FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Minutes,
Senate
Members: L. Atkinson, B. Butler, L. Cornett, J. Konz, B. Larson, D.
Lisnerski, S. Mills, G. Nallan,
P. Nickless, D. Pierce, B. Reynolds,
Excused: R. Booker.
Visitors: M. Alm, J. Burges, T. Glenn, P.
McClellan, A. Shope, J. Wexler, S. Whisenhunt.
I. Call to Order and Announcements
Dr.
III. Approval
of minutes
The minutes of September 16 were
approved as distributed.
IV. Administrative Report
Dr.
Religious Studies Task
Force
Last
year Dr. Padilla convened the Religious Studies Task Force to study the merits
of establishing
a UNCA degree in Religious Studies. The committee consisted of Gordon Wilson
(Chair), Bill Sabo,
Faculty Committee Assignments
Dr.
Padilla was pleased by all of the work that has gone into the formation of the Integrative
Liberal Studies Oversight Committee (ILSOC).
He would suggest to ILSOC -- if it meets with the Senate’s approval –
that it accept some resource people from Student Affairs. He is looking to find ways to gain fruit from
the division union and one of the goals was to allow faculty who are working on
curricula to have a deeper understanding of what students are receptive to and what
they are interested in. Faculty would not
cede any control over the curriculum – but they would have more information as
they develop the curricula. He has asked
Student Affairs to develop co-curricular and extra-curricular programs that emphasize
the curriculum and it would be helpful to them to know what the thinking of the
faculty is. There is also some interest
in the clusters, where some faculty might be interested in Student Affairs’ perspectives
and visa versa.
Faculty
governance would decide whether down the road ILSOC should have an ex officio,
non-voting member from Student Affairs. Dr.
Padilla suggested that he invite a couple of members as resource people to the
ILSOC and see what happens. He asked if
there were any objections to him taking that step. Dr. Nickless suggested that Dr. Konz take it
up with
Strategic Visioning Task Force
Dr.
Padilla distributed copies of a report from Dan Ray, of The Institute at
Biltmore, regarding UNC Asheville’s Strategic plan. He stressed that this document was not
adopted by the Strategic Visioning Task Force.
The Task Force met four times to discuss various areas of strategic importance
to the university, with its main goal to develop better expertise and
understanding of how contemporary strategic planning is conducted and the purposes
of strategic planning. It was also a way
to allow university employees to meet and discuss university priorities with a
broader constituency of parents, alumni, and community leaders.
The
issues raised were big and important, and the Task Force never decided if there
was a consensus or not. Dan Ray submitted
his personal recommendations to the Chancellor and Dr. Padilla as something to
be provocative that would help to keep the conversations going. It is important that it be known that this is
not adopted by the university and it is not a strategic plan. It is a possible basis for strategic
discussions that might occur.
Dr.
Padilla highlighted some major areas.
·
That
Integrative Liberal Studies be applied from the classroom to the campus, and
ultimately to the greater community in a unique approach to be known as the
“Asheville Experience.” (We have already
expanded this through the union of Student and Academic Affairs. Perhaps it could be expanded further as a
working concept to talk about our engagement with the community, in ways to be
defined at another point).
·
That
UNCA proactively increase its full-time enrollment (FTE) through 2017. (The Task Force on Enrollment Growth and
University Size is looking at this issue).
·
That
UNCA consider the role of the
Dr.
Padilla referred to the Senate’s decision to have the Institutional Development
Committee (IDC) function as the University Planning Council (UPC) for this year,
which leads to the question of where formal strategic planning will take place. Strategic planning has a strong communication
role; it communicates what is happening inside the campus with outside the
campus, and it aligns resources with goals.
Typically the President or the Chancellor chairs the strategic planning
group that is broadly representative of the university with faculty governance
participation. He anticipated that the Chancellor
will chair and convene a Strategic Planning Committee at UNCA that is standing
and has broad membership. This committee
would receive Dan Ray’s recommendations and decide what, if anything, to do
with it. It might also receive the Task
Force on Enrollment Growth and University Size report and anything else of such
magnitude. He anticipated this filling
the void of a UPC.
Dr.
Pierce sat on the Strategic Visioning Task Force and noted that some of the
most valuable input came from community members. Dr. Padilla added that it is interesting to
look at both aspects -- what it means to be a high quality liberal arts college
that emphasizes the undergraduate experience and be part of a larger community
that has needs of the college, needs of our expertise and involvement -- and
how we reconcile that. Some of this has
to do with terminology. The community does
not like to hear words such as “undergraduate research” or “undergraduate share.” This is language that we think of as natural,
but it is not natural, it is the product of institutional thinking. Words like “branding” and “market” jar us,
yet those words may be more acceptable than words like “integrative liberal
studies” or “service learning” which often seem like oxymorons to the community. How do we find a language that allows outside
perspectives, which are so refreshing and are reality checks for us, to come in? And how do we find the language to convey our
core values and curricular principals that do not glaze over the community? We are very challenged by this.
Dr.
Konz commented that he found himself confused in the distinction between
strategic visioning and strategic planning.
According to earlier explanations, visioning has to do with branding, marketing,
and telling people who we are and what our values are. Just about everything in this document deals
with issues he would call strategic planning – such as proactive growth. Dr. Padilla replied that the focus of the
exercise was strategic visioning, not planning.
This report was designed to provocatively take it beyond strategic
visioning into strategic planning should we wish to do that. There has been no decision to do that.
Dr.
Nickless asked if the next step is putting together a Strategic Planning
Committee. Dr. Padilla replied that the
next step would be for the Chancellor to convene a Strategic Planning Committee
and for him to decide who should serve on it, and for that committee to meet
and receive this report. It would decide
whether it wants to create a new strategic plan, or to keep our current
strategic plan, but maybe fine tune it and implement it in a more public way,
which was his hope.
Dr.
Lisnerski found it interesting that we have a University Planning Council but
it is not to serve in strategic planning.
He asked what the original intent of the UPC was -- was it more of an
operational planning group rather than a strategic planning group? Dr. Nickless replied that there were times
when UPC was operational, times when it evaluated programs, and times when it
was strategic. Dr. Larson agreed that
UPC performed a variety of functions at different times. Dr. Ruiz added that it was a very powerful
committee in the past.
Dr.
Larson asked Dr. Padilla if we got out of this process what he had hoped to
get. Dr. Padilla explained two
objectives that were met:
·
His
goal of broadening the idea of what strategic planning can be was achieved. He wanted the campus to be more aware of the
need to develop a better communication strategy so that we can share what we
are in to with the outside world in case there are people with resources that
want to help us. The language that we
use now is too insular for that purpose.
We saw the importance of developing a vocabulary that is broader and we
also saw the challenges.
·
He
wanted to show that it is increasingly difficult for strategic planning to be rooted
in faculty governance alone because of the way higher education has changed. Faculty governance has to be involved, but it
has been re-centered at the senior staff level.
Dr. Padilla wished the document had more
context material, more documentation. The
Task Force was so worried about going into strategic planning that it erred on
the side of minimalism. There are some PowerPoints
that the Task Force on Enrollment Growth will be looking at.
Dr.
Rossell asked if the document, to Dr. Padilla’s knowledge, was provided to the Task
Force. Did they receive this as a follow
up, or have an opportunity to submit comments on it? Dr. Padilla replied no; it was useful to have
a consultant, but the value was starting to wane. Due to financial considerations, he asked for
a summation document. We will take the
process over ourselves.
Dr.
Rossell noted that the document was written as recommendations offered to the Strategic
Visioning Task Force. The Task Force talked
about some of these issues during one meeting.
It seems like the document should go to the Task Force – and it seems
like we stopped short of something. Dr.
Padilla agreed -- does the Task Force exist anymore? If the Chancellor decides to include those
folks in the strategic planning process, then it does exist; if not, then it
has essentially been disbanded, so there is no Task Force to receive this
document.
Dr.
Nickless asked if it was inappropriate to suggest that it would be polite to
send the Strategic Visioning Task Force members a copy. Dr. Padilla replied that a letter thanking
the Task Force members was on his desk and the report will be included. He had waited because he wanted to say what
the next step was. The Chancellor wanted
time to think about it, but he believes now that Chancellor Mullen has decided
to convene and chair the Strategic Planning Committee. The letter will go out to Task Force members
and the report from Dan Ray will be attached.
Dr.
Pierce noted that we received valuable input from the community. He asked if community members would be on the
Strategic Planning Committee. Dr.
Padilla stated that he would convey this recommendation to the Chancellor. Dr. Pierce added that one of the most
important things they discovered is that most people who know what is going on
feel like we are doing a very good job – but we are doing a terrible job of
communicating that.
Dr.
Lisnerski noted that we also need to communicate internally, so people know
what is going on and have some idea why changes are occurring. Dr. Padilla agreed – strategic planning is
really a communication strategy. Things
are always in motion and we have to adapt to the world – it is very hard to
clearly communicate that in ways that do not create unnecessary
controversy. Lack of communication and a
lack of strategic planning are really the same.
Dr.
Nickless noted that the Executive Committee is meeting with the Chancellor on a
regular basis and they will keep the Senate updated. IDC will be involved in whatever planning takes
place.
Student Affairs Annual Report
Dr.
Nickless reminded Senators that every fall the Vice Chancellors are asked to give
a report on their area goals and activities for the year. Senators received reports from Keith Ray and
Pat McClellan,
Report on Activities for Student Activities and Integrative Learning. Dr. Ray was out of town. Pat McClellan explained that she and Dr. Ray
worked closely together and he had given her permission to answer questions
having to do with his report. He will
follow up on any unanswered questions.
In
response to questions/discussion, the following points were made:
·
A
smart classroom is being furnished and equipped in Governor’s Hall and will be
available for limited use by faculty next semester. Health and Fitness will offer several courses
in this classroom in the spring.
·
It
is likely that counseling services will become increasingly important on
campus. A clinical psychologist should
be on our wish list, particularly someone who can help with learning
disabilities and more seriously disturbed students, in addition to transition
issues.
·
Highsmith
Union operations budget, supported by student fees and some state funding, is
presently projected over-budget due to uncertainty about utility costs and
auxiliary revenue. Information regarding
actual cost/revenue and possible fee increase will be available in the
spring. We are delaying the decision and
possible hiring of a Union Director.
John Bucher is serving as interim facility manager.
·
The
meeting rooms in Highsmith Union lack good acoustics. Our wish list should include carpet and
draperies to improve the acoustics. It
may not be feasible to lower ceilings.
·
The
administration is looking to provide faculty and academic departments with
support for alternative learning experiences and plans to assess needs for
course-related travel and to develop predictable travel alternatives. UNCA purchased two mini-buses to shuttle
students that will be available for university use next year.
·
Senators
were pleased to see materials from the Enhancement part of the SACS Self-Study
embedded in Ms. McClellan’s report.
·
Last
year, nearly 750 students were employed in some capacity on campus.
·
Plans
are underway to have a combined Calendar of Events to enable faculty, if they
wish, to include events/activities in their syllabus.
·
Class
mentors for the Liberal Studies Introductory Colloquia have been received very favorably
by students. About 75% of the colloquia
have class mentors to serve as support for students.
·
Phase
II of the bond referendum could take place in 2006 or 2007. Wayne McDevitt’s group has been studying what
the $75,000,000 proposal might look like.
Mr. McDevitt is scheduled to meet with the Faculty Senate in November.
V. Executive
Committee Report
Dr. Nickless gave the Executive
Committee Report
Constitution
Update
Dr. Nickless distributed three
documents: Highlights of Constitution Revision,
Draft 3 Proposed Senate Constitution Revision, and Sample Rules and Rules or
Order.
The Constitution Revision includes suggestions made by the 2003-04
Senate. Article 2 Section 1.2 is
new. It outlines the powers and duties
of the Senate. It proposes adding three
members to the Senate for a total of 18 members.
Article 2 Section 5 has a provision
for Standing Rules and Rules of Order. These
govern how we conduct business outside of Roberts Rules of Order, such as the
Comer Rule. It would include the traditions
that have not always been written down. For
example, the Constitution says that if an alternate is elected to be a senator,
they shall take on the full duties and power of that position. The Executive Committee has interpreted that
to mean that the Senate alternate fills the remainder of the Senator’s
term. That is an interpretation of the Constitution. The duties of the committees may change from
time to time, or year to year. Typically
the Standing Rules and Rules of Order are approved as the first order of
business with each new Senate. The
Senate would go through these and amend them if necessary. She noted that we cannot create Standing
Rules and Rules of Order until the Constitution revision has been approved by
the full faculty.
First
EC 1: Proposed Faculty Senate Constitution
Revision.
EC 1 will be considered for Second
Reading on
Dr. Nickless asked that substantive
changes be made in writing. Editorial
changes can be made via email and will be handled in the same way as in the ILS
proposal. Substantive changes will be
discussed on October 28. She encouraged
everyone to participate. The Task Force consisted
of
Dr. Nickless noted that nothing in
the Constitution shall abrogate the Chancellor’s final authority over policies
and procedures and all procedures must be compatible with acts of the
legislature, rules of the BOG and the BOT, and rules established for the
University as a whole. She will ask the
university counsel to review the proposal.
After the faculty vote on the Constitution, it will go to Chancellor
Mullen for consideration.
Update
on Minority Affairs Commission
As Faculty Senate Chair, Dr.
Nickless serves ex officio on the Minority Affairs Commission (MAC). She was asked to convey to the Senate that
Dwight Mullen has decided to step down as the Director of Diversity and
Multicultural Affairs, perhaps at the end of this semester. The Commission anticipates advising the
Chancellor on his replacement, whether there should be an interim for the spring
semester, and what kind of search we might look for in the future. Dwight Mullen will give a report to the
Senate in January.
Dr. Padilla suggested that in
thinking about how to advise the Chancellor on filling the position, to
consider whether the Senate prefers someone who works on diversity across the
board or whether the goal is to work on a particular aspect of diversity for a
defined period of time. That will
determine what kind of person you are looking for because it requires different
skill sets. Make sure that the person
you want is in line with those expectations.
Helping faculty with the curriculum requires a different skill set than student
diversity would require. Once people
start nominating themselves there is an expectation -- if you send out signals
ahead of time about what we are looking for, you will be more likely to get
that person and also ruffle fewer feathers.
Review
of SD1003F: Revision to Process of
Appointment of Lecturers
The
Executive Committee is recommending the review of SD1003F: Revision to Process of Appointment of
Lecturers. This document passed last
year with a minority of Senators voting for it.
It sets the process of appointment of lecturers, but the primary change
was the evaluation of lecturers. The Executive
Committee wants FWDC to look at it, while also working with Academic Affairs.
There is an increasing use of
contingent faculty on campus – either part-time faculty or non-tenure track
full-time faculty. A lot of faculty
appointments are being made this way instead of with the more traditional
tenure track appointments. This is a
national trend.
FWDC is being asked to look at the
AAUP guidelines and its suggestions. UNCA
follows many of AAUP’s recommendations, such as allowing lecturers to serve on
the Faculty Senate and integrating them into our campus community. Dr. Nickless added that when the Senate passed
this document, she was not sure it gave serious enough consideration to what it
means to have lecturers that are not peer reviewed. This is one of AAUP’s recommendations. The Executive Committee is concerned with
academic integrity, academic freedom, and to some extent protecting non-tenure
track personnel throughout the campus.
Interdisciplinary
Studies Task Force
Last
year IDC endorsed Dr. Padilla’s recommendation that we have a Task Force on
Interdisciplinary Studies to make recommendations for the next phase of the
program’s development. The following
individuals have been appointed to the Task Force:
VI. Student
Government Association Report
Mr. Tarik Glenn reported for the
Student Government Association.
Mr. Glenn reported that students
have to be elected to the
Greenfest is held every semester
where students volunteer their time to beautify the campus. Last year trees were planted near the
VII. Faculty
Welfare and Development Committee Report
Dr. Don Lisnerski gave the Faculty
Welfare and Development Committee Report.
Committee
Assignments
The committee assignment list has
gone out for fall semester. This is the
fifth revision and there will likely be a final list soon. There were questions about whether a couple
of committees were still viable due to changes that have taken place. After discussions with Dr. Padilla, previous committee
members, and committee chairs, FWDC decided to fill those committees and to ask
them to decide their fate – whether they wish to continue or make a
recommendation to change the charge in a Senate Document.
The Asheville Institute Advisory
Committee was not included on the assignment list. FWDC will initiate the documentation for the
Faculty Senate’s consideration. This
committee advises Elaine Fox on summer programs.
Dr. Lisnerski asked that when
committees meet and select their chairs, to notify Elaine Warren, Don
Lisnerski,
Change
in Faculty Record
The Provost provided FWDC with suggested
changes to the faculty record for feedback.
FWDC met and offered suggestions: 1) separate the top portion by semester
and workload, and 2) broaden the scope of the new section where faculty describe
their contributions to ILS to include other programs -- such as Africana
Studies, Women’s Studies, and teaching outside the department.
Nomination
Process
FWDC has started discussing a
nomination process. They are considering
publishing a calendar of when elections will take place at the beginning of the
spring semester and have some open nominations where individuals can self-nominate
or others can nominate if they check with the individual and they agree to
run. FWDC will need time to validate
those candidates to make sure they are eligible to serve, and then they would
hold the elections. Anyone with concerns
or suggestions should contact members of FWDC.
Dr. Nickless noted that the Constitution has to be revised before the
election process can be changed.
VIII. Institutional
Development Committee Report
Dr. Irene Rossell reported for the
Institutional Development Committee (IDC).
Task
Force on Enrollment Growth and University Size progress report
The Task
Force on Enrollment Growth and University Size has met twice and has made
progress
towards one of its goals, which is to define how we will identify a “student”. She reminded Senators of earlier discussions on
how we define the term student.
The Task Force will meet again next
week when Dr. Padilla will lead them through a discussion of the strategic
vision report from Dan Ray. They will be
discussing the recommendation in his report pertaining to growth and will give Task
Force members background on that issue. The
Task Force would like to have its first all-university focus group meeting before
Thanksgiving to start addressing the issue of growth and university size.
IX. Academic
Policies Committee Report
Dr. Jeff Konz reported for the
Academic Policies Committee.
Goals
for 2004-05
At its September 23 meeting, the Academic Policies Committee
adopted the following goals for 2004-05, in addition to carrying out its normal
consideration of documents proposing curricular changes.
1) Diversity: To continue advocating for diversity in the
university curriculum, particularly when
considering
proposals for introducing or modifying degree program curricula.
2) Consistency in the
Catalog: To develop a degree program
template to guide faculty making
proposals
for changes in the curriculum. This
template will include catalog conventions in style, program and concentration
descriptions, descriptions of the method of fulfillment of competencies,
faculty listings, etc. This template
will not be directive (requiring all programs to change their description to
conform) but will serve as a guide for proposed changes.
3) Study of
Plus/Minus Grading: UNCA has had
plus/minus grading since Fall 2002. In
response to
faculty
requests,
APC will consider extending
the submission deadline of documents to APC due to time lost during the
hurricanes.
X. Old Business
Senate Orientation
Luncheon
Dr.
Nickless and Dr. Larson met with new Senators for an orientation luncheon last
week. Dr. Nickless thanked Dr. Padilla
for paying for the event. She suggested making
this a tradition with the full Senate, but perhaps hosting it earlier in the
academic year.
Critical State of Shared Governance
Dr.
Nickless distributed an article on The Critical State of Shared Governance by
the AAUP. The article may be viewed
at: "The Critical State of Shared Governance"
.
XI. New Business
There
was no New Business.
XII. Adjourn
Dr.
Nickless adjourned the meeting at
Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely
Don
Lisnerski