FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Members: L. Atkinson, G. Boudreaux, B. Butler, K. Cole, L. Cornett, B. Hook, P. Downes,
H. Holt, B. Larson, D. Lisnerski, C. McKenzie, S. Mills, G. Nallan, P. Nickless,
M. Ruiz, S. Walters, J. Wood; M. Padilla.
Excused: S. Judson.
Visitors: H. Johnson, C. Mitchell, J. Noor, A. Shope, D. Smith, B. Spellman, B. Wilson.
I. Call to Order
The order of business was modified.
III. Student Government Association Report
Highlights of meeting with President Bowles
are huge start-up costs, President Bowles supports a rental book policy as it
will be cheaper for students. The Senate
discussed why some faculty may not embrace a rental book policy: it is anti-intellectual (a college textbook
should be read, underlined, written in, and kept as students build a foundation);
there is an ethical issue (books that are bought and sold second-hand and any
rental policy would compromise all the royalties that authors of books are paid);
translations and definitive additions change;
students will not receive any supplemental materials that come with many
books; faculty have little flexibility in dropping a book that students dislike. Dr. Padilla announced that a task group
President Bowles was very open to an alternative funding mechanism for UNCA and some of our small population schools. UNCA is underfunded at $2,000 per student. Included in the General Assembly bill is an extra $1.5 million for UNCA in recurring dollars, but President Bowles said it will likely not stay recurring. UNCA would receive more funding for graduate students as opposed to undergraduates but that is not necessarily why a college would want to add a graduate program. President Bowles did not seem to want to push for graduate programs.
The Governor wants to offer early-college at universities and community colleges. UNC-G, NC A&T, and UNC-W will start an early-college next year. Many issues are associated with early-college, such as safety for 15-17 year olds on a college campus and holding core classes that will eliminate slots for undergraduates. Dr. Padilla noted that there are no plans to initiate an early- or middle-college at UNCA.
There is a need to plan tuition in four-year increments so people can plan financially for college.
Alternate Faculty Conciliator
II. Administrative Report
At Dr. Nickless’
request, Dr. Padilla summarized the merit system. There are usually two components to an
increase for faculty members each year when funds are available – COLA (cost of
living adjustment) and Merit (performance).
Many schools give the majority as COLA and a portion is allotted for
merit. He has an obligation to maintain a
merit system where faculty receive both the symbolic and the financial reward for
accomplishments as reviewed by the Chair, the
The following points were made during discussion:
Chief Academic Officers Meeting
Highlights of the meeting follow:
IV. Executive Committee Report
Pamela Nickless reported for the Executive Committee.
Faculty Handbook Editorial Consultant
At the Executive Committee’s request, Dr. Nickless will serve as editorial consultant on revising the Faculty Handbook next year. She will work closely with Ms. Gravely, the Provost, and Dr. Friedenberg.
Evaluating Administrative Offices
The Chancellor asked the Executive Committee’s advice on putting into place a regular review-evaluation of administrative offices. She is hoping to start evaluating administrative offices by group – not the entire campus – next year. The Chancellor’s interest in this matter contradicts what Dr. Padilla reported at the last meeting but the misunderstanding arose due to semantics. In the past we have evaluated administrative offices. What the Chancellor views as her prerogative is evaluating the personnel in those offices. Areas under new leadership or which are being rearranged, such as Academic and Student Affairs, will not be evaluated immediately.
V. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
FWDC 12: Proposal to Eliminate the Academic Support Services Committee
(Faculty Handbook 10.4.3)
FWDC 12 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 4706S.
FWDC 13: Proposal to Establish the Campus Commission on the Allocation of Student Services Funds as a Standing Committee (Faculty Handbook 10.4.2)
FWDC 13 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 4806S.
FWDC 14: Proposal to Establish the Teaching Awards Committee as a Standing Committee
(Revision of SD0194F) (Faculty Handbook 10.4.29)
FWDC 14 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 4906S.
VI. Academic Policies Committee Report
The following documents were considered for Second Reading:
for DRAM 317.
(Faculty Handbook 5.2.11 and 8.3.5)
The Senate discussed due process
and ensuring that when a student is withdrawn there is a mechanism for appeal
or to file a grievance. Dr. Wood
suggested that the process should be articulated in the policy.
Concentrations; Modification to ENVR Concentration Requirements.
VII. Institutional Development Committee Report
Larson thanked the members of IDC for their work this year:
Report on Activities
Dr. Larson distributed IDC’s Thoughts on Additional Masters Programs and explained that the preliminary criteria are the same as distributed on April 13th but the preamble is a little different. A faculty forum will be held next Thursday at in 223/224 Highsmith; IDC will make a final presentation of its thoughts and it will be an opportunity to answer questions and share additional thoughts. IDC is starting to talk with our peer colleges/universities who have or do not have masters/graduate programs.
Dr. Lisnerski asked for an update on equity adjustments. Dr. Padilla reported that the two reports have been implemented and the task force has completed its charge. The equity reports established that our salary structure is equitable. The equity issue this fall, as we raise beginning salaries, is to ensure we are not practicing salary inversion. He predicted that the compression will get greater. Dr. Nickless suggested that the Senate continue to put merit and equity on the agenda for review.
VIII. Old Business
Dr. Nickless thanked all the Senators for being so helpful the last two years. Dr. Nallan thanked Dr. Nickless for serving as Senate Chair the last two years. A round of applause followed.
IX. New Business
There was no New Business.
Dr. Nickless adjourned the meeting at . She reconvened the meeting at to receive the final report from the Task Force on Student Rating of Instruction (SRI).
Task Force on Student Rating of Instruction (SRI) Final Report
Dr. Mathews reported that three years ago the Senate assembled the task force from faculty volunteers as a result of concerns raised by the faculty about our student rating of instruction instrument and protocol. The work began in earnest during fall 2003 following a collection of faculty feedback about SRI. [The entire report is available at: Final Report of the Task Force on SRI.]
The executive summary follows:
· The UNCA Faculty Handbook indicates that student rating of instruction (SRI) is used to both help faculty improve their teaching and to make personnel decisions.
· Change is needed in how we do SRI. Faculty are interested in seeing improvements in both the SRI instrument and the overall system of teaching evaluation.
We designed and tested a
revised SRI form which appears to offer improvements over our current
form. Additional work is needed to
refine the SRI form; this work should be linked with a campus-wide discussion
on learning objectives and other campus conversations related to our
· In addition to changing the SRI form, we recommend additional changes be made. These include a standardization of procedures for conducting SRI as well as a clarification on how the SRI are used in collaboration with other measures of teaching performance in order to make personnel evaluations.
· A continued investigation into SRI and the general process of how we evaluate teaching at UNCA is necessary, and should be led by the Faculty Senate in collaboration with the Center for Teaching and Learning.
Several Senators thanked Dr. Mathews and
members of the Task Force for the progress they made and their hard work. The work needs to continue and it will be
placed on the agenda next year. We need
to have a campus-wide discussion on merit and how we evaluate faculty,
including how we use the SRI form.
Dr. Nickless adjourned the meeting at and announced that the organizational
meeting of the