FACULTY SENATE
MEETING
Minutes, December 3,
2009
Senate
Members: C. Bell, R. Berls, G. Boudreaux, L. Dohse, G.
Ettari, V. Frank, B. Haas, G. Heard, J. Konz,
B. Larson, A. Lanou, K. Moorhead, L. Nelms, E. Pearson, D.
Pierce, K. Reynolds, L. Russell,
M. Sidelnick; J.
Fernandes.
Visitors: E. Adell, G. Ashburn, L. Friedenberg, S.
Haas, E. Katz, H. Kelley, K. Krumpe, P. McClellan,
G. Nallan, R. Pente, A.
Reagan, A. Shope, R. Sousa, H. Stern, T. Tieman, G. Trautmann.
I. Call to Order, Introductions and
Announcements
Dr. Dohse
called the meeting to order at 3:17pm and welcomed Senators and guests.
II. Approval
of minutes
The minutes of November 5, 2009, were approved as distributed.
III. Executive
Committee Report
Dr. Lothar Dohse reported for the Executive Committee.
Report from Faculty Assembly
Dr.
Gary Nallan reported that he and Pamela Nickless are UNC Asheville’s two
representatives on the Faculty Assembly.
Dr. Nickless serves on Tenure and Promotion and Phased Retirement. Dr. Nallan serves on Communication and the
Assembly website. The Faculty Assembly met
in October and in November.
At
the October meeting the Faculty Assembly met with President Bowles who outlined
his five priorities for this academic year.
·
Continue to do our part to Improve Public K-12 Education.
o
We have worked successfully to educate more
teachers, now we have to make sure we are producing better teachers.
o
Comprehensive academic program review to
redesign program of study to school leaders (Principals)
·
Continue efforts to Increase Access to Higher Education
o
Develop and implement plan to increase
community college transfers
o
Continue to expand distance education
o
Review Enrollment Growth Plan (tied to
retention and graduation)
·
Continue to internally Transform our Institutions to be more Nimble, Efficient, and Responsive
o
Continue efforts to be more Demand Driven
o
Evaluate all campus leadership on Performance
Goals
o
Eliminate useless regulation that creates bureaucracy
with little value
o
Reduce middle management
o
Institute Budget Reductions based on Best
Practices
§ Centralize HR
§ Review all Centers
and Institutes
§ Merge redundant
programs
o
Reexamine appropriate Faculty Workload
Productivity
·
Increase
Focused Research and Become more Actively Engaged in Economic Transformations
o
Take advantage of Stimulus funding
o
Focus on UNC Tomorrow identified needs
§ Marine Science,
Aviation, Health Care, Environmental Science, Energy, Nanoscience,
Biotechnology, Natural Products, Advanced Manufacturing
o
Coordinate with Community Colleges
o
Focus on Innovation
·
Enhance
Global Competitiveness
o
Use crisis to upgrade Talent (administrators,
employees, and faculty)
o
Set higher Standards of overall performance
o
Set higher Admissions Standards
o
Focus on improving Retention and Graduation
(graduation with a diploma that means something)
o
Better Customer Service at all levels
(admissions, financial aid, advising, etc.)
o
Fix Employment Practices
§ Examine salary,
leave, benefits (prepare study on benefits)
§ Better definition,
better accountability on retreat rights
Dr. Nallan said ‘retreat rights” refer to
golden parachutes that have been given to some departing Chancellors. The Board of Governors is going to end this
practice. They are expected to vote in
January that: Administrators could qualify for a six-month leave after five
years on the job and only at a faculty-level salary.
Some examples of the golden parachutes from
the
·
When
Stanley Battle stepped down in June as Chancellor at NC A&T after only two
years in office, he did not go off the payroll.
His $273,156 annual salary continued while he took a “study leave,”
which began July 1 and ends December 31.
He then has the opportunity to return to a faculty position at “a normal
salary for his discipline.”
·
UNCG’s
Patricia Sullivan was granted a year’s research leave at her $301,952 salary
when she retired in June 2008 after successful 13-year tenure as
chancellor. Then she was to return to a
tenured faculty position at 60 percent of that pay level. Sadly, she died in August of cancer.
·
In
June, UNC President Erskine Bowles brokered a resignation deal with beleaguered
NC State University Chancellor James Oblinger, under fire for his role in the
hiring of former first lady Mary Easley.
The terms included a six-month research leave during which Oblinger
would continue to earn his full chancellor’s salary -- $420,000 annually, or
$35,000 a month. In August the UNC BOG
scaled Oblinger’s pay rate back to $173,000 annually, more in line with other
faculty members in the department where Oblinger will return to teach.
November Faculty Assembly meeting:
Health Insurance for Students
·
Currently
eleven schools in the NC University system, including UNC Asheville, have
mandatory student health insurance.
Students purchase the insurance plan at their University, or prove they
are insured from some other plan. Five
schools have no requirement that students have health insurance
·
The
plans at the Universities differ, in terms of cost, and the amount of
coverage. By Fall 2010, the University
system should have a unified mandatory plan, with a cost of $600-$700 per year,
and coverage up to $100,000.
Health Insurance for State Employees
·
The
State plan is poor, compared to other State plans. Why?
The 600,000 people in the plan are old, sick, and too many people are
obese and/or cigarette smokers. A reason
is that the plan is free for employees, and expensive to insure one’s
dependents. Increasingly, people accept
the free plan, and insure their dependants in another plan. There are few children in the State plan, and
children are generally healthier.
·
No
HMO wants us. There was a time when we
had about 12 HMOs bidding for our business.
·
Our
only choice in the State plan is 80/20 or 70/30. Employees not insuring dependants in the
State plan invariably select the 80/20 plan.
·
On
July 1, 2010, smokers will be placed on the 70/30 plan. On July 2, 2011, the obese will be placed in
the 70/30 plan.
First
The following document was distributed for First Reading:
EC 2: Student
Learning Outcomes
ILS – Clusters
Dr. Dohse said it may be necessary for the Faculty Senate to take a
second look at clusters. Some clusters
are being dropped and the more popular ones are amorphous. He pointed out that the ILS Faculty Survey
report conducted last year is available on the Senate website: Integrative
Liberal Studies Faculty Survey (Spring 2009).
Dr. Pierce
asked Dr. Dohse to notify faculty of the link on the website: all faculty need to be made aware that the survey
results are available. He also asked
that the Senate discuss the survey data, and perhaps even hold a special
session of the Senate for discussion. He
was out of town at the last meeting and should not have missed it. He did not believe that the report from APC (APC
Report on 2009 Faculty Perceptions of ILS) reflected the seriousness
of the results in the survey data.
Dr. Russell
said, as APC representative to ILSOC, she will follow up with Patrick Bahls to
keep the lines of communication open. ILSOC
is actively pursuing this question of the clusters and trying to come up with
mechanisms. ILSOC needs to be included
in the conversations.
Dr. Dohse said
he is in close communication with Dr. Bahls.
He agreed with Dr. Pierce that the Senate should look at clusters more
carefully. He also agreed with Dr.
Russell that we need to work with ILSOC to have a cohesive discussion. He encouraged everyone to read the reports.
Dr. Bell and
Dr. Lanou spoke in support of action ILSOC is taking. Dr. Bell said that ILSOC saw the same results
everyone else did and it started dealing with the problem at that time. APC has oversight over ILSOC and it gave the
committee a nudge. Dr. Lanou spoke as a
new member of the Cluster Oversight Subcommittee. ILSOC has met twice with cluster coordinators
and she has met with them twice since she became a member last month. Action is happening to look at all types of
issues.
Dr. Bell asked
if this was the Senate’s responsibility or APC’s responsibility. Dr. Dohse noted that APC is part of the
Senate.
Dr. Pierce
said there is a lot of defensiveness apparently whenever any criticism is
offered. He was not sure there was a lot
of faith in the evaluation that has taken place.
Dr. Dohse
asked that everyone to read the report. The
Senate and APC needs to stay on top of this issue. If the process to address these issues has
started by May then we have done our job.
IV. Faculty
Welfare and Development Committee Report
Dr. George Heard reported for the Faculty Welfare and
Development Committee.
Second
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
FWDC
2: Revision to UNC-Asheville Phased
Retirement Policy
(Revision
of SD2098S; Faculty Handbook 2.11.2)
Dr. Heard
explained footnote 1: A half-time
employee is eligible to participate in the health plan, but only if the
employee pays 100% of the premium. If a
faculty member is reduced to a half-time appointment through the phased
retirement program and begins receiving retirement benefits, then the health
insurance premium is paid by the retirement benefits. If a faculty member is moved to half-time and
does not draw retirement benefits, then he or she would pay to participate in
the state health plan. FWDC 2 passed without
dissent and became Senate Document 0809F.
FWDC
3: Proposal to change term of Faculty
Athletics Representative (Faculty Handbook 10.5.11)
FWDC
3 extends the tenure of the FAR from three-years with one year renewal to four-years
with one renewal. Dr. Nallan spoke in
support of lengthening the term limits or having no term limits on this
position. He served for nine years as
Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR) and after nine years, he was still
learning. Most faculty representatives
serve at the pleasure of the Chancellor and have done so for many years. Several schools have no term limits on this
position.
Dr.
Pearson said some schools do have indefinite terms, but most are “heavy hitters.” Even
V. Institutional Development
Committee/University Planning Council Reports
Ms.
Institutional Development Committee (IDC)
· In terms of assessment, IDC is hoping it can
at least propose a rotation at some future point.
· In terms of SACS, IDC will be meeting with
Dr. Friedenberg on a regular basis next semester.
· In terms of planning, IDC has said it will
work actively with the UPC to bring forward ideas.
· In terms of communication, IDC will be
meeting, as part of the UPC, with the Board of Trustees for lunch next
week.
University Planning Council (UPC)
·
UPC
continues to discuss the strategic plan dashboard. There are now fewer areas with no set
standards. In those areas, there are
dates by which we should expect set standards.
·
Steve
Baxley met with UPC and provided background on capital projects. With the budget crisis, all capital projects
have been on hold except those that were already underway.
·
To
be prepared for possible requests from General Administration regarding
capital, Steve Baxley briefed UPC on his top priorities. UPC discussed them at length and approved the
top priorities and forwarded them to the BOT for discussion at its upcoming
meeting.
·
UPC
discussed the idea of addressing some group leaders for segments of the
strategic plan. Dr. Katz and Dr. Harvey
met with UPC and discussed undergraduate research, areas that might be set up
in terms of goals, areas of concern, and areas of communication.
Discussion
Dr. Larson asked if there was anything on the
construction priority list for the performing arts. According to the UPC minutes, the Chancellor
has said that campus priorities no longer need to align with the 2000 Eva Kline
study. That study recommended a
performing arts center and he believes it is important for us to take a close
look at this – it is one area where great changes can take place. Ms. Nelms said UPC only discussed the top
three priorities. These included Carol
Belk Theatre and Lipinski Hall.
Second
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
IDC 2: Proposal
to Establish a New Degree Program in Anthropology
IDC 2 passed without dissent and became
Senate Document 1009F.
IDC 3: Proposal to
Eliminate the Institutional Effectiveness Committee
(Revision of SD4002S; Faculty Handbook
10.2.2.3.1)
IDC 3 passed without dissent and became
Senate Document 1109F.
VI. Academic Policies
Committee Report
Dr.
First Reading: [Unanimously approved by APC]
The
following documents were made available for First Reading:
APC 1: Elimination of Reading Licensure Program
APC 2: Elimination of B-K Licensure Program
APC 4: WMST Program Title & Curricular Change to Women, Gender &
Sexuality Studies (WGSS)
APC 5: Divide ACCT 317 into two courses: ACCT 317 (lecture) and ACCT
320 (laboratory)
APC 6: Add new course, MGMT 388, Leading Organizational Change; Add
MGMT 388 to
list of electives
in Business Management and Administration concentration
APC 7: Addition of new course, LIT 346 , Readings in Gender and
Sexuality
APC 8: Allow CLAS 340 to be repeated for credit
APC 9: Remove IP grading designation for CLAS 495
APC 10: Add new course, ENVR 107,
Natural History of the Southern Appalachians
APC 11: Change course description for ENVR 330
APC 12: Change course description for ENVR 336
APC 13: Delete ENVR 354, Management of Hazardous, Municipal and Solid Wastes
APC 14: Change in the number of required hours for the Concentration in Ecology and
Environmental
Biology
APC 15: Change requirements for Earth Science Licensure concentration
APC 16: Revise requirements for Environmental Studies minor
[Approved
by 3-2 vote]
APC 3: Delete German Major
[Approved by 4-2 vote]
APC 17: 3-Year Academic Calendars 2010-2011;
2011-2012; 2112-2013
Discussion of APC 3: Delete German Major
·
Dr.
Russell said she voted against the document formalizing the deletion of the
German major in the UNC Asheville catalog at the October 29th APC
meeting. She wanted to share some of the reasons for her vote:
“First of all, I understand that this
decision to end the German major was a mandate from the GA, and that my
dissenting vote holds little power for changing the decision. I did, however, think that the loss of the
German major marks a significant curricular change for the university, and I
used my vote in part as a mechanism to invite broader discussion on the meaning
and significance of this decision for the campus and our liberal arts mission.
The
cancellation of the German major came at a critical time during an economic
crisis. While some describe the collusion of events “a perfect storm,” we
should also be aware of the ways the decision points to a level of potential
vulnerability for small programs across campus. The measure whereby GA
identifies “underproductive programs” puts all those programs graduating less
than ten students per year at risk. Other indicators, such as the program’s
demonstrated excellence and centrality to our mission of liberal learning, may
not be sufficient defense given such a focus on productivity.
Our
success as a university depends in part on our small size and dedication to
programs like German, where students can experience the best of what a liberal
education can offer. UNC Asheville is a small university in a state dominated
by larger universities, places where the counts for productivity are inevitably
higher, and where reaching that ten-student goal is less of a challenge.
Despite our status as the state’s only public liberal arts university, we are
subject to the same criteria used at larger NC universities. We need to be
aware and cognizant of how these measurements create a special vulnerability
for our campus, which remains small by choice for good reason.
I
want to end by publically thanking Henry Stern for all of his hard work on the
behalf of the program and the university. I speak as a former German major and
graduate of UNC Asheville, and my dissent in part registers my sense of
personal loss at this cancellation. I am sorry that future students will not
have the opportunities I had, and urge the university to recognize what a loss
to our curriculum this change represents. Moreover, I wanted to alert my
colleagues to the potential threat that these GA productivity measurements
might pose to other quality programs on our campus. Recent changes in staffing
point to the increasing vulnerability of German on our campus, and I urge
careful consideration of this decision.”
·
Dr.
Frank opposed APC 3 and shared his colleagues concerns in terms of the
inequities that are involved in the process.
He asked Senators to be careful about how quickly we approve decisions
that come from General Administration. We
should raise our voices when we feel something is not kosher about the process,
regardless of whether or not we agree on the substantive issues. He noted that UNCA’s homepage says: “A total
of 34 UNC Asheville students have received the prestigious Fulbright
award.” Over one-half of the Fulbright
awards have gone to a German-speaking country.
This speaks directly to the productivity issue.
·
Dr.
Gretchen Trautmann, Chair of Foreign Languages, thanked Dr. Russell and Dr.
Frank for their comments. She shared discussions
the Foreign Language (FL) department is having about reconfiguring its major. There is a consensus within the department to
move its major(s) from one in French, German and Spanish to a major in modern
languages and cultures with a specialization in one of the languages. This reflects trends in language departments
in smaller campuses nation-wide, and it is a response not only to try to
protect lower-enrolled languages, but also to defend the evolution of Spanish
as nothing but a service-department for the wider campus. The department is in the process of meeting
with its dean and other administrators to see how quickly it can move on
this. Should this come to pass, it will
affect catalog changes not only for German, but for other languages as
well. She noted that weakening the
German program also weakens all of the programs in the Foreign Language
department and across the campus.
·
Dr.
Larson asked if it is the case that the same standards have been applied to all
the universities in the system – 10 graduates per year. Dr. Bell said yes, that is his
understanding.
·
Dr.
Haas opposed APC 3. He rejects that the
same standards apply system-wide. The
Faculty Senate will not stop GA, but it should tell them loudly that their
standard is not appropriate and they should not micromanage the campuses.
·
Dean
Gwen Ashburn said low productivity programs are an ongoing issue. Some sister institutions have also had to
make difficult decisions. General
Administration is struggling to maintain university funding, so do not make too
loud a noise.
Discussion of APC 17: 3-Year Academic Calendars 2010-2011;
2011-2012; 2112-2013
APC 17 (Revised) was distributed for First Reading. It passed APC by a vote of 4 to 2.
The
APC wanted to make Senators aware of significant changes in the new calendar. As background information, Dean Keith Krumpe
explained that this year the administration established an Academic Calendar
Committee with eleven representatives, including: Dr. Dohse (Faculty Senate), three department
chairs and one program director, CSAC, SGA, Athletics and Finance. The group identified a number of issues that
were important to the various constituencies and are reflected in the calendar:
·
GA
mandates 75 instructional days (can include final exams.)
·
The
Finance area was interested in the possibility of saving the university money
by shortening the calendar. In recent
years our calendar has been longer than the minimum.
·
Students
were concerned about having final exams all in one week and losing the
opportunity to study and to complete projects and papers over the weekend.
·
There
was concern about keeping Martin Luther King Day in the academic calendar and
not starting after this holiday.
·
Some
faculty wanted a full week of classes after Thanksgiving break.
·
Faculty
wanted an equal number of class meetings for every day of the week.
·
Academic
Affairs wanted an official start to the semester. In recent years there has been a growing
problem with the need for committee meetings and the need for decisions to be
made with regard to curricula at the start of the semester. Often faculty are not on campus until one or
two days before the semester starts.
Most of our sister institutions have a start of the semester which is
typically one week before the first day of classes.
·
Dr.
Reynolds identified two problems with the calendar. 1) Some faculty members take field trips over
winter break. They would like to have at
least two weeks after Christmas day before classes start so there is time for
our students to get immersed in a specific ecosystem, such as
·
Dr.
Krumpe related discussion at the APC meeting.
No faculty would be penalized if they were engaged in student learning and
were on a trip and were not available during the first week the semester was open.
The one fundamental
difference between what is before the Senate moving forward and what we
experienced the last two years and in both 2003-04 and 2004-05 is the reduction
of one week within the semester. If we
want 75 instructional days (the shorter calendar) we can not have the week that
the biologists and the environmental studies faculty want and also have Martin
Luther King Day in the academic calendar.
The only way to have MLK Day and the environmentally rich week at the
end of the semester is to go to a longer calendar (79-80 instructional days.)
·
Dr.
Reynolds said the shorter calendar means that our students who study biology
classes are going to be very negatively effected. These are the types of things that Senators need
to consider.
·
Dr.
Sidelnick said he reiterated the same concerns as Dr. Reynolds at APC. Penalizing faculty is not the issue. The issue is disadvantaging faculty and our
potential advisees that week because these faculty members would not be on
campus to do post-bac and transfer advising, and meeting with new students in
our specific areas. These faculty would
return on a weekend and essentially start teaching on Monday – so preparation
for that would have to occur over our “holiday.”
·
Dr.
Konz said the idea of having an official start date creates an expectation that
faculty are around in that week. He also
heard that faculty will not be penalized or expected to change. Dr. Konz asked what the impact would be on
the lives of faculty for having an official start date for the semester a week
before classes begin.
·
Dr.
Krumpe said he would expect faculty to be on campus for a departmental meeting
unless they were traveling on university or scholarly business. Dr. Konz said if that is the case, then we
need to consider the language that is in the Faculty Handbook about the
expectations for faculty.
·
Dr.
Bell said another issue is the date by which senior grades are due. The new schedule has finals spanning over a
weekend with graduation on the following weekend. We can not wait until all students, including
seniors, take their final exams with their classes. The date when senior grades are due precedes
the end of finals.
·
Ms.
Nelms asked that someone address the idea of starting earlier to include the
holiday in the calendar. Dr. Krumpe said
it was important that MLK day was incorporated in certain University sponsored
activities and it would be difficult to include these if the semester started
after the holiday. Ms. McClellan said
one aspect of including the holiday is to be able to have programs to recognize
Martin Luther King. If classes start the
Tuesday after the holiday, staff members trying to get the students moved in would
work not just on a weekend, but also on a holiday weekend. This could also involve holiday pay as
well.
VII. Administrative Reports
Academic Affairs
Proposed Change to Academic Calendar 2009
Dr. Fernandes reported that changes made to the calendar last year were
designed to help us save money and it did save the university about
$50,000. However she has learned that in
the December graduation students will receive a program book, but it does not
recognize their honors/distinctions because we are not able to compute them in
time. This problem has been addressed in
future calendars.
Dr. Fernandes proposed changing when
senior grades are due to our current academic calendar to enable students
graduating with Latin Honors and departmental distinction to have their
achievements printed in the program book they receive at commencement in
December and May. Discussions have
occurred with the Registrar’s Office and the Publications Department in making
this proposal.
Dr. Bell moved a Sense of the Senate
Resolution. Dr. Haas seconded the motion. Dr. Dohse clarified that senior grades are
due the last day of final exams. Dr.
Lanou said there was significant resistance to making the change for fall 2009
at this late date, just eight days from now.
Following further discussion, Dr. Lanou offered an amendment to delete the
section on Fall 2009. APC accepted this
as a friendly amendment. The amended
Resolution follows:
Sense
of the Senate Resolution
Resolved: That the Faculty Senate endorses the Provost's proposed
change to the
2009-2010
academic calendar:
For
Spring 2010, Senior grades are due Friday, May 7th by noon.
The Sense of the
Senate Resolution passed as amended and became Senate Document 1209F.
Craft
Dr.
The Craft Campus Committee’s
first meeting was November 6, 2009. They
will meet three or four more times and hope to come to a clearer idea of where
the project is going and to make recommendations for a site on campus. The group agreed that an
environmentally-friendly campus should be the first priority. Dr. Fernandes’ report is available at: Craft
Campus Committee Update.
Discussion
Highlights of the
discussion follow:
·
Dr.
Fernandes said that the newly acquired Rhoades property has been considered as
a possible site for the project, but it is not one of the most prominently
considered locations.
·
She
said the idea of a craft campus was born out of a think-tank of craftspeople to
advance the craft field. In 2004, Craft
Studies was announced as an area for development as an academic university
program. The idea of a craft campus
preceded the idea of using the methane gas at the landfill.
·
Dr.
Fernandes said most of the people on the committee think we will have a craft
studies program, but it has not been formalized yet. We need to make a formal decision to have it
and we need to make a formal decision about how we will proceed and where it will
be located.
·
When
asked if there will be opportunities for others to comment about the decision
before it is made, Dr. Fernandes said the committee had not planned to do that,
but they could if it would be a good thing to do.
·
Dr.
Moorhead said he had been involved in this process for years and would like to
be involved in this. He was very
concerned about the scale of what was planned at the landfill now possibly
coming to campus. The design and
location of this project on campus is a huge change for this campus. He was also concerned about the energy
requirements of this facility.
·
Dr.
Sidelnick said during a time when we are cutting programs, reducing budget, and
have a director of a program that does not exist and a site that was just taken
away, this project does not look good to the public nor to the people whose
programs have just been cut.
·
Dr.
Fernandes said that this is a particular niche, inherent in western NC that can
become a very important program for UNC Asheville. We could be one of the only universities with
a craft studies major. There can be
tremendous economic benefits to us and to the region that has been documented
through economic studies. There are also
many people whose hopes have been raised by the university repeatedly. Large numbers of community members came to
this campus and participated in designing a building at the landfill. There are pros and cons and we have to weigh
them all as we make a decision.
·
Dr.
Sidelnick noted that our university has raised the hopes and disappointed
others in the past, for example a day care center.
·
Dr.
Haas said the B.F.A. mentioned will have to come through IDC and then the
Faculty Senate for approval. He would
imagine that new buildings and territory on campus would go through UPC. He would hope that the Faculty Senate has
input in this.
·
Dr.
Berls had a question for the future:
When craft studies becomes a viable option, will the faculty come from
outside the area, from local craftspeople, from the Southern Highland Craft
Guild and Penland School of Crafts, or will we staff it with our present
faculty? A marvelous crop of
individuals also have their hopes raised.
·
Dr.
Fernandes said that it is important to note that 56% of practicing artisans in
the region are over 55 years old. Only
9% are under 30 and most of them move here because of what is already
here. With the majority of our
practicing artisans reaching retirement age, and few young craftspeople in line
to take their place, the region needs new artisans to support crafts in
Last year Chancellor Ponder
set up a task force called the Community School Partnerships Initiative
Committee to revisit the various partnerships and activities that the
university does with local schools and with the community. The task force did a massive project of
gathering data and information on what the university does, what kind of
programs we do, and how well we do them in
Student
Government
Mr.
Stephen Haas said this would be his last report from SGA as he will begin
student teaching next semester. He introduced
his replacement, Mr. Andy Sherman, a freshman who also serves on SGA’s Academic
Affairs Committee. The Faculty Senate
gave them both a round of applause.
IX. Old Business
There was no Old
Business.
X. New Business
Dr. Dohse presented Ms. Gravely with a
gift on behalf of the Faculty Senate.
XI. Adjourn
Dr. Dohse adjourned the meeting at 5:25pm.
Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely
Executive
Committee