dix

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE FACULTY GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE

DATE: May 24, 1985
TO: James LeRoy Smith, Chair of the Faculty
FROM: Patricia Daugherty, Chair

Membership of the committee (including ex officio members):
Michael Bassman, Foreign Languages

Patricia Daugherty, Biology (Chair)

Larry Hough, Political Science

Artemis Kares, Academic Library Services

Constantine Kledaras, Allied Health

Eldean Pierce, Nursing (Secretary)

Robert Woodside, Mathematics (Vice Chair)

Ex officio: James LeRoy Smith, Chair of the Faculty
Vice Chancellor Angelo Volpe

Committee meetings (dates and members absent):
August 20, 1984 Organizational meeting
September 10, 1984 (Kledaras)

October 8, 1984 (Bassman, Pierce)

October 22, 1984 (Bassman)

November 12, 1984 (Hough)

January 14, 1985 (Bassman, Smith, Woodside)
March 29, 1985 (Bassman, Smith, Volpe)

Date of reports to the Faculty Senate during the year:
October 23, 1984 January 29, 1985
November 20, 1984 February 19, 1985
December 11, 1984 April 23, 1985

Specific instructions, if any, given to the committee by the Faculty
Senate, other than those found in the committee's constitutional
charge.

None

A brief statement of committee organization, subcommittees,
research activities, etc.:

The committee is formally organized and conducts business using
Robert's Rules of Order. No subcommittees were utilized during the

year. The committee met with representatives of units submitting code
revisions,

List of committee accomplishments including recommendations made to
agencies other than the Faculty Senate:

The committee approved and sent to the Faculty Senate Code revisions
from the following units:

Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Safety

Chemistry

Academic Library Services

History

 
Mathematics
English

In approving the HPERS Code, the Faculty Governance Committee made a
recommendation to the Faculty Senate regarding the meaning of "code
development" in Appendix L. The committee's interpretation was accep-
ted by the Faculty Senate when it approved this code. (Faculty Senate

Minutes, October 23, 1984)

The committee reviewed the revised code of the School of Education and
returned it to the School with the committee's suggestions for changes.
(This code has not yet been returned to the committee.)

The committee considered and recommended an amendment to the Faculty
Senate Constitution adding the Health Sciences Library to the list of
units allotted a faculty senator.

The committee considered a suggestion that a unit whose senator serves
as Chair of the Faculty be represented by an additional senator. The
consensus was that unit representation is not a problem.

The committee considered the possible problem of use of anonymous
information by selection committees as a result of inclusion of an
"Additional Comments" section on evaluation forms. The committee took
no action on the matter.

Citation of the numbers of Senate resolutions that originated with
the committee:

84-35 (HPERS Code revision)

84~36 (Chemistry Code revision)

85-1 (Health Sciences Library receiving own senator)
85-10 (Academic Library Services Code revision)

85-27 (History Code revision)

85-28 (Mathematics Code revision)

85-29 (English Code revision)

Proposals and/or business to be carried over to next year:

Code revisions received in the Faculty Senate Office, but not
considered by the committee: Physics

Codes needing revisions in order to conform to Appendix C include
Allied Health, Education, Medicine, Technology.

Revisions in the Sociology/Anthropology/Economics Code are to be
considered (Sociology needs to supply committee with ten copies).

Topics suggested for consideration next year: 1. Possible follow-up
study of anonymity and selection process; 2. Question of desirability
of standardization of evaluation criteria; 3. Lengthening terms of
Faculty Senate officers from one to two years. 4. Review of current

 
policy of allowing only tenured or tenure-track faculty to serve on
academic committees (referred from April 24 Senate meeting).

Evaluation of the committee:

A. Structure: satisfactory

B. Duties: well defined in charge
C. Functions: satisfactory

D. Personnel: excellent

Suggestions for improving the effectiveness of the committee:
None