University of North Carolina at Asheville
Minutes, November 8, 2001

Members: K. Bramlett, F. Davenport, C. James, J. Kuhlman, B. Larson, H. Lee, C. Mitchell, D. Mullen, S. Patch, J. Rackham, A. Weldon, G. Wilson; K. Whatley.

Excused: M. Burchard, C. Ho, P. Nickless.

Visitors: S. Browning, J. McGlinn, B. Miller, G. Nallan, B. Sensabaugh, A. Shope, K. Skolnik.

I. Call to Order
Dr. Mitchell called the meeting to order at 3:16 pm and welcomed senators and guests to the meeting.

II. Announcements
There were no announcements.

III. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of October 18, 2001 were approved as written.

IV. Administrative Report
Dr. Kathy Whatley gave the Administrative Report in Dr. Cochran's absence.
Chairs Discussion of 9-9 Load
Department Chairs recently discussed the feasibility of achieving a 9-9 load. Dr. Whatley reported there were no objections to a 9-9 load, but most Chairs found they could not achieve this goal with current resources. Most departments would be unable to offer enough diversity in the curriculum for students to progress in a normal rate toward graduation. This would seriously impact interdisciplinary programs, such as Honors, Arts 310, Arts and Ideas, Humanities, and the First Year Experience. Some departments found it impossible to achieve a 9-9 load when they considered faculty leaving for off-campus scholarly assignments. There was also concern about the number of adjuncts currently teaching. Some departments may be able to offer a 9-9 load on a rotating basis, perhaps every three or four years. Only one department indicated it could offer a 9-9 load every year.

Dr. Wilson concurred with Dr. Whatley's assessment, but he found some Chairs' arguments to be spurious, given Academic Affairs' constraints that programs, like general education, not be weakened to meet this objective. He asked if Academic Affairs would permit some departments to go forward with this experiment. Dr. Whatley replied that there is clearly an equity issue involved in having different size teaching loads. Academic Affairs will make a decision by the December 3rd Chairs meeting. Dr. Mullen wanted the General Education Review Task Force (GERTF) involved in discussions impacting our general education core, major requirements, and faculty work load. Dr. Whatley noted that there is an overlap with GERTF members and department Chairs, so they should be aware of the issues. Mike Ruiz, Charles McKnight, Lisa Friedenberg, and Cathy Pons are members of both groups.

The Senate discussed whether or not some Chairs were hesitant to express their views during the meeting. Dr. Whatley stated she would like to hear from people who support the 9-9 load. Dr. Lee regarded the 9-9 load as a quality issue rather than a faculty welfare issue; as policy makers we need to analyze the cost benefit when initiating change, and if the benefit is greater, then we might have to make sacrifices. Dr. Whatley noted that departments were encouraged to be flexible and to take a serious look at how they might reorganize the curriculum or the structure of the department to achieve a 9-9 load without increasing the number of adjuncts. Concerning quality as an institution, the administration would prefer that the number of adjuncts not increase.

Diversifying the Curriculum
Dr. Mitchell reported that the Minority Affairs Commission is distressed over the delay in diversifying the curriculum, and asked Dr. Browning to address this issue. Dr. Browning reported that last spring Dr. Ghidina helped coordinate a meeting where Chairs/Directors discussed diversity, teaching, and the curriculum. Dr. Ghidina, Dr. Spellman, and Dr. Booker made presentations on what they personally and their departments had been doing in this regard. Dr. Ghidina surveyed Chairs/Directors to get a baseline as to whether or not diversity was being addressed within our curriculum; all departments did not respond to the survey. Dr. Ghidina then replaced Dr. Malicote as a co-director in the SACS review and Dr. Browning analyzed the responses. He noted there is great disagreement among faculty about what we mean by diversity. While many excellent points were made on the survey, there was no correlation in the responses. Another meeting was held this fall to continue the dialogue and to narrow the focus. Discussion on teaching, curriculum and diversity will continue in December, and another workshop will probably be held next spring.

To facilitate discussion, Dr. Browning asked Chairs/Directors for a written statement on: (1) their single most important student learning objective with regard to diversity, and (2) the single greatest challenge they faced in accomplishing that objective. He has found a slight central tendency to the challenge question in the 27 responses received thus far. It has to do with either diversity in the student body or lack of expertise in the faculty. The learning objectives remain unfocused. Brenda Greene distributed a handout to Chairs that addressed diversification of curriculum. She will also participate in some of the conversations. Dr. Browning noted that curriculum change and revision is at times a painfully challenging process.

Mr. Bramlett asked to what degree the diversity task force subcommittee report on curriculum was part of this discussion and to what degree Brenda Greene has been involved in these efforts. Dr. Browning replied that the discussion was being driven by a combination of the diversity task force recommendations as well as comments made directly to Academic Affairs from some chairs for an opportunity to learn more about this issue. He has attempted to integrate Dr. Greene's office with these efforts with limited success. Dr. Greene presented a handout to the Chairs at the last meeting and has promised to join them at the next meeting. She was invited to the presentation and workshop last spring but was unable to attend.

Discussion turned to what the administration could do to ensure everyone is using the same definition of diversity. Dr. Browning suggested that the university increase the level of conversation about the different perspectives people have so there can be some appreciation for the different views on the subject. With the exception of Dr. Greene, there are not many experts on this issue on campus. Often times our perceptions are driven by our life experiences or our life situation and diversity may have to be addressed in stages -- perhaps using a holistic approach. He found that people speak up during small group discussions, such as those held in the Opening Doors project. Dr. James supported the idea of a holistic approach and suggested asking, "What should UNCA look like with its stated mission -- versus a school that does not claim to be a liberal arts institution?"

Dr. Mullen stated that the diversity task force also made pedagogical recommendations to ensure diversity in classrooms across campus with students successfully completing all majors. This issue cannot be left to the end of the conversation relating to the different departments and the Chairs' responses. Maybe pedagogical approaches are affecting the composition of the classrooms.

V. Executive Committee Report
Dr. Cathy Mitchell gave the Executive Committee Report.
NCAA Certification
Dr. Gary Nallan reported that the National Collegiate Athletic Association governs intercollegiate athletics and in the 1990s it began a certification process similar to an accreditation process. They look at 4 areas: 1) governance/rule compliance, 2) academic integrity, 3) fiscal integrity, and 4) gender equity, minority opportunities, student-athlete welfare, and sportsmanship. UNCA first went through this process in 1996. The steering committee and subcommittees examine the four areas and write a self-report, whereas a peer review team evaluates the athlete program. Although this is normally a ten-year process, UNCA opted to accelerate the process to coordinate it with the SACS review. Dr. Keith Krumpe is Chair of the steering committee and Dr. Patch is subcommittee Chair for governance/rule compliance. The first three areas reviewed are in very good-to-excellent shape and there are no plans for improvement. However there are some challenges in the fourth area on gender equity. There have been changes on campus -- a new chancellor, new athletic director, and the compliance officer, David Mitchell, left the athletic program and took another job on campus. The peer review was scheduled for April, but UNCA requested and was granted a six month extension. The committee will develop plans for improvement in gender equity.

Improving Communication with SGA
The Executive Committee discussed ways to improve communication with SGA. The SGA Executive panel will now receive Senate agendas and minutes, and an SGA report will continue to be a standing item on the Faculty Senate agenda.

9-9 Faculty Work Load
The Executive Committee discussed the 9-9 load and recommended forming a task force to examine the issues involved in going to a 9-9 load. If the Senate concurs, the Executive Committee will return with a charge, will solicit individuals to serve, and hopefully will have a report by April. Dr. Rackham made a motion, "That the Senate appoint a task force to investigate the possibilities of developing a 9-9 load at UNCA." Dr. Weldon seconded the motion.

Dr. Weldon and Dr. James questioned whether forming a task force was the best way to address this issue. Dr. Rackham suggested that a task force could give direction, guidance, and definition by studying how this is done at our peer institutions and make a determination whether it's something we might want to do. It could then give suggestions or guidance in the process that would be necessary -- either negative or positive. Dr. Wilson added that the Senate reiterated support for the 1985 resolution at the last meeting. If a department cannot achieve a 9-9 load, we need to ask what can be done to make it possible. The motion passed by a vote of 10 to 1.

VI. Student Government Association Report
Mr. Kevin Skolnik gave the Student Government Association report.
The SGA and public safety director Lou Caliendo discussed installing courtesy phones in the lobby of each academic building. The numbers of public safety and information would be posted and students could make free on-campus telephone calls. Existing emergency call boxes will remain in place.

SGA representatives regularly attend meetings once or twice a month of the Association of Student Governments (ASG) in North Carolina.

SGA is considering administering student surveys every three years to compile statistical information so it can report more accurately and have more administrative power. Dr. Larson recommended Mr. Skolnik contact Dr. Gravely for suggestions on developing student surveys.

The SGA is helping students adjust to major construction on campus and is working to ensure that the unsightly construction does not deter prospective students. Dr. Mullen added that students have complained about reduced air quality during construction.

The SGA recently created an ad hoc committee on multicultural affairs and diversity. Andrew Hainsworth is chairing the committee.

VII. Academic Policies Committee Report
Dr. Jeff Rackham gave the Academic Policies Committee Report.
First Reading:
The following documents were distributed for First Reading:
APC 4: Changes to Drama Requirements for 6-9 Language Arts Licensure
              and 9-12 English Licensure

APC 5: IST: Revision of the Application Process for an Individual Degree

APC 7: IST: Addition of 490, and 495 to course listings

Second Reading:
-Unanimous Votes by APC
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
APC 1: Add Computer Competency to Academic Regulations.
APC 1 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 0201F.

APC 2: Change to Environmental Studies Concentration: Earth Science with Teacher Licensure.
APC 2 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 0301F.

Honor Code
APC has submitted a revised Honor Code proposal to IDC for consideration.

VIII. Institutional Development Committee/University Planning Council Report
Dr. Bruce Larson gave the Institutional Development Committee/University Planning Council Report.
Second Reading:
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
IDC 1: Vision Statement
IDC 1 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 0401F.

IDC 2: UPC Composition (Revision of SD4201S)
IDC 2 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 0501F.

IDC 3: IEC Composition (Revision of SD4301S)
IDC 3 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 0601F.

IDC 4: UNCA Goals
IDC 4 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 0701F.

Report on Current Activities
IDC reviewed strategic plans from Carnegie Mellon, Iowa State University, and St. Mary's College of Maryland to formulate additional structure for how we might go about developing our strategic plan. Dr. Larson distributed a Proposed Strategic Planning Update Process prepared by Dr. Cochran, Vice Chancellor McDevitt, Dr. Gravely, and himself. A strategic planning retreat may take place next semester. Participants in strategic planning are: UPC, the Chancellor's cabinet (expanded version), Faculty Senate Executive Committee, and probably some members of the Board of Trustees, students and alumni.

Mr. Kuhlman, Dr. Gravely, Dr. Patch and Dr. Larson are in the process of setting indicators associated with the goals for UNCA. A draft will be made available to the university community for broad input.

IX. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report
Dr. Gordon Wilson gave the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report.
Faculty Elections
Dr. William Bruce, Chair of the Faculty Elections Committee, is working with Dr. Ghidina and Dr. Van Engelen on improving the faculty election process and should have recommendations next spring. If changes are made to the election process, it would require a vote going before the entire faculty. The committee is exploring the idea of having a primary election in the fall and then run-off elections in the spring. Everyone would vote for every committee in the fall, and the top vote-getters in the different categories would have a run-off election in the spring. There would be fewer candidates running for each of the various committees.

FWDC is developing a statement on the creation and maintenance of university-wide ad hoc committees and task forces to curb a proliferation of committees and ensure there are target dates for completion.

FWDC will examine a copyright use and ownership policy prior to Senate consideration.

As part of the SACS review, FWDC has been asked to develop an institutional policy concerning faculty members and professional conduct.

FWDC is working with the VCAA on faculty loads and guidelines to aid discussions and ensure workloads are distributed equitably within departments and across campus.

FWDC is gathering data for the Faculty Salary Report with the help of Dr. Gravely.

Dr. Patch, Chair of the Tenure Task Force, reported it recently completed two surveys and plans to report to the Senate Executive Committee in February. Any revisions to the University Procedures and Policies require General Administration endorsement.

X. Old Business
There was no Old Business.

XI. New Business
There was no New Business.

XII. Adjournment
Dr. Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 4:50 pm.

Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely
Gordon Wilson