University of North Carolina at Asheville

FACULTY SENATE MEETING

Minutes, March 2, 2006 – 3:15pm

Senate

Members: L. Atkinson, B. Butler, L. Cornett, B. Hook, P. Downes, H. Holt, S. Judson, B. Larson,

D. Lisnerski, C. McKenzie, S. Mills, G. Nallan, M. Ruiz, J. Wood; M. Padilla.

Excused: G. Boudreaux, K. Cole. P. Nickless, S. Walters.

Visitors: G. Ashburn, S. Baxley, G. Bushong, L. Friedenberg, A. Gravely, G. Hardy, E. Katz,

G. Kormanik, Y. Koslen, C. Miller, L. Nelms, J. Noor, B. Schaffer, A. Shope, B. Spellman,

K. Whatley, G. Wilson, B. Yearout.

I. Call to Order

Gary Nallan announced that Pamela Nickless was ill and unable to attend the meeting today. He called the meeting to order at 3:22pm and welcomed Senators and guests.

II. Approval of minutes

The minutes of February 9, 2006, were approved as written.

III. Administrative Report

Mark Padilla gave the Administrative Report.

Transportation Planning Update

Steve Baxley, AVC for Campus Operations, reported that historically, transportation planning has been limited to managing campus parking. In recent years the campus determined that a new type of planning is needed in order to manage campus resources. A transportation study was completed by Desmon Associates in 2003, and in fall of 2004 the University hired a transportation planner. With these new resources committed to transportation, the University has a chance to adopt a vision and mission for transportation.

Campus Operations would like a draft of the Transportation Plan along with fee changes to be presented to the BOT in fall 2006. This will require working throughout the remainder of the semester to involve the campus community in this planning. In addition, Chancellor Ponder has challenged us to take a hard look at the parking and transportation fee to remove it as a barrier of access to the university. The first step is to agree on a set of principles that can drive the mission and vision for transportation planning, then to develop parking policies that meet these principles, and alternative transportation programs that meet the needs of the campus.

AVC Baxley commended transportation planner Yuri Koslen for his excellent contributions and introduced Chris Miller, our new safety officer.

Review of priorities articulated by Pres. Bowles at the Feb. Chief Academic Officers Meetings

Dr. Padilla reported that General Administration has asked all campuses for a study on how we are trying to contain the cost of textbooks. Requests for campus-initiated tuition requests and fee increases for the 2007 academic year are dependent on the report due in December. AVC Whatley will Chair the task force.

Changes to Commencement

The Senate supported the following changes in commencement proposed by Dr. Padilla:

· Faculty will meet in the Curry Courtyard; marshals will help organize faculty.

· Faculty will sit according to their decade of appointment under a tent on the porch/landing of Ramsey library where graduates and parents can see them.

· Efforts are being made to keep commencement to two hours.

· Chancellor Ponder would like to have a light reception following commencement and has asked that department/program receptions not take place during this time (11:00-12:00).

MGMT/ACCT Strategic Planning Fact Sheet

Dr. Padilla distributed a MGMT/ACCT Strategic Planning Fact Sheet that he used to address the proposal that APC discussed and that is on today’s agenda. The critical question before us is the feasibility of maintaining a very small program within a very large and expensive department. This is a multidimensional question that is quite different from questions about maintaining small departments/programs.

There was a review of the controversy and a strategic plan was developed between his office and the management chair representing the department. The agreement had these key components: to establish the size of the department (13 full-time faculty); cap the number of majors (175); increase salaries where we could effectively hire; and sunset a program.

There is one tenure track faculty member with a health care specialty and four courses designated specifically for this program. Given the extensive use of adjunct faculty to staff this program, it is clear that the full-time faculty member may continue to have an important teaching role within the department. He asked Senators to consider this information and to hold comments until the larger discussion during the APC report.

Chief Academic Officers (CAO) meeting at General Administration

Dr. Padilla reported that the Office of the President has returned to its former name – General Administration (GA). President Bowles has asked campuses to consider campus-based priorities and then ask GA to help in those initiatives. He has been meeting with the UNC Faculty Assembly. Highlights of his comments follow:

· The efficiency of the administration needs to be proven before asking the legislature for more funds. In particular, to see if we have the ability to shift funds from lower priority initiatives to higher ones to ensure our campus programs are as strong as possible.

· He wants to bring the message about the importance of higher education in India, China and other parts of the world to North Carolina so we are aware of our competition.

· His highest priority in the curricular area will be education -- producing more teachers.

· He wants greater partnership with community colleges and barriers dropped that prevent students from starting in a community college and finishing at a UNC school to get an education degree. He wants to emphasize access and affordability – especially in this context.

· He is impressed with a school like ours that has reached out to embrace education from our liberal arts basis. He is more concerned with the traditional schools that are perhaps not staying with their original mission.

· Distance education is the future and we need to stop giving up the market in this area.

· The UNC system’s central role is not to be vocational. Even though economic transformation is important – the two college systems have been charged with transforming the economy from agricultural, textiles and furniture manufacturing to a knowledge-based economy – the liberal arts are crucial for what we are and what we do.

· The UNC system needs to respond to the needs of the state, to accept that privilege and responsibility.

· A top priority is the need to address benefits and compensation for faculty. He is concerned about the lack of competitiveness that our system has in attracting and keeping highly qualified faculty. This has risen to the highest system priority.

Faculty Assembly

Gwen Ashburn followed up on Dr. Padilla’s report. President Bowles spoke to the Faculty Assembly about attracting and retaining the very best faculty, and of the necessity of academic freedom and supporting research. He plans to meet monthly with Faculty Assembly officers.

- Legislative update:

· The staff is in flux but Mark Fleming is the legislative liaison. The legislature goes into short session May 9^th. GA is asking the legislators to look again at enrollment funding. We are promising to enact university efficiency measures and have asked for improved benefits for faculty and staff.

· President Bowles believes that the University can do a better job of its own health plan but he has agreed to give the state a year – in July a new packaging of the health care system will be introduced.

· Mr. Fleming said that they hope state employees will get a 4% raise. State revenues are up 8%.

· The bad news is that the mandated Leandro case, increased Medicare/Medicaid costs, and employee raises cannot all be funded.

- Academic Affairs:

· Alan Mabe, interim VP for Academic Affairs, reiterated the textbook report.

· The new campus peer selection process can be found at the UNC Faculty Assembly website. UNCA’s new peer group has changed – the private schools have been reduced to four: Bucknell, Furman, Lafayette, and Union College.

- Budget Committee:

· Rob Nelson is the acting VP of Financial Affairs.

· Jeff Davis is now President Bowles’ Chief of Staff.

· President Bowles is studying four proposed initiatives:

o The Alfred Mann Institute would provide a $50 million endowment for a biotech center in a joint venture of Chapel Hill and NC State; the system would provide the scientists. Intellectual property rights and future operating costs are being negotiated.

o The Research Center at Kannapolis. Mr. Murdoch, of Dole Foods, would provide operational capital. In return, the university would provide input about biotech and food research. President Bowles is studying closely what projects will cost the university system in the future.

o The Graduate Engineering Center in Hickory. Corning Center is vacant since the market for digital cable is no longer there; the community is seeking help in retooling the work force.

o The UNC-CH and IBM Renaissance Center.

- Election of Officers:

· Brenda Kilingsworth, ECU professor, Management Information Technology, elected second term as Chair

· Bonnie Yankaskas, Professor of Radiology at Chapel Hill, elected new vice chair

· Jimmy Reeves, Chair of Chemistry and Biology at UNC-Wilmington, elected secretary.

Dr. Padilla added that Larry Nelson, the provost at NCSU will chair the national search for the Vice President of Academic Affairs position. Chancellor Ponder is serving on the search committee. The emphasis will be on finding someone who supports the vision that the UNC system is made up of unique individual institutions.

The order of business was modified

VIII. Institutional Development Committee Report

Bruce Larson reported for the Institutional Development Committee.

Second Reading:

The following document was considered for Second Reading:

IDC 1: Intent to Establish B.A. Degree in Religious Studies.

IDC 1 is a continuation of the process begun last year with the unanimous approval of a Request to Plan a B.A. Degree in Religious Studies.

Dr. Lisnerski noted that two additional faculty members will be recruited based on enrollment growth funds yet we have not met the enrollment target this year. Adding new degree programs makes the assumption that current resources that departments/programs receive are sufficient. He added that he had an issue with adding new degree programs in general, not specifically with this program. Dr. Gravely stated that we did not meet the enrollment target this year but we did not have to return funds. The administration’s strategy is to meet the minimal enrollment target. Dr. Larson added that IDC believes that a major in religious studies will attract new students and that resources will be forthcoming because of this new opportunity.

Discussion turned to the number of projected majors and the number of faculty positions anticipated in the near future. AVC Spellman stated that enrollment projections (15 majors) were conservative estimates based on the enrollment patterns at other UNC institutions and the perceived level of interest from the community and UNCA students. Over 100 current majors in history will be attracted to this major. The figure was also based on classes currently in the minor – such as History of Christianity and the History of Judaism --- that are always full. Dr. Padilla stated that the Position Allocation Committee (PAC) has received two position requests for this program. There are about 12 positions available, so there is room for allocating them depending on the outcome of the PAC meeting on March 20.

Dr. Wood asked what the competition was going to be with these two additional positions in religious studies – and would that eclipse positions requested in other departments. Dr. Padilla replied that there are about 12-13 requests including these two and there are also requests for lecturer positions. Five or six retirement positions will also be available. Departments always seek the available positions; will crucial program requests be eclipsed? The PAC needs to evaluate, rank, discuss, and decide. If these are allocated, there will still be 10 tenure track positions that are likely to be allocated plus five or six lecturer positions.

Dr. Mills recused herself as she served on the Religious Studies Task Force. IDC 1 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 2906S.

IV. Student Government Association Report

John Noor, Executive for External Affairs, reported for the Student Government Association.

· SGA met with Chancellor Ponder last night where students asked questions about growth, new enrollments, and expansion of graduate programs.

· Elections will be held the last week of March. Faculty are being asked to persuade students to participate in and support student elections.

· UNCA will host the 70-80 member delegation of the Association of Student Governments from State and will present an educational workshop on the importance of environmental initiatives on campus.

· The Student Scholarship Fund discussed at the last meeting is being revamped after discussions with Vice Chancellor Massey in the Development Office. The changes will help Development create a connection between students and the university. Students tend to associate with their individual academic departments as opposed to the university as a whole.

· Greenfest will be held in April. Some faculty members and the Chancellor have volunteered to showcase their hybrid vehicles on the quad. Greenlife Grocery may sponsor the event to promote organic and sustainable food.

At Dr. Larson’s request, Mr. Noor commented on his internship last fall where he worked for the Senate Judicial Committee in the UNC Washington Program. This is a new system program where students from across the state intern in Washington, DC. In an exit interview with his boss (who was the general counsel for the committee) he asked, “What was something that a student can do to prepare for a job?” Her reply was to educate oneself in a liberal arts curriculum – study the classics, study the basics of how we come to look at and analyze things; a diversified background is indispensable.

V. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report

Don Lisnerski reported for the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee.

Nominees for Academic Appeals Board

The Senate approved the following slate for the Academic Appeals Board election:

Noah Allen Bill Haas

Ken Betsalel Tammy Huffman

Michelle Bettencourt Mary Anna LaFratta

Rob Bowen

First Reading

The following documents were distributed for First Reading:

FWDC 10: Professional Development Leave Policy (formerly Off-Campus Scholarly Assignment)

(Revision of SD5404S) (Faculty Handbook 4.1.4)

FWDC 11: Proposal to Revise Minority Affairs Commission

(Revision of SD5000S) (Faculty Handbook 10.3.2)

Second Reading

The following documents were considered for Second Reading:

FWDC 6: Proposal to Revise University Research Council (Revision to SD0981F)

(Faculty Handbook 10.3.5).

The changes in FWDC 6 have been made in accord with recent and current practice, due in part to the functions assumed by the Office of Sponsored Research. In addition, it should clarify confusion regarding purpose and membership. FWDC 6 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 3006S.

FWDC 9: Proposal to Establish a Transportation Committee (Faculty Handbook 10.4.15).

The Transportation Committee will review and make recommendations concerning parking and transportation issues (including parking, mass transit, bicycle facilities, pedestrian resources, carpooling etc).

Dr. Holt asked what would happen to the Traffic Committee with the establishment of this new committee. Dr. Lisnerski explained that the Traffic Committee and the Transportation Issues Working Group (TWIG) will merge into the new Transportation Committee. Dr. Downes asked for clarification on the membership and asked if 12 people were needed on the committee. Mr. Koslen explained that six members of the group would be alternates to replace active members when their terms expire. FWDC 9 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 3106S.

VI. Executive Committee Report

The Executive Committee report was postponed until the next meeting.

Dr. Larson presided over the meeting during the APC report.

VII. Academic Policies Committee Report

Gary Nallan reported for the Academic Policies Committee.

First Reading

[Unanimously Approved by APC]

The following documents were distributed for First Reading:

APC 25: Changing Advanced Placement Credit for Chemistry

APC 26: Add CHEM 222, 231, 232, 236, 237; Add CHEM 406, 407, 408, 418;

Change course description and credit hours for CHEM 428, 429

APC 27: Changes in Procedures for Declaring a Major in Chemistry

APC 28: Changes to Major Requirements in Chemistry

APC 29: Editorial Change to Chemistry Narrative; Changes in Times Offered and Prerequisites

APC 30: Change MGMT 394 to MGMT 464. Add provision to award IP grade in MGMT 492.

APC 31: Change in Industrial and Engineering Management Requirements.

APC 32: Change BIOL 105 from one 5-hr course to a 3-hr lecture and a 1-hr lab;

Add new course, BIOL 365; Change prerequisite for BIOL 223.

Second Reading:

[Unanimously Approved by APC]

The following documents were considered for Second Reading:

APC 18: Delete IST 490; Add new courses IST 290 and 499. Remove allowable repeat of IST 495.

APC 18 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 3206S.

APC 19: Changes to the Individual Degree Concentration Narrative. Changes to the Individual

Degree Concentration Major Requirements.

APC 19 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 3306S.

Discussion of an APC proposal that Failed Unanimously

Dr. Nallan read a statement on behalf of the APC expressing concern about the process which resulted in the submission of two APC proposals from the Management Department. Earlier this academic year the Faculty Senate approved a proposal to cap the Management Major by a fractured vote. Last week APC discussed and voted on a Management proposal that would have eliminated the Health Care Management concentration and the Certificate in Health Care Administration.

The APC learned that both proposals were submitted because Academic Affairs held a faculty replacement position in Management in limbo, insisting that these two proposals be submitted before the department would be allowed to conduct the faculty search. This effectively marginalized the academic department in the decision-making process. The proposal was unanimously defeated.

The APC has to rely on the full, frank, and professional judgment of the departments presenting proposals. The departments are in the best position to keep abreast of developments within their disciplines and among their students, and likewise, are best qualified to revise their majors and concentrations to meet new challenges and opportunities. If a department feels unable to present its best professional judgment because of administrative restrictions, the faculty is effectively deprived of the role in the decision-making process charged to them in the Faculty Handbook. The APC hopes that the Management Department and Academic Affairs will engage in effective dialog towards clarifying and presenting the proposal.

- Claudel McKenzie’s comments

Ms. McKenzie referred to the handout distributed by Dr. Padilla and acknowledged that the department uses a lot of adjuncts because of the high number of faculty vacancies in the department.

She offered background on the concentration, the process, and the basis for the rationale she presented to APC. The department has looked closely at this emphasis area and has discussed eliminating it. They believe that the Health Care Administration concentration could be both strong and popular with full support. Health Care Administration is Don Lisnerski’s field of study. He teaches courses in the concentration and coordinates all the offerings of the concentration. For the past few years the department has always had vacant faculty positions and needed to call on Dr. Lisnerski to teach some of the core management classes. While the use of adjuncts is not the best way to deliver any part of the curriculum, it is extremely important that the principles-level courses be taught by full-time faculty members. Highly-qualified adjuncts have taught some of the Health Care Administration classes.

The department talked about this concentration last year and decided to postpone any decision about the emphasis area until more of their vacant tenure-track positions were filled. Although the Health and Wellness program is quite different from our Health Care Administration concentration, they were hoping that the Health and Wellness program might give their program a boost – that some of the Health and Wellness majors might even minor in Management.

Submitting an APC document which would cap the number of management majors and submitting a plan to phase out the Health Care Administration concentration were conditions imposed on the department to have one of its vacant positions released. It is extremely important to have the marketing position filled. While the Department and Administration can both come up with a rationale for eliminating the Health Care Administration concentration, the Department was not asked for input on the decision.

- Don Lisnerski’s comments

Dr. Lisnerski noted that the department used to have two people in Health Care Management. When the person specializing in long term care and finance left, the position was never filled and it became necessary to rely on qualified adjuncts. MGMT 321 and MGMT 421 most often have been taught by adjuncts because they are specialty areas. MGMT 421 is being taught by the head of the legal department at Memorial Mission Hospital. MGMT 321 is taught by an expert in finance.

Dr. Lisnerski stated that after being told by the department chair that Dr. Padilla had requested that we eliminate our Health Care Administration concentration and that we cap our majors in order to obtain our Marketing position, he was rather taken aback. His main concern about what has occurred is not that the concentration was eliminated but the lack of faculty input into the decision-making process. Where was the faculty input that is supposed to exist with curricular issues? The fact that the department was ordered into cooperating to get a faculty position released is appalling. What was the role of the Position Allocation Committee in this process? These actions are a very poor example of shared governance. For administration to make an order and for faculty to vote on it is not shared governance. His hope is that this situation could translate into a fairer process being developed where faculty could have input into the elimination of programs. IDC looks at new programs and concentrations – we have no such process for elimination.

- Discussion

Dr. Padilla stated that he regretted that the process went through APC. His role is to make sure that resources are distributed as well as they can be and he sees tremendously escalating costs in one department that are substantially impacting the ability of other programs to be successful. He looked forward to a new process to emerge where we can review the sunsetting of programs as all universities have to do and to make way for newer programs that the university wants to develop. He will suspend further involvement in this issue and await the Senate’s decision on how to develop a process by which programs can be reviewed before we move the department’s staffing positions further. He thanked the Senate for bringing this upset to his attention. He takes it to heart and acknowledges any missteps he may have made and he looks forward to a new day of reviewing programs.

Dr. Larson thanked Dr. Padilla and stated that he appreciated his comments.

Dr. Downes noted that this is the health care center for six counties – one would think there would be a lot of majors interested in it. Dr. Lisnerski stated that it costs over $100K to recruit someone new in health care. Ms. McKenzie added that our community advisory board thought the concentration should be here. Ms. Nelms stated that one of her concerns is the idea that one action was tied to what seemed to be an unrelated action. We have a very large marketing concentration – we really need the position.

Dr. Larson noted that one of the recommendations of the Enrollment Growth Task Force last year was that we would be rigorous in our review of academic programs. The process for departmental and probably program self-studies was terminated by the decision of UPC before he became chair of IDC. Since then, there has not been a formal mechanism for looking at programs. To his knowledge – aside from eliminating concentrations – we have never eliminated a program or a department. This would be a new era. Dr. Nallan stated that if Dr. Nickless were here she would be saying that she never really appreciated the importance of UPC until it was gone – UPC is in limbo.

Dr. Ruiz noted that we have grown and the administration needs to look at the health of the whole university. He finds it commendable that Dr. Padilla tried to do something although obviously there have been some problems. These are our friends and he does not want to take sides but something has to be done – we have to take responsibility and hopefully we will all come together and do it through shared governance.

Dr. Larson suggested that the Executive Committee return with thoughts on how we might proceed. The theme of shared governance is on our agenda – it seems like a good place for the Faculty Senate and the administration to work together.

IX. Old Business

There was no Old Business.

X. New Business

There was no New Business.

XI. Adjourn

Dr. Nallan adjourned the meeting at 5:00pm.

Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely

Don Lisnerski