EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE FEBRUARY 23, 1988 The sixth regular meeting of the Faculty Senate for the academic year 1987/88 was held on Tuesday, February 23, 1988, in Mendenhall Student Center, Room 244. Members absent were Singhas (Biology), Voors (Art), Pinkney (Counseling Center), Schellenberger (Business), White (HPERS), Pories (Medicine), and Jones (Music). Alternates present were Patton for Kopanski (Aerospace), Spence for Powers (Education), Markowski for Steele (Home Economics), Nasea for Stangohr (Health Sciences Library), Pennington for Cunningham (Medicine), and Taggart for Schwartz (Music). Agenda Item I. Call to Order Chair Conner Atkeson called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m. Agenda Item II. Approval of Minutes of January 26, 1988 Emily Boyce (Faculty Assembly) moved approval of the minutes of the January 26, 1988, meeting. After a second, the motion passed. Agenda Item III. Special Order of the Day B. Announcements, Conner Atkeson, Chair 1. Academic and Senate Committee Chairs should note that Committee Annual Reports are due in the Faculty Senate by 4:00 p.m., April 29, 1988. Compliance with this due date is mandatory in order for the Chair of the Faculty to complete the Senate Annual Report in a timely manner. Chancellor Eakin has approved Senate Resolutions 88-2 through 88-8 (Calendars). Resolution 88-10 (Book Store/Computer Marketing) has been noted and referred to Vice Chancellor Moore. The Inauguration of Richard Eakin as the Ninth Chancellor of East Carolina University will take place on Friday, April 15, 1988, at 11:00 a.m. in Wright Auditorium. Other special activities include a concert on Thursday evening and a symposium on Friday afternoon. Dave Hart, Director of Athletics Mr. Hart gave an overview of the goals and objectives of the Athletic Department into the 1990's and his view of the role of athletics in the university structure. Some of the short-range goals include: the continuation of a fiscally sound program; the enhancement of the public's perception of the program; the creation of an atmosphere where the faculty, students, and community feel part of the program; the promotion of "class" and enthusiasm without sacrificing integrity; and the improvement of academic standards. He thanked faculty for their help in the recent recruitment weekends and mentioned that no football athlete recruited this year will be a “special admit". (The Senate responded with applause. ) Ken Wilson (Faculty Assembly) stated that he was impressed with Pam Penland's work in academic support and asked if there were any plans to strengthen this program. Mr. Hart responded that the program is strong at present and that if weaknesses develop, he will address them. Jim Smith (Faculty Assembly) stated that we are the only campus in the state that can claim no "special admits" and he moved that the Faculty Senate commend the East Carolina University Department of Athletics for completing the recent football recruitment without “special admits'' and that this commendation be passed on to the media. After the motion was seconded, it passed. (Resolution #88-11) Emily Boyce, (Library & Info. Studies) Educational Policies and Planning Committee Professor Boyce announced that a draft of the University Mission and Goals Statement has been completed. There will be a series of meetings scheduled for faculty input on the statement. The schedule of meetings will appear in Pieces of Hight. Gene Ryan (Administrative Council) asked about the ultimate route of the mission statement. In particular, he wondered whether or not it will come before the Senate. Boyce responded that it would. C. and D. Chancellor and Vice Chancellors The Chancellor and Vice Chancellors had no reports. Chair Atkeson noted that this was a “hallmark...The Chancellor and Vice Chancellors are speechless". Larry Hough (Faculty Assembly), indicating that he would not remain speechless, directed a question to Vice Chancellor Bloodworth concerning a recent memo directing that registration terminals be open for a minimum of six hours per day and that schedules not be locked. Bloodworth responded that the number of hours recommended came from the Academic Liaison Committee on On-Line Registration and the request for the unlocked schedules came primarily from the General College. At this time, the latter directive is temporary and the Registration Committee would consider the policy. He indicated that statistics show little need for locked schedules. Jim Smith (Faculty Assembly) asked Chancellor Eakin about the progress on any Ph.D. programs and the effect they might have on departments in general. Eakin responded that such programs are on hold, pending the outcome of the Education Policies and Planning Committee's work on the University's Mission Statement. He indicated if the mission statement called for such programs, we would then decide on them individually. E. Jim Mitchell (Sociology and Anthropology), Drug and Alcohol Survey Jim Mitchell indicated that faculty would be receiving survey forms in April. He requested that the Senators encourage their colleagues to respond. Mitchell indicated that the student survey forms will go to professors of certain selected classes and that the students would be given the forms and asked to return them at the next class meeting. He urged cooperation in this important endeavor. F. Faculty Assembly Report, Ken Wilson (Sociology and Anthropology) See Attachment 1 for Report. A copy of the UNC Policy on Illegal Drugs was distributed to the Senators. Those desiring to review the Policy should contact their Senator(s). Thomas (Allied Health) asked about the TIAA/CREF reference in the second paragraph. Wilson responded that some changes in the program were expected but that any changes would have to be approved by the Board of Governors before they were available to faculty. Dare Nash Harris (foreign banguages) asked whether or not the State Retirement System was ever considered. Wilson responded that it was considered but that the State Legislature had continually made clear that it would not allow faculty to switch programs. G. Election of Nominating Committee for Faculty Senate Officers Chair Atkeson called for nominations. Nominees and ballots cast were as follows: Malcolm South, English 42 Connie Kledaras, Social Work 47 Doug McMillan, English 43 Ken Wilson, Sociology & Anthro46 Judy Sadler, Lib. & Info. St. 45 With 48 ballots cast, all nominees were declared elected. Chair Atkeson called for nominations for committee chair. Nominees and ballots cast were as follows: Ken Wilson 25 Connie Kledaras Zs With 48 ballots cast, Wilson was elected. IV. Unfinished Business There was no unfinished business. V. Report of Committees A. Committee on Committees, Holly Mathews (Sociology & Anthropology) Professor Mathews presented the first reading of the resolution concerning Ex-Officio Membership of Faculty Senate Academic Committees (see Agenda). Jim Smith (Faculty Assembly) questioned the impetus for this change. Mathews responded that in some cases ex-officio members outnumbered elected members. Dean Ryan remarked that in some of the committees in which he serves as an ex-officio member, he already feels "somewhat inferior'' since he is not counted toward a quorum and that taking away his vote would just deepen his depression. He pointed out that visitors to committees are often given speaking privileges and that the ex-officio members would have little more. Judy Sadler (Library and Information Studies) pointed out that in some cases administrators serving ex-officio on committees were voting on matters that would later come before them in their administrative capacity. This policy change would eliminate this. She also mentioned that the problem of ex-officio outnumbering elected members had to be watched. Dean Ryan gently pointed out that this was a "sledgehammer" approach to the problem. He noted that another means to control the problem was having the Faculty Senate determine the membership on the committees more carefully. Bob Woodside (Mathematics), having been granted floor privileges, spoke for the revised policy. He indicated that he felt the Committee on Committees wanted administrators on committees and wanted to keep administrators informed on committee deliberations. He reminded the Senate that the committees are advisory only, and he noted that "the advice should be faculty advice". Furthermore, Woodside remarked unsympathetically that Dean Ryan did not need a vote. Dean Ryan, somewhat unconvinced, pointed out that he led the unsuccessful fight to give the Faculty Assembly delegates a vote in the Senate and that not having a vote does "psychological damage". Hearing no further discussion, Chair Atkeson reminded the Senate that this policy will be voted on after the second reading at the next Senate meeting. B. Faculty Governance, Robert Hursey (Mathematics) Professor Hursey presented the first reading of the proposed amendment to Appendix D (see Agenda). Sexauer (Art) suggested moving the footnote reference to p. D-8 rather than D-9. Dean Ryan presented an alternate amendment for consideration (Attachment 2). He felt that the alternate avoided the phrase “material procedural irregularity", yet safeguards faculty. Hursey responded that he did not consider the alternate amendment hostile and that it would be considered for the second reading. Morrison (Chemistry) asked whether or not the requirement for a one-year appointment for the faculty member in question would carry automatic tenure. Hursey responded that it would not. C. Faculty Welfare Committee, Pat Dunn (HPERS) Professor Dunn (HPERS) presented the recommendation concerning Additional Faculty Salary Data (see Agenda). Many questions and much discussion ensued. Bays noted (Economics) that the regression formula seemed incomplete, that it did not include any explicit measure of teaching, research, and service. Dunn responded that if there was a disparity, it would be up to the unit head to explain it. Smith (Faculty Assembly) noted that he agreed with Bays, noting that new unit heads may not have the historical knowledge to explain disparities. Smith then moved to delete the word “used" and insert the word ''considered" in line three of the recommendation. The motion to amend was seconded. Dean Ryan asked whether or not directions would be included for the unit heads. Dunn responded that she believed so. Glascoff (Business) indicated he was against the amendment. Hughes (Business) indicated that it was not clear whether or not the data would be for information only. Spickerman (Mathematics) questioned the use of one standard deviation. A motion to close debate on the amendment was seconded and passed. The amendment was voted on and passed. Sexauer (Art) moved to amend the recommendation replacing chair with unit head, non-degree with non-terminal degree, and doctorate with terminal degree. After the motion to amend was seconded, it passed. Parkerson (History) indicated that the recommendation was a very good idea but that there were some technical problems with some of the measures. Spickerman (Mathematics) asked how F was going to be measured. At this point, Jo Ann Jones (English) moved that the recommendation be returned to the committee. After a second, the motion passed. (Resolution #88-12) D. Teaching Effectiveness Committee, Frank Rabey (Allied Health) Professor Rabey (Allied Health) presented the report concerning the use of the Student Opinion of Instruction Survey in faculty evaluation. He simply stated, "I have no idea."" He then asked for the concerns of the Senators. Kledaras (Social Work) stated that he supported such a survey for a faculty member's & assessment of his or her teaching and its use by that faculty member to improve his or her teaching. His concern is for the intent of the survey when it is used as a measure of job performance. He believes that its use is inconsistent and that it does not measure what it is purported to measure. Kledaras said that he felt it should not be the sole measure of job performance. Rabey responded that nowhere is it said that it is to be the sole measure. South (English) pointed out that the form is not very useful to faculty and that we should move to a more diagnostic form. Chamness (Allied Health) responded that the original form was more diagnostic but that this was not the information that the chairs needed. She pointed out that the second page has diagnostic information. Rabey stated that he felt that the committee was functioning as "part-time amateurs doing a job for which they were ill-prepared". He feels that we need a faculty development office with a full-time staff. Sexauer (Art) asked how many departments had taken advantage of the alternate procedure mentioned in Appendix C. Rabey responded that a survey a few years ago elicited five responses. Smith (Faculty Assembly) asked if the committee could review the seven principles adopted by the Senate in 1984/85 and determine how far we have come. Kledaras then moved that the concerns expressed by the Senators in regard to evaluation of faculty and the progress on the seven principles be referred to the committee for its review, study, and consultation with administrators and that a progress report be given to the Senate at the first regular meeting next fall. After the motion was seconded, it passed. (Resolution #88-13) VI. New Business There was no new business. Chair Atkeson adjourned the meeting at 4:10 p.m. Resp ecb ty. submitted, *¥ Ye °F os o/) pi pn? Vlaad/ An He Secretary Sharon Bland, Office Secretary Resolutions: 88-11 Commendation to Department of Athletics 88-12 Return of Additional Faculty Salary Data Report to Faculty Welfare Committee 88-13 Charge to Teaching Effectiveness Committee to study progress made on seven principles, confer with administrators, and give a progress report to the Faculty Senate at the first Senate meeting in Fall 1988 Attachment 1 c Pc , ) ae Ken Gftacn (Sociology and Anthro). Cenner “‘Etkeson ae comes Pie Senate) also attended. lal h C Oroauos Adminis .t bring together orobl = Progr am: Under old bu if lal = ul 3 an Pa Attachment 2 Eugene Ryan Feb. 23, 1988 Suggestions for Hearing Committee Faculty Manual, D-10 Firsttut) par. "Except as provided in Par. G below, the Hearing Committee’s review of the faculty member’s case shall be limited.... Failure to follow prescribed procedures: If a faculty member contends that there has been a failure to follow prescribed procedures, the Hearing Committee shall consider this contention, and shall grant a hearing if it determines that the facts alleged by the faculty member suggest, if proven, that there has been a failure of such a nature as to cast doubt upon the validity of the decision not to reappoint the faculty member. The hearing shall conform to the relevant provisions of Par. D. Conduct of Hearing, and Par. —. Hearing Procedure above. "Following the hearing, provided (A) that the Hearing Committee determines that there has been a failure, either on the part of the personnel committee or of an administrator, to follow procedures mandated by the Faculty Manual and the relevant unit code; and (B) that the Hearing Committee judges that this failure has been responsible, at least in part, for the decision not to reappoint the faculty member, the Hearing Committee shall recommend to the Chancellor that the rA faculty member be reappointed for the year in question, or that the procedure related to reappointment or to the granting of permanent tenure be carried out anew,"