FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Members: L. Atkinson, B. Butler, R. Booker, L. Cornett, J. Konz, B. Larson, D. Lisnerski, G. Nallan,
S. Mills, P. Nickless, D. Pierce, B.
Excused: S. Walters.
Visitors: D. Clarke, T. Glenn, A. Gravely, A. Hantz, E. Katz, L. Mathews, P. McClellan, C. McKenzie,
T. Rizzo, A. Shope, B. Spellman, K. Whatley, P. Williams, B. Wilson.
I. Call to Order and Announcements
Dr. Pamela Nickless called the meeting to order at and welcomed Senators and guests. There were no announcements.
II. Approval of minutes
III. Administrative Report
Update on Budget
As reported in the Chapel Hill Herald and the Raleigh News and Observer, the Board of Governors (BOG) took $97,570 from UNCA’s tuition receipts as a penalty for exceeding the 18% enrollment cap on out-of-state incoming freshman in the fall semester. Chancellor Mullen has accepted responsibility for exceeding the cap. There were no budgetary consequences because the money had not been budgeted. It is hard to hit the enrollment target exactly. UNCA will be more conservative for the fall to ensure that we stay within the enrollment target. UNCA might well deserve to have a different cap, perhaps closer to 25%.
The BOG has not permitted any school to increase its in-state undergraduate tuition. The BOG approved the $600 a year out-of-state tuition increase and the request to increase student fees.
As reported in the Asheville Citizen-Times, all of the UNC system campuses were asked to project how they would absorb budget cuts up to four percent in the 2005-06 fiscal year. There is a $1 billion state deficit. A four percent cut for UNCA is substantial. To date, no budget cut has been imposed for next year.
The composite figures for the UNC system:
1% = $19.6M cut
2% = $39M “
3% = $58M “
4% = $79M “ (a reduction of 908 positions).
Dr. Padilla noted that state funding of our overall budget is shrinking. When he came to UNCA, the state funded 50% of our budget -- it is now less than 40%. It is worse in other states. We need to continue to find ways to survive in a culture that does not value state assistance in higher education as much as it used to.
Draft 2006-07 and 2007-08 Academic Calendars
Dr. Whatley reported that Bulldog Day had been removed from the fall 2006 calendar. This enables classes to start on a Monday, which was a concern for some faculty. There have been discussions about having a partial day of service for freshmen and sophomores during the Undergraduate Research Symposium.
Dr. Rossell expressed concern that Bulldog Day was not being held in the fall and asked what impact this would have on freshman class bonding, faculty/student bonding, and the community. Dr. Whatley replied that in the new ILS program set up, freshman advisors will be placed with students in their classes – bonding would occur during orientation and the first week of class.
Dr. Rossell asked about the impact on the community. Ms. Pat McClellan explained that having a Monday start date affects orientation and Bulldog Day. We do not want to lose the idea of service in the community and options are being discussed – such as having an optional multi-day service opportunity similar to the optional wilderness experience.
Dr. Padilla stated that he wants to engage the community in a discussion of what the next generation of service learning would look like. He has heard reports that some of the events on Bulldog Day have been a bit lackluster. Other schools are moving toward a sustained campus commitment. This is important, but we might use the fall semester/early spring to build toward making a significant community impact and experience bonding through orientation. The idea is to move service learning forward and make it more important, not less important.
Dr. Rossell noted that if we are trying to strengthen service learning and take away Bulldog Day, students and others might get the impression that service learning is being de-emphasized. Dr. Padilla agreed that is the danger.
Dr. Larson moved that the Faculty Senate approve the draft of the 2006-07 and 2007-08 Academic Calendars. Dr. Reynolds seconded the motion. Dr. Nickless noted that while the Senate approves the calendars, ultimately the Chancellor sets the calendar. Changes may occur, but she was sure the Senate would be informed of them in a timely fashion. The motion passed unanimously.
IV. Executive Committee Report
Dr. Konz reported that the Chancellor Search Committee has a strong and diverse pool of candidates and is adhering to the timetable of having the new Chancellor named in May.
Update from Task Force on Student Rating of Instruction
Dr. Leah Mathews reported that the Senate assembled the Task Force on Student Rating of Instruction two years ago in response to a concern that the student evaluation form, which has been in use for over 20 years, could benefit from revision. The Task Force work has included a synthesis of feedback from faculty regarding the perceptions of the current form, a review of evaluation instruments used at other universities, and research on student evaluation of teaching. They spent a substantial amount of time considering both the type of questions that are meaningful to ask students about our teaching, as well as how to ask them in a way that responses will be useful for us to improve our teaching. They drafted an instrument that they believe is a significant improvement to the existing form and have asked for faculty feedback before pursuing a pilot test of the instrument.
A section has been added to assess the progress students have made on various learning objectives. In addition to the closed-ended questions, the draft will also include a set of open-ended questions to elicit feedback that is directly useful for the improvement of our teaching.
Faculty participants are being asked to conduct the pilot test during the last week of class (April 25-May 2) and at the start of a class session. Depending upon the results of the pilot test, the Task Force could return in the fall with a report and recommendations on whether this draft should be adopted by the university or whether it might be useful to think about further study.
The Senate discussed: (1) having the pilot test identify whether a course is in the major or not and (2) whether students would recognize course objectives. Dr. Nickless thanked Dr. Mathews and members of the Task Force for their continued hard work. She suggested that the Task Force present the pilot test results at a faculty forum in the fall. Dr. Mathews agreed this would be a good way to introduce their ideas -- which the Senate will take up as recommendations.
Report from Task Force to Study Faculty Salary Distribution
Bruce Larson reported that the Task Force has been working since January/February 2004. The Final Report has two parts: the Report proper and Attachments. Dr. Nickless suggested that Dr. Larson give a short report and hold substantive questions until after Senators have carefully read the report.
Dr. Larson noted that the 18 recommendations addressed equity adjustments, starting salary offers, compensation for Department Chairs/Program Directors, compensation for faculty members coming from or partially in administrative positions, and additional recommendations which they were not asked to make. He outlined the recommendations, the references, and the statistical analyses that formed the core of the equity adjustments. He corrected a citation on page 6.
Dr. Nickless noted that the Task Force was now dissolved, but may be asked to host a faculty forum in the fall.
New Method of electing officers to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee
Dr. Nickless reminded Senators that the recently revised Constitution changes how officers of the Faculty Senate are elected: “Nominations shall be made from the floor of the Senate and can be made by any member of the faculty eligible to vote or serve on the Senate.” She encouraged interested Senators to self-nominate and let others know of their interest to serve on the Executive Committee.
Meeting on Space Needs for Conferences
Dr. Nickless reported on a meeting
that addressed space needs for conferences.
As Senate Chair, she received two letters – one from Leah Karpen and one
from Dot Sulock – who expressed their views on
V. Student Government Association Report
Greenfest is underway with a dumpster dive and alternative fuel vehicles on the quad.
VI. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report
Dr. Don Lisnerski gave the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report.
The following documents were distributed for First Reading:
FWDC 4: 2005 Revision to the Post-Tenure Review Process
(Revision to SD1000F) (Faculty Handbook Section 3.7)
FWDC 5: 2005 Revision to the Guidelines for Awarding of Reappointment, Tenure and
Promotion (Revision of SD1092S) (Faculty Handbook 126.96.36.199)
FWDC 6: Revision to the Faculty Handbook Election Procedures (Section 10.2.1)
Update on Committee Assignments
The University Service Committee report was postponed until the April 28th Senate meeting.
VII. Academic Policies Committee Report
Dr. Jeff Konz reported for the Academic Policies Committee.
Report on Plus/Minus Grading
Last fall, the Executive Committee
The most significant conclusion
January, while giving a report to the Senate, Vice Chancellor Massey requested
that the Senate consider changes in commencement. The impetus behind the request was that if
students participate in commencement they are more likely to support the
university financially and otherwise after they graduate.
1) Allow students who can be expected to graduate in August (because they have one or two courses to complete in the summer) to walk in May.
2) Have a formal commencement ceremony in December for fall graduates, so that students who are finishing up in the fall semester have their own ceremony.
3) Is it necessary for graduates to receive their diplomas at commencement? Handing out diplomas lengthens the graduation ceremony. (This is wrapped in the first question. If it were decided that students do not receive their diploma at commencement, it has implications for when senior grades are due, as well as other issues).
discussion, Dr. Konz noted that the fall commencement is much more about
resources than the consideration of whether summer graduates should walk in
May. There are institutional resources
involved in putting on a full commencement that involve space, staff, and
faculty time. The expectation is that if
we have a commencement in December, it would be parallel to the May
commencement and would require an institutional and a faculty commitment.
Padilla stated that he thought that
Konz clarified that the three proposals were referred to
Proposed development of an internal template/style sheet
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
Change Prerequisites for HIST 390.
VMP 207 and 209.
Declaring a Major in MCOM; Change Requirements for Minor in MCOM.
Addition of New INTS Classes.
Change Title and Description of BIOL 351.
Changes in Descriptions of BIOL 444 and 455.
Changing title and description of MGMT 394; adding MGMT 481;
Changing description of ACCT 301, ACCT 302.
IST Special Topics.
for students concentrating in Ethics and Social Institutions.
Dr. Nickless questioned the impact
statement on resources. Dr. Hantz
explained that the department is growing and the curriculum change is not
intended to preclude requests for additional faculty based on growth.
a friendly amendment, the phrase “under exceptional circumstances” was added to
the second paragraph of the Drop/Add Policy.
An editorial correction was also made.
The following document was distributed for First Reading:
Dr. Konz noted that Senators received this document prior to the meeting; he moved to waive the
Comer Rule to consider the document. Dr. Pierce seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
Dr. Clarke and Dr. Whatley noted
that no students were currently enrolled in the program. Interested students may take courses at UNCA
and transfer to
VIII. Institutional Development Committee Report
Dr. Irene Rossell reported for the Institutional Development Committee (IDC).
Update on Task Force on Enrollment Growth and University Size
The Task Force is completing its discussions on enrollment growth. Its report will be posted on the web tomorrow and Dr. Rossell will email the link to faculty, staff, and students with a request for comments. The final forum to discuss recommendations will be on April 14th from in Laurel Forum. The Task Force will present its recommendations to the Faculty Senate on April 28th.
The following document was considered for Second Reading:
IDC 8: Intent to Plan a B.A. in Religious Studies.
Dr. Spellman explained that IDC 8 was a distillation of a Task Force report that recommended the creation of a complete Religious Studies department with four or five full-time faculty. Task Force representatives met with the Provost and it was acknowledged that in terms of practicality it was unlikely that the Office of the President would provide any start-up funds for the program. There would be incremental growth; we offer courses now in the minor with faculty from across campus. One possibility is to set aside through the Position Allocation Committee one position for an individual to be hired in a traditional department with the clear mandate that a Religious Studies department would be created over the next three or four years and one or two more faculty would be added. At that juncture, that individual would leave the host/traditional department and become the Chair in a functioning department of two or three faculty members. The question is a serious one – if there is no additional outside funding from the state, where do we look for those additional dollars for positions and space? Dr. Pierce noted that this could be similar to the Health and Wellness major which was approved in 1998 and is just now becoming a major.
Dr. Rossell suggested that the Senate address these issues next year in the Intent to Establish proposal. The Task Force on Enrollment Growth is releasing its recommendations and that is also something we need to think about. For example, if UNCA is to grow, perhaps we need more majors such as Religious Studies to absorb some of the growth. There are a lot of curricular planning issues that will come into play in making that kind of decision.
Dr. Nickless questioned the demand for religious studies among our students. Many people are very interested in religion and not at all interested in studying religion. That does not mean that we should not have the program. But if that is going to be an argument, we need more documentation in the Intent to Establish proposal. IDC 8 passed unanimously and became Senate document 6105S.
IX. Old Business
There was no Old Business.
X. New Business
There was no New Business.
Dr. Nickless adjourned the meeting at .
Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely