli (Allied Health) moved and J.L. Smith seconded that in la, part of the sentence after "field" be struck. Ferrell (History) moved to amend Muzzarelli's motion by striking only the phrase "in the case of the fine arts."" Brinn (Medicine) seconded the amendment. G. Haskins (Drama) moved to recommit the Guidelines to the University Research Committee. R. Hause (Music) seconded the motion. In discussion which followed, Adler pointed out that the Committee needed some guidelines with which to begin next fall and spoke against the motion to recommit. Haskins then withdrew his motion, Ferrell's amendment to the motion was approved by a show of hands 25-16. (Res. 82-38) Muzzarelli's amended main motion was adopted. (Res. 82-39) The entire document was seconded and adopted. (Res. 82-40) Agenda Item 5B: University Calendar Committee R. Hause (Music) moved to adopt the Summer School 1984 Calendar. Ayers seconded the motion. The calendar was adopted. (Res. 82-41) Hause moved to adopt the Fall Semester 1984 Calendar. P. Terrell (Education) seconded the motion. Ferrell moved to reschedule Preregistration for Spring Semester for November 5-9 and Change of Major to October 29 - November 9. L. Hough (Pal. Sci.) seconded the motion. The amendment was approved. (Res. 82-42) The amended Fall Semester 1984 Calendar was approved. (Res. 82-43) The Fall Semester Examination Schedule was seconded and approved. (Res. 82-44) -4~ Haskins moved and it was seconded to amend the Spring Semester 1985 Calendar by rescheduling Change of Major to March 18-29 and Preregistration to March 25-29. The motion was approved. (Res. 82-45) A. Haney (Art) moved to substitute "To Be Determined" for Friday, May 3, Commencement. Tacker (Psychology) seconded the motion. The motion was ap~ proved with the stipulation that the date for commencement be set no later than the fall of 1982. (Res. 82-46) The entire Spring Semester Calendar for 1985 was seconded and approved. (Res. 82-47) The Spring Semester Examination Schedule for 1985 was seconded and approved. (Res. 82-48) Agenda Item 5C: University Curriculum Committee Chairman William Grossnickle presented the following changes and additions from the Curriculum Minutes of March 22, 1982 which were approved: 1. Change B.S. in Correctional Services 2. B.S. major in Social Work and BA/BS minor in Social Welfare 3. B.S. in PRC 4. New B.S. minor in Math 5. Change BSBA major and minors (Res. 82-49) Grossnickle noted a correction in the Curriculum Minutes, sixth line from the bottom: "revised" B.S. minor changed to "new" B.S. minor in Mathematics. Agenda Item 6: New Business Ferrell made the following motion: WHEREAS, Professor Thomas Johnson has served the faculty of East Carolina University for three years as chair of the faculty; and WHEREAS, he has rendered such services with energy, dedication, and commitment; THEREFORE, the Faculty Senate of East Carolina University commends him for his efforts in behalf of progress of East Carolina University in general and the faculty of East Carolina University in particular; and that The Chancellor and Chairman of the Board of Trustees be notified of the sense of the Senate in its appreciation for Professor Johnson's services. The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m. Rosalie Haritun Secretary of the Faculty Helen Broaddus Office Secretary of the Faculty Senate Report of Faculty Assembly Meeting of April 16, 1982 he Faculty Assembly of the University of North Carolina met at the General Administration Building in Chapel Hill on April 16, 1982. East @unk University was represented by Caroline Ayers, William Byrd, Robert Hursey and Eugene Kyan. James L. Smith attended as an observer. In the afternoon plenary session, President Friday and his staff addressed the Assembly. In response to Faculty Assembly Resolution 81-4, President Friday stated that at the briefing in April he plans to encourage the Chancellors at the constituent institutions to obtain faculty participation in budgetary matters. He discussed the seriousness of the budget situation in view of the June session of the legislature and stated that the General Administration has the following priorities: (i) maintain the 5% faculty salary increment (2) maintain the present operational budget. He indicated that longevity pay will be made a part of debates on the 1983-85 budget. At this time the primary goal is to maintain present budget levels and prevent retrenchment in faculty. Vice President Joyner continued the discussion of the budget, informing the Assembly of the calendar for distribution to the campuses of requests for different parts of the budget and submission deadlines. Mr. R. D. McMillan, legislative liason, reviewed the status of the hospitalization issue. He stated that he expected the legislature to adopt a 90-10 coinsurance with a cap of $1000 and $150 deductible. When asked about a proposed prepaid medical plan for state employees, he replied that the prospects of such being adopted soon seemed unlikely. Vice President Dawson discussed Faculty Assembly Resolution 81-7 dealing with the development of policies and procedures concerning retrenchment. He maintained that in the University of North Carolina Code specifies certain policies and procedures which do not allow latitude in certain areas. Although procedures for obtaining faculty input in the determination ot whether financial exigency exists varies from campus to campus (and he illustrated the breadth of variation with specific instances), each campus has a specified policy in this regard. He stated that the General Administration would also discuss this matter with Chancellors at their April meeting. President Friday urged members of the Assembly to encourage their Faculty Senates to adopt resolutions encouraging the federal government not to implement proposed cutbacks in student aid. He also requested delegates to write their legislators and to urge their colleagues to do so. Vice President Joyner distributed a copy of the resolution adopted by the Board of Governors concerning Student Aid and a copy of President Friday's speech during the Congressional Hearings on this matter. (A copy of each of these and the minutes of the February 26, 1982 Faculty Assembly Meeting is available in the Faculty Senate Office.) Ballots for the election of officers and committee chairs of the Assembly were distributed. In the evening plenary session, the officers for 1982-83 were announced: Chair: Alan Hauser (ASU) Vice Chair: Dorothy Prince-Barnett (NCA&T) ‘ Secretary: Annalease Markus-Kennedy (NCCU) ECU delegate Caroline Ayers was elected Chair of the Budget Committee. The Budget and Planning and Programs Committees presented a resolution on student aid to be directed to senators and representatives from North Carolina. The resolution was adopted by the Faculty Assembly. oe Recommendations dealing with a study of grievance procedures at the constitutent campuses presented by the Faculty Welfare Committee were adopted. Included in the recommendations were a request to provide an opportunity for faculty members serving on appeals committees to acquire skills and knowledge related to their duties and a request that reasons for adverse appeals decisions be made available to the affected faculty member. Recommendations of the Paculty Welfare Committee of the Faculty Assembly on Grievance/Appeal Procedures The Code of the University of North Carolina (1975) prescribes procedures whose intent is to provide in internal due process structure on each campus of the University. The provisions of Section 607, establishing faculty grievance committee of Sectior 605-C, establishing & reconsideration procedure in the events of financia exigency, and major curtailment or elimination of institutional programs; of Section G04-B, stating impermissible reasons for nonreappointment; of Section 603, providing procedures for discharge or imposition of serious sanctions; of Section 604 (4), yroviding for standards of review of tenure~track faculty; and of Section 501-C(4), providing various routes of appeal, offer testimony to the careful attention accorded the difficult task of attempting to resolve faculty disputes. In recent years, however, a new wave of federal legislation has washed upor the shores of academe, and complaints based upon expanded faculty rights are being heard with increased frequency by external agencies; colleges and universities have S begun to lose the privilege of self-regulation and can no longer be considered sanctuaries from the courts. In general, higher education is being held increasingly accountable and finds itself caught in the throes of a shift from informal and consensual judgments to authority based on formal criteria. Standardization, litiga: and consha Sia iee have become the watchwords of academic governance. Ample incentive, therefore, exists for academic communities to appraise their need for formal complaint procedures which will be fair and adequate, and whic! will be widely viewed as such. The very best procedures will be of little consequenc if such procedures do not command the respect of faculties. Faculty members must be convinced that their complaints will be treated promptly, thoroughly, objectively, anr without retribution -- otherwise, the trend toward external resolution that has already begun is certain to continue and, indeed, to intensify. The magnitude of ae the threat to institutional autonomy and academic traditions presented by external control is, perhaps, not fully appreciated by all faculty and administrators. The & ndependence of the univers: ia vital to th of the university as a plece cf honest inquiry and learn speaking to the students of Yale University. ¢ Ipon ¢ special nature ¥¢ academe when he rem rked: “You probably have not been as f: before. You may Enjoy the freedom of doubt rnal grievance procedures can be formulated need for appeal to external authority, protect titutional autonomy and academic traditions, and fully protect the rights of individual faculty that the following recommendations are made to the President North Carolina: recommended tha € provi ded hed in 1981 _ “ é oe wh Ure : -. Att f toe Us oat . t, . Sy + e % 2 / , | oe of - F > >) & ). O180 Oe, N ew York, 10020) be studied carefully by apprepriat s ls of hte staff. appropriate facultu and administrators A & ie LAs 4 Aid Levi - Ala T+ . , fo a AY re Carolina, Implementation of ed to reflect tnstit.tional needs, The text cited above provides a detai with many internal grievance procedures and makes treating said problems. Used by appropriate campus provide a framework for determining what changes, institutional policies and procedures. 6 Te of a 4 28 9, It ts recommended that the Presi that faculty charged with the reeponsibili grievance/appeal presentations be ekille and knowledge required of It is essential that faculty orievance/appeals be treated by possess the necessary knowledge and objectivity demanded of their position. antention of a campus grievance committee is not a sufficient guarantee of faculty gights. The need for education is urgent if internal procedures are to command the respect of faculty and withstand external review. That repuest c00h Chance hr Co ple 3, It te recommended #e the President, thee renewed emphaets +e— 3 ~—phaced upon the timely resolution of grievances at the lowest possible level of appeal. The early usage of skilled mediators and the opportuni ty for impartial review by a disinterested person aé a final step in grievance procedures, where applicable, are provisions which should be given the most serious consideration. Faculty complaints must not be allowed to become ensnarled in informal procedures which are so casual, undirected, vague, and lengthy that more formal consideration is discouraged, if not virtually precluded. The traditional pattern o & appeal to successively higher levels of administrative authority is being increasing rejected by faculty as they resort to litigation as 4 perceived means of attaining greater measures of equity and impartiality. "There are," states McCarthy, "“obviou due process deficiencies in procedutes which vest final authority with the presiden or another high-level administrator. Procedures that provide only for an administ review and allow administrators to act a5 judge, jury, and prosecutor will not enge: widespread confidence (p. 12)." Evidence from a recent survey of Faculty Assembly delegates suggests that impartial, third-party arbitration, where applicable, as a final step in grievance/appeal procedures to provide for external review of complai involving employment, alleged discrimination, professional activities, and academic freedom would do much to legitimate internal procedures. eat Begues f of Ze Chanc eHens 7 4. It is recommended +e the President, that a faculty member who te & the recipient of an adverse decision be given, tf requested by the affect faculty member, the reasone for the adverse decision; and that, tr requested, those reasons be committed to writing. One fundamental explain source of inadequacy negative decisions. in many Without reasons, academic due the tantamount to an impotent gesture; without reasons and the right each ins practices, and reflect institution. as promotion, "Policies cn substance but to determine if sh e P=) institution’ adverse the goals, poli impor tan g The tenure, and conce cies decisions. . omplaint procedure will to make prov tf said poltcites are suffic process structure. os 50: oe 187 tutton to overnance structure, Since complaints t that these should have ci tion retrenchment. rning pro ould pr . The more specific be recommended that tons for appropriate extating pers ee e to peg a viable review care fully oi early es itly spect rt spect > faculty status should cedural: ovide for wiftten ste