University of North Carolina at Asheville
FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Minutes, March 25, 2004
Members: R. Booker, K. Bramlett, T. Brown, J. Konz, ML Manns, S. Mills, P. Nickless, S. Patch, D. Pierce, K. Reynolds, I. Rossell, M. Ruiz, J. Wood; M. Padilla.
Excused: M. Alm, D. James.
Visitors: T. Glenn, M. Honeycutt, E. Katz, W. Kirby, B. Larson, G. Nallan, R. Sensabaugh, A. Shope, K. Whatley.
I. Call to Order and Announcements
Dr. Steve Patch called the meeting to order at 3:20 pm and welcomed senators and guests.
There were no Announcements.
II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of January 29, 2004 were approved as written.
The minutes of March 2, 2004 were approved with editorial corrections.
III. Administrative Report
Dr. Padilla gave the Administrative Report.
Dr. Padilla suggested combining the administrative report on "Discussion and Implications of the Divisional Union" with the Executive Committee report on "Faculty Concerns about Administrative Reorganization."
Academic Affairs is releasing $120K in funds for department operation use that had been withheld for possible budget reversions. Department Chairs were asked to submit their requests. Thirty-one departments/programs responded: twenty-one of the departments/programs received at least 97% of what they requested. The funds were released to the AVCs who met collectively, reviewed the requests, and distributed the money to the departments. Spring semester's Equipment and Technology money was added to the same pool and distributed -- the entire amount was $176K.
Dr. Padilla has secured $100K for Summer 2004 ILS-related faculty development. This money has to go into paychecks in May and June.
The CTL and FYE accounts have provided $20K for faculty travel and class activity support. The Foundation provided $75K for faculty development this year; $60K is currently being distributed.
Approximately 60 new computers for faculty and 6 for secretaries have been purchased. Efforts are being made to allocate $100K a year for a refresh policy in Academic Affairs.
The administration received permission to raise Summer School tuition to increase pay for faculty salaries for summer school effective 2004, as well as $60K for research scholarships to support faculty/student partnerships. The information on faculty salaries for summer school is on the web.
Increase in Adjunct Compensation
Beginning fall semester of 2004, there will be a $100 per credit hour increase in adjunct compensation. For example, adjuncts at the instructor level currently earn $600 per credit hour, or $1800 for a normal three hour course. The new salary will be $2,100 per three hour course. The new rate per credit hour applies to adjuncts at all ranks, from instructor to full professor.
Faculty Salary Adjustments
Between Fall 2002 and Fall 2003, 63% of faculty have had salary adjustments due to promotion, tenure, Post Tenure Review, Chairing a department, or equity.
Joint Engineering Program in Mechatronics
The Board of Governors passed the NCSU and UNCA Joint Engineering Program with the Concentration in Mechatronics. The funding will now be released to NCSU and UNCA.
Dr. Whatley reported that the $300K in funding has to be spent by the end of June. It was agreed that NC State and UNCA would divide the money evenly, each receiving $150K. NC State is spending
$150K on equipment for the program that will be located on UNCA's campus. Dr. Whatley highlighted UNCA's $150K proposed engineering expenditures.
101-1000 $ 2,500 Installation expense for equipment in the Square D Teleconference room
(May move to 101-3000)
101-2000 $ 2,000 Supplies
101-3000 $ 6,000 Brochures for recruiting
$ 4,500 Renovations/lab space
101-5000 $100,000 Equipment
101-5600 $ 30,000 Library materials
Dr. Rossell asked what space was being renovated. Dr. Whatley replied that the renovation would be in an undetermined area of the shop in the Rhodes Tower where some of the larger equipment in the engineering program will be used. The remainder of the money would go toward needed renovations in the two distance learning classrooms.
Campus-based Tuition Increase (CBTI)
Last Thursday, the Finance Committee of the Board of Governor's approved a recommendation regarding campus-based tuition increases. The recommendation was forwarded to the BOG, who approved the following:
It is the first priority of the Board that revenues generated from the tuition increases be used to enhance the quality of the academic experience for students. To this end, the Board directs the Chancellors to use the tuition revenues to:
1) reduce the size of classes;
2) increase the number of sections offered, especially in the core areas where classes must be available to ensure that students graduate on time;
3) hire fewer part-time and more permanent faculty;
4) take other actions as appropriate.
Chancellors may also use these funds to ensure the competitiveness of faculty salaries.
Dr. Padilla stated that now we need to interpret this against our needs and goals. The Senate briefly discussed the UNC system funding formula.
Bond Referendum -- 2nd Phase
Dr. Brown noted that faculty need to be involved in the second phase of the Bond Referendum and be given the opportunity to provide feedback. Dr. Patch stated that the Master Plan Update Committee has only briefly discussed the bond referendum. Dr. Padilla added that the University needs to respond by April 15: we will resubmit our original plan with the expectation that by the fall term we will revisit the plan and have appropriate campus input. He suggested that Steve Baxley attend a Faculty Senate meeting or a UPC meeting and bring the two page document. The Senate agreed to invite Mr. Baxley to a meeting and to send the two page document to Senators prior to the meeting.
IV. Executive Committee Report
Dr. Patch gave the Executive Committee Report.
Report from the Task Force to Study Faculty Salary Distribution
Dr. Bruce Larson reported that the Faculty Senate created the Task Force to Study Faculty Salary Distribution on November 13, 2003. Members Gwen Ashburn, Dee Eggers, Gregg Kormanik, Bruce Larson (Chair), Betsy Mayes, Scott Walters, Archer Gravely, Steve Honeycutt, and Dwight Mullen have met three times. They are reading: Paychecks: A Guide to Conducting Salary-Equity Studies for Higher Education and Faculty Compensation Systems: Impact on the Quality of Higher Education.
Their short-term challenge is to develop a plan for dealing with the campus-based tuition increase. Dr. Larson expects to have a proposal after their April 9 meeting. Their longer-term plan is to develop a systematic approach to our current faculty compensation system. In relation to this, they have addressed three broad issues to consider: a cost-of-living component to salary increases; a merit component to salary increases; and an equity component to salary increases. Their proposal will come to the Faculty Senate. This document will not require Senate approval, but it would be nice to have the Senate's approval. The Task Force will complete its work no later than the last Faculty Senate meeting of the 2004-05 academic year.
Mr. Bramlett asked what will happen to the last three years' of evaluations where recommendations for merit were made. Dr. Larson replied that they would have to be addressed in subsequent salary increases for the university -- assuming that the funds that we receive from CBTI are insufficient to build a merit component.
Mr. Bramlett noted that Dr. Padilla reported that 63% of faculty this year had some kind of salary adjustment. Dr. Larson outlined the sources of increases that were manifested by the changes in their position in the university:
Post-Tenure Review $1000
Chair $1000 1st year, $500 2nd year, $500 3rd year
Program Director $ 500 1st year, $500 2nd year, $ -0- 3rd year
Dr. Padilla stated that the Task Force will forward its recommendation to him and he would have to see a compelling argument why there would not be a merit component. Dr. Larson stated that the Task Force believes that the cost of living increases must be met first because it affects all of the faculty.
Faculty Concerns About Administrative Reorganization
Dr. Patch reported that several faculty members have expressed concerns to members of the Executive Committee about the recent administrative reorganization. Most of the concerns had to do with the lack of faculty input in the decision-making process. The Executive Committee thought that it might be beneficial to invite Chancellor Mullen to our next Faculty Senate meeting so that the Senate might discuss the reorganization with him and also discuss more generally his thoughts on the role of faculty governance in university decision-making. The Senators agreed it was a good idea to ask Chancellor Mullen to the next meeting.
Implications of the Divisional Union
Dr. Padilla stated that the reference point for the divisional union (of Academic Affairs and Student Affairs) is the SACS Self-Study: concerns were raised about the lack of connection between the curricula and student life. SACS' response was that our aspirations were overly high compared to what we were doing. We have to be able to show that we have addressed this before our next SACS review. We will look at the recommendations in the 2000 document and change to adapt to the aspirations of that Self Study. Many faculty are heavily engaged with students outside of the classroom but there has not been a way to acknowledge that activity. Ideally this is an extension of teaching, but faculty will not be required to be involved in co-curricular and extra-curricular activities.
Dr. Padilla plans to hold four sessions to discuss the union: one for faculty, one for students, one for staff, and one final open session where we might present the common themes or the issues that were raised in the individual groups. A Task Force will be created to study the structure that is best for us to facilitate the goals of our curricular/co-curricular enhanced learning environment (the results of which will be available to act upon at the end of the 18-month pilot period) and to study immediate programmatic initiatives that we should be doing in the fall. Dr. Padilla will facilitate the process and the discussion, but ultimately the faculty will decide what we do and what works. He invited faculty to see this as an opportunity to develop the kind of campus environment that many faculty are passionate about -- where students learn and have fun both in and outside the classroom.
Dr. Rossell stated that some people have asked how this might impact Dr. Padilla. Over the last year Academic Affairs was reorganized to relieve him from responsibilities, to allow for long term visionary planning. Now he has increased divisional responsibilities. Dr. Padilla commented that this is the kind of thing he thought about being released to do. Two needs came out of the SACS Study: 1) a more sustained strategic planning process that showcases our programs of excellence and reputation, and 2) addressing the co-curricular area (from the enhancement report of the Self Study). He predicted that the Strategic Visioning process that will culminate next week in a presentation to the Chancellor will meet the need to move forward on strategic planning. This is new work that will enhance our reputation and make a difference in students' lives. If faculty think he should be doing something else, they need to let him know.
Senate Constitution Revision
Dr. Patch stated that at the last Senate meeting it was decided that Senators would forward their thoughts on the draft Constitution to the Executive Committee, who would discuss them and send them to Dr. Nickless for her to revise the draft and seek input from the entire faculty. The Executive Committee did not receive any comments from other Senators. In its discussion, it became clear that Executive Committee members believe that at least two significant changes should be made to the draft:
1) the Task Force should draft by-laws in a separate document so that faculty would have a good idea of what they might be like should they adopt the new constitution. It is not feasible for the Executive Committee to do this job, and we should take advantage of the expertise and experience of the current Task Force to get it done;
2) although the Task Force found that the faculty does not want large changes in the functions of the committees, the Executive Committee believes that the revised Constitution should clarify the responsibilities of the three committees. The responsibilities of the overall Senate were listed in great detail in the draft, but the corresponding responsibilities of the committees are almost what we have now. Lack of clarity in charge often results in frustration and inefficiency within the Senate committees. Dr. Patch suggested that the Task Force meet with the Senate committees to discuss appropriate committee responsibilities.
The Executive Committee recommended that the Senate give the Task Force time to revisit those issues before making a decision to recommend a Constitution to the faculty, noting that as long as the faculty vote by the last faculty meeting in 2004, the Constitution can be in effect for the 2005-2006 academic year. The Senate agreed that Dr. Nickless would meet with the Executive Committee.
Senators were asked to review their committee responsibilities and to consider whether or not the membership of the Faculty Senate should be increased.
Dr. Padilla commended FWDC on its vital policy work this year.
V. Student Government Association Report
Mr. Tarik Glenn gave the Student Government Association Report.
Mr. Glenn reported that the 2004-05 Student Government Association elections are currently underway. The inaugural ceremony will be held Wednesday at the Reuter Center.
Greenfest will be held next month.
VI. Academic Policies Committee Report
Mr. Keith Bramlett gave the Academic Policies Committee Report.
The following documents were distributed for First Reading. Mr. Bramlett suggested that Senators pay particular attention to APC 24, APC 26, and APC 38, as they are the most substantive documents in terms of change.
APC 23: Addition of MATH 303: History of Mathematics.
APC 24: Changes in the Course Withdrawal Policy. (REVISED)
APC 25: Deletion of the First Year Experience Prefix.
APC 26: Change to the Academic Suspension Policy.
APC 27: Changes in Biochemistry Requirements and the Requirement of CHEM 328, 332, 336, and 435 within
all degree options.
APC 28: Delete MMAS 439 and 440; Add new course MMAS 438; Editorial changes in major requirements
and departmental narrative.
APC 29: Delete MGMT 221 and MGMT 494.
APC 30: Change in course title and description for MGMT 394.
APC 31: Change in prerequisites for MGMT 489 and MGMT 499.
APC 33: Mass Communication Visual Media Production Course Prefix Changes.
APC 34: Changes in Mass Communication Requirements for Major: Demonstration of Competence.
APC 35: Sociology and Anthropology Curriculum Revision.
APC 36: Reduction of requirements to declare B.A. Art as Major.
APC 37: Art Department Narrative/Mission Statement.
APC 38: Requirements for a major in Art with a Concentration in Art History.
APC 39: Deletion of current Art History courses; Addition of new ARTH (Art History) courses.
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
APC 9: Changes to Environmental Studies Minor Requirements.
APC 9 passed unanimously and became 2004S.
APC 10: Clarification of Lit major requirements for Concentration in Literature and Concentration in Creative Writing.
APC 10 passed unanimously and became 2104S.
APC 11: Changing Description for LANG 497: Senior Seminar in Creative Writing.
APC 11 passed unanimously and became 2204S.
APC 13: Changes in frequency of CLAS 104 and CLAS 211.
APC 13 passed unanimously and became 2304S.
APC 14: Advanced Placement Credit in Classics.
APC 14 passed unanimously and became 2404S.
APC 15: Removing General and Research Emphases, and the Concentration in Political Economy; Adding Computer Competency Requirements for Political Science with Teacher Licensure.
APC 15 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2504S.
APC 16: Change to Middle School Licensure Requirements for Math.
APC 16 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2604S.
APC 17: Change description of EDUC 383.
APC 17 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2704S.
APC 18: Individual Course Changes within the Drama Department.
APC 18 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2804S.
APC 20: Revision of Prerequisites for MUSC 484, 485, 486, 487 and Clarification of ensemble requirements for music majors.
APC 20 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2904S.
APC 22: Adding a new course, CSCI 358, to be cross-listed with MMAS.
APC 22 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 3004S.
APC 12: Adding New Course in PSYC 344.
APC 12 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 3104S.
APC 19: Changes in Concentrations in the Drama Department.
APC 19 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 3204S.
APC 21: Change to four CSCI course-listings and to CSCI AP Exam Requirements.
APC 21 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 3304S.
VII. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee
Dr. Mary Lynn Manns gave the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee (FWDC) Report.
The following documents were distributed for First Reading:
FWDC 10: Revision of University Service Council (Revision of SD0700F) (Faculty Handbook 10.3.7)
FWDC 11: Revision of "How Members are Selected" for Committees Whose Members Are Appointed (Standing Committees) (Faculty Handbook 10.4.1.2)
FWDC 13: Changes in the Review Process for Off-Campus Scholarly Assignments (SD1488S)
The following document was considered for Second Reading:
FWDC 9: Annual Evaluation of Faculty (with focus on Department Chairs) (Faculty Handbook 3.4)
Dr. Manns noted that FWDC 9 was edited for clarification following input from the Senate.
Dr. Nickless opposed FWDC 9. She felt that this institutionalizes the non-review of program directors every year. It asks Department Chairs to evaluate the activities of program directors of Africana Studies, Women's Studies, the MLA, and Undergraduate Research when they have no special expertise and no knowledge. She believed that Program Directors' contributions on a yearly basis will not be included in their evaluation -- their salaries will suffer and we will have trouble recruiting program directors. Dr. Katz stated that Program Directors said that the process that they would like is for them to submit to him a narrative describing their accomplishments in the current year as program directors and laying out the goals for the program for the next year. He would then write a responsive descriptive and evaluative comment and forward this to the Chair. This would inform the Chair of the quality of the work of the Program Director. The Chair would then be in a position to respond to that as part of the evaluation. That response would be incorporated in the faculty record of the Program Director and would go to the AVCs. This recommendation was also supported in a meeting of Department Chairs and Program Directors.
The Senate discussed when the new procedure would be included in the Faculty Handbook. Dr. Padilla noted that this will be finalized at the April 12 Department Chairs/Program Directors meeting. A document will come before the Faculty Senate.
Dr. Nickless made a motion to delete the last sentence under 1a. Dr. Konz seconded the motion which passed unanimously. FWDC 9 passed unanimously as amended and became Senate Document 3404S.
VIII. Institutional Development Committee/University Planning Council Report
Dr. Irene Rossell reported for the Institutional Development Committee/University Planning Council (IDC/UPC).
Update on Expansion Budget and Centers
IDC has been meeting with all of the Vice Chancellors to discuss their plans and priorities for the next budget year. So far, IDC has met with Mark Padilla to discuss the priorities of Academic Affairs, and with Bill Massey to discuss the priorities of the Office of Alumni and Development. IDC has arranged meetings with Wayne McDevitt to discuss the initiatives of the Office of Administration and Financial Affairs, and with Mark Padilla, Keith Ray, and Pat McClellan to discuss the initiatives of Student Affairs. Dr. Rossell will compile a summary report of these meetings for the Senate, for distribution at the April 29 Senate meeting.
IDC is continuing to discuss the establishment of new Centers at UNCA, and expects to receive the planning documents for the six proposed Centers throughout the next year. Dr. Padilla added that John Stevens has been asked to develop a policy on how we can assess the Centers. We need to be able to retire Centers that are unable to find outside funding or do not serve a justifiable purpose that allows for State funding. Evaluation of Centers will be an important function for the committee.
IX. Old Business
There was no Old Business.
Dr. Pierce suggested that the Faculty Senate pass a Sense of the Senate Resolution expressing concern over our staff's low salaries and going several years without a pay increase. While faculty will benefit from the recent campus-based tuition increase, staff were ultimately excluded from the increase. It is appropriate that the Faculty Senate express its concern to the campus and to Chancellor Mullen. The Senate concurred and asked Dr. Pierce to draft a resolution.
Dr. Patch adjourned the meeting at 5:15pm.
Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely
Mary Lynn Manns