FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

February 19, 1985

The sixth regular meeting of the Faculty Senate for the academic year 1984-85
was held on Tuesday, February 19, 1985, in Mendenhall Student Center, Room
244, with Chair James LeRoy Smith presiding. Members absent were: Bays
(Soe/Anthro/Econ), Kledaras (Allied Health), and Boyce (Faculty Assembly
Rep.). Alternates present were Thornton for Capen (Business), Holt for Jones
(English), Hancock for Johnson (HPERS), Steele for Gallagher (Home Economics),
Boklage for O'Brien ~Medicine), Merrow for Spickerman (Nursing). Doug McMil-
len will be replacing Malcolm South who is on a leave of absence for the
spring semester.

The Chair asked the Senate's approval of Agenda Item VC presented only for
discussion. The purpose of leaving action for the March meeting was to permit
senators to discuss the report of the Teaching Effectiveness Committee and the

dissenting report with the individual units and faculty at large. By
consensus the agenda item was approved.

Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes

P. Bredderman requested a change on page 5, Agenda item IV.A., second
paragraph, second sentence from, "Since that Library was separated from the
old Division of Library Services, Medicine had . . ." to "Since the
dissolution of the Health Affairs Division, Medicine has .. ."

A. Volpe requested the change on page 2, paragraph 3, first line from

"Associate or Assistant to the Vice Chancellor" to "Associate or Assistant
Vice Chancellor."

The minutes were approved as corrected.

Agenda Item IIIA. Announcements
T. Elizabeth Dole, a native North Carolinian and Secretary of Transportation

in Washington, D.C., will be our commencement speaker this spring. She
will receive an honorary Doctor of Letters degree.

Chancellor and Mrs. Howell will host a reception for Faculty Senators and

spouses/ friends a the evening of March 18..

The "on-line" registration "go, no-go" decision will be made in late
February. Terminal operator training sessions are underway this week. The
Liaison Committee is preparing recommendations for Dr. Volpe. I will send
our results to all senators once they are available. I have attended one
of the training sessions, and I am confident that all concerned will see

the distinct advantages of this system, once hands-on familiarity and a bit
of experience is gained.

The Committee on Committees has prepared the annual letters seeking
nominees for the important work of faculty and administrative committees
for next year. I cannot say enough about the importance of these

 
rJ

g
endeavors, and I wish to thank Chancellor cm ee support for this
effort, as indicated in the cover letter from him that is attached to the
call. Please give every consideration to this matter and discuss it with
your colleagues. I remind you of the availability in your unit of the
committee handbook,

5. The Rotterdam Symphony will perform Wednesday, February 27 at 8:00 p.m. in
Wright Auditorium.

Agenda Item III.B. Faculty Assembly

Search .
Hough stated that there was little to report because no faculty appointments
have yet been made to the Advisory Committee.

Agenda Item III.C. Art Baker, Head Football Coach

The Chair introduced and welcomed Art Baker, the new head football coach.
Baker reported that recruiting has been completed and 18 young men signed with
ECU. He thanked those faculty who helped in the process. With regard to
faculty interest in the academic capabilities of athletes, Coach Baker
reported that in his last two positions, 95% of the football players had
graduated. Several things are being done on the state and local level to
assure that athletes' academic standards be raised. Although it is true that
usually the higher the SAT score, the longer the 40 yard time (the Slower the
athlete), many factors affect performance. The coach announced that one

young man with a grade point average of 3.9 had just broken Terry Long's squat
lift record with a 825 1b. squat lift. He noted that there is a very
difficult football schedule in place for the next two years. Coach Baker

invited faculty to support the team, indicating that the faculty was welcome
to watch drills or to attend film viewings.

Agenda Item IIID: Election of Five Members of the Nominating Committee for
Faculty Senate officers for 1995-06

ee,

The following candidates were nominated to the Nominating Committee for
Faculty Senate officers for 1985-86:

Larry Hough, Political Science
JoAnn Jones, English

Artemis Kares, Academic Library Services
Bea Chauncey, Music

Ken Wilson, Sociology/Anthropology/Economics

Rees moved and Crawley seconded that nominations be closed. The motion passed

on a voice vote and the five nominees were elected by acclamation to the
committee,

Kares and Hough were nominated and both declined the chairmanship of the

committee. Wilson was nominated and elected by acclamation to be the chair of
the Nominating Committee.

Agenda Item IV.A.
R. Fulghum reported on a meeting of the Parking and Traffic Committee with

 
Chief of Security Calder. Calder explained that ticketing of cars does not
begin until registration day because of the large numbers of unregistered :
parent cars, and because there is insufficient manpower for the heavy traffic.
Traffic regulations are enforced, however, during registration and examination

periods. The policy is not to tow a vehicle until three tickets have been
issued.

If a faculty member wishes to make a complaint of an illegally parked vehicle,

he/she can do so and the car will be towed. The faculty member who complained _

will have his/her name included on the ticket. in trelet Icept
74 note in Security obfice

Some students drive their parents' cars with faculty stickers and some

Students have obtained staff stickers with old ID cards similar to staff

cards. Efforts are being made to halt these practices. " e

-
Discussion followed concerning i i rt ae only parts
of which have been implemented,|notably the increased parkin fee Income
from fees has been used to pave and prepare more parking lots.

The remainder of the report is in the Planning Commission Report. Atkeson
noted that his original motion had been to enforce traffic regulartions and if

this is the intent of the security forces during registration and exam
periods, he was satisfied.

= B. Chauncey moved that the name of a faculty member who reports a traffic

spoke against the motion noting the right of the student to know his
er and the obligation of faculty to acknowledge their complaint. Rees
f suggested delaying action until more information was acquired. The motion
TY passed after a voice vote was too close to call and a division of the house
Vv“ revealed a vote of 24 for and 17 against. Resolution 85-7.

Fe ok not appear on a ticket given to a student. Atkeson seconded. Ed

Agenda Item IV.B: Second Reading of Calendar Charge Revisions

J. Sadler presented the second reading of the Calendar Charge revisions.

H. Ferrell asked for the purpose of the charge and whether the function of the
Calendar Committee would be Mainly to formulate guidelines or did the
committee's function remain the creation of calendars. In order to guarantee
the latter, he suggested the addition of a section 6. Sadler indicated that
the Calendar Committee shall submit the appropriate calendar(s) to the Faculty

Senate for its approval. The revised charge of the Calendar Committee was
approved as amended. Resolution 85-8

The revised charge reads as follows:

2. Membership: Six (6) faculty members and one student member, plus ex
officio: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs or an appointed

representative and the Vice Chancellor for Student Life or an appointed
representative.

4, A. Committee Functions: ... down to line 5:

term; (3) the scheduling of examination periods; (4) the scheduling of
bd holidays and vacation periods; (5) and other matters affecting the
calendar. The committee (a) develops and presents guidelines to the

 
Faculty Senate for its approval, (b) makes, recommendations based on

these approved: guidelines and other matters affecting the calendar; and

(6) the Committee shall submit the appropriate calendar(s) to the
Faculty Senate.

Agenda Item V. Report of Committees
Stella Daugherty presented. the Curriculum Committee report. (See Agenda.)

The actions of the Committee as recorded in the minutes of January 24, 1985,
were approved by the Senate on a voice vote. Resolution 85-9

. Agenda Item J.B, Studen§ Reqrui ment and Retention Committee

Susan Smith reported for eee and Retention Committee. The
committee has studied statistics on student retention nationwide. Two factors
were discovered to be most important, student involvement in University
activities, and academic and personal advising. Faculty need to be made more
aware of the services available in these areas at E.C.U. While it is true
that many students are lost because of academic weaknesses, we are also losing
good students. A memo has been circulated to faculty alerting them to aids
and services available and faculty are urged to spend a little extra time with

students needing advice... Professor Smith read a letter from a faculty member
pointing out three factors: it takes only a little time, students are

appreciative of the attention and faculty appreciation of students rises.

Ferrell asked if the committee had any specific recommendations concerning
advising, particularly general college advising. Susan Smith replied that the
committee supports the report of the Planning Commission on advising. K.
Wilson suggested. that better advising might take place if faculty had fewer ~
advisees and more faculty participated in general college advising more
frequently. . B. Chauncey asked if data were available on attrition among
General College students versus students: with declared majors. Volpe replied
that retention is a greater problem at the freshman and sophomore levels.
Overall, approximately 50% of the freshmen who enter graduate/an—four-years;—
and this figure seems to compare favorably with other universities.

Agenda Item V.C. Teaching Effectiveness Committee
Belinda Lee presented and read the Tea ing Effectiveness Committee report as

distributed to the faculty. J. Longhill then presented his dissenting report.

The €hair announced rules for discussion on tHe’ report. Each Senator
could*speak Once to therissue until’ every Sendtor who wished to speak had done
so. Comments from committee members would not be included in the one-time

rule, and committee members would be given the opportunity to make a statement
before the floor was opened.

In reply to Longhill's report, M. McGrath noted that the many objections she

had heard from faculty regarding evaluation had all. dealt with the evaluation

instrument. None had dealt with the idea of having evaluations of teaching
effectiveness. os, Ra te

Bloodworth, a member of the committee, spoke to the integrity of the use of
the instrument. Ed Ryan noted that Appendix C mandates the development of an
evaluation instrument. Longhill was asked if his statement. that the majority

 
of the faculty do not favor student evaluations, was an opinion or the results
of a poll. Longhill replied that a scientific poll was not taken and the
statement was his opinion. , Rees asked if Longhill favored the continued use
of the old long form or if he was opposed to all forms. Longhill replied that
the latter was his position.

J.O. Smith (Business) asked if this form will be final and if the TEC would go
out of business for three years until data on the results could be compiled.

Boklage asked if other forms of teaching evaluation had been considered,
particularly the. measurement of learning in pre- and .post-tests on the course
‘» subjeet4matter. Ee “iWtoiss.66 Ings iinped

L. Hough raised his departments' objections to the wording of some questions .
on the short form, particularly in reference to how students would interpret
questions containing. two or three elements. Bloodworth responded that
although interpretations by students cannot be controlled, the analysis of the
responses can be controlled.

C. Adler also noted concern with some multi-part questions and the inhibitions
on teaching style that might result. McGrath noted that the questions dealing
with respect and fairness were addressing the old problem of sexual or racial
discrimination rather than a teaching style. Adler asked if "good teacher"
was not better than "effective teacher" and also questioned student

interpretation of course goals, which for most students meant to pass the
course.

H. Ferrell noted the history of the 12 questions designed to help improve
intruction. The request for evaluation of teaching by administrators came

from the Board of Trustees. The short form now designed for administrative
use will affect tenure-track professors and promotion more than established

professors. Longhill noted that his objection to administrative use of

student evaluation was aimed not at the effect on professors or their careers,
but at its effect on higher education. OS

'
}

Bloodworth reported how ineffective the present long form is for
administrative evaluation of teaching. Lee urged faculty to remember

that the committee recommended that this four-item instrument be only one of
several methods used to evaluate teaching.

“ree 7 oe ? wr + #@

- > - 7 ° 9 “~ .

“Ferréll asked why one form could not be used with four questions pulled out
for administrative evaluation purposes. Bredderman questioned the scale and
asked why there was no clear indication of what a student could label as
unacceptable. Wilson summarized the debate as having three parts:

1. Do we want student evaluation of teaching at all?
2. Do we support this procedure of§—two-—forms,- and
Do we support the specific items and questions?

 
He suggested that future debate be aimed at these separate categories. eS

Dudek spoke to the issue of evaluation versus measurement. Students can
evaluate but not measure, and data from student evaluation cannot be used as a
measure. Good teaching depends on traditional mutual respect and discussion
among colleagues rather than on student opinion. Bloodworth responded that
measurement of data collected from the responses of those four questions would
be valid as a measurement if used as outlined on the committee report.

Boklage objected on the grounds that the only objective data would be data
based on subjective responses, and therefore such data could not be objective.
Bloodworth replied that the meaning attached to the survey numbers must be
consistent amd statistically significant as carefully outlined in the report.

C. Adler spoke in favor of peer evaluations being used in conjunction with
student evaluations. In his department of 13 faculty, the correlation between
the two kinds of evaluation had proved to be exactly the same. Discussion on
these issues will continue at the next Senate meeting.

Agenda Item V.D. Revised Academic Library Services Code
Eldean Pierce presented the revised Academic Library Services Code. The

Senate approved the Code on a voice vote. Resolution 85-10

Agenda Item VI. New Business
There being no New Business the Senate adjourned at 4:50 p.m.

Nancy Mayberry Helen Broaddus
Secretary of the Faculty Office Secretary of the Senate

Resolutions passed by Senate:

85-7 Motion which states that the name of a faculty member who reports a
traffic violation not appear on a ticket given to a student.

85-8 Calendar Committee Charge Revisions

85-9 Curriculum Committee Minutes of January 24, 1985

85-10 Revisions in Academic Library Services Code

> €6