University of North Carolina at Asheville


Minutes, May 3, 2007



Members:   L. Atkinson, G. Boudreaux, B. Butler, K. Cole, P. Downes, M. Harvey, H. Holt, B. Hook,

                   B. Larson, D. Lisnerski, J. McClain, C. McKenzie, M. Moseley, G. Nallan, B. Sabo,

                   B. Wilson, J. Wood; K. Whatley; A. Ponder. 


Excused:     S. Judson.


Visitors:       C. Bell, R. Booker, L. Dohse, J. Fox, L. Friedenberg, B. Haas, J. Hartsfield, G. Kormanik,

                   K. Krumpe, P. McClellan, J. McKnight, A. Shope, S. Reiser, S. Weatherford.  




I.        Call to Order, Introductions, Announcements

          Gary Nallan called the meeting to order at 3:20 pm and welcomed Senators and guests.    


II.       Academic Policies Committee Report 

         Claudel McKenzie gave the Academic Policies Committee Report. 

         Second Reading 

         [Unanimously approved by APC]

         The following documents were considered for Second Reading:

          APC 47:  Increase the number of credit hours for EDUC 316;

                        Drop EDUC 317 from the requirements for Foreign Language licensure.

          APC 47 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 5807S.


         APC 49:   Change to requirements for Pure Mathematics concentration.

                        Change in departmental approval procedure for required courses.

          APC 49 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 5907S.


         APC 50:   Change the prerequisite for MATH 480.  

         APC 50 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6007S.


         APC 51:   Add new courses:  MMAS 101, 201, 255, 350, 450.

         APC 51 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6107S.


         APC 52:   Delete the Sound Recording Emphasis Area.

         APC 52 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6207S.


         APC 53:   Change the prerequisite requirement for MMAS 121.

         APC 53 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6307S.


         APC 54:   Edit requirements for the MMAS major and minor.

         APC 54 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6407S.


         APC 55:   Establishing Minimum Requirements for Minor Programs.

         APC 55 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6507S.


         APC 56:   Reinstate CSCI 142: Computer Programming I (FORTRAN).

         APC 56 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6607S.


         APC 57:   Adding a Minor in Astronomy.

         APC 57 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6707S.


         APC 58:   Delete ASTR 380; Change title and prerequisite for ASTR 411;

                        Add new courses: ASTR 412, 430, 431; Change prerequisites for ASTR 321, 322.

         APC 58 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6807S.


         APC 59:   Adding 6-9 teacher licensure as an option to the Psychology major;

                        Required editorial changes resulting from the addition.

         APC 59 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 6907S.


         APC 60:   Delete EDUC 313 from required courses for 6-9 Social Studies licensure;           

                        Clarify requirement of the Humanities sequence for Social Science licensure.

         APC 60 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7007S.


         APC 61:   Add new courses: ECE 109 & ECE 209; Delete ECE 480 and add EGM 482;

                        Change credit hours and description for ECE 200.

         APC 61 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7107S.


         APC 62:   Changes to Degree Requirements in Mechatronics.

         APC 62 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7207S.


         APC 63:   Clarify credits allowed for CHEM 190, 290 and 390.

         APC 63 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7307S.


         APC 64:   Clarify students may not receive credit for more than one section of LSIC 179 & 379.

         APC 64 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7407S.


         APC 65:   First-Year Student Suspension Policy.

         APC 65 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7507S.


         APC 66:   Change how World and Western Civilization courses are applied to HIST 151 & 152.

         APC 66 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7607S.


         APC Approved as Minor Proposals:

         APC 48: Adding Undergraduate Research to Art History.

         APC 48 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7707S.


         ILSOC Report to APC

         APC received the required report from the Integrative Liberal Studies Oversight Committee.  Alan Hantz met with APC and they had a good discussion.     


III.     Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report 

         Don Lisnerski gave the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report.

         Second Reading

         The following documents were considered for Second Reading:

         FWDC 6:     Proposal to Eliminate all References to the First Year Experience Program in the

                           Faculty Handbook including the First Year Experience Advisory Committee

                           (Revises SD27998; Faculty Handbook,, 10.4.15, 10.4.19 and 11.2)

         FWDC 6 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7807S.


         FWDC 7:     Proposal to Establish the Sustainability Committee as a Standing Committee

                           (Faculty Handbook Section 10.4.6)

         FWDC 7 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 7907S.


         FWDC 8:    Proposal to Establish the Safety and Health Committee as a Standing Committee

                            and Revisions to Faculty Handbook Section 10.4.6

         FWDC 8 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 8007S.


         FWDC 9:     Proposal to Eliminate the Recreation Committee (Faculty Handbook Section 10.4.14)

         FWDC 9 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 8107S.


         FWDC 10:   Proposal to Eliminate the Violence Prevention Committee (Faculty Handbook Section    10.4.31).

         FWDC 10 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 8207S.



         FWDC 11:  Proposal to Revise the Faculty ILS Oversight Committee

                            (Revises SD0703F, SD0304F and SD0105F; Faculty Handbook 10.3.8)

         FWDC 11 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 8307S.


         Review of University Service Council

          FWDC anticipates completing its review of the University Service Council (USC) next fall.  The USC was originally designed to provide a service award and to make appointment recommendations on some committees.  The present committee assignment process has some flaws, as did the old process.  FWDC is considering a process to computerize/automate an online listing of committees that faculty can indicate an interest in.  If this occurs, USC would have less work to do; it may provide a greater voice in advocating the value of service assignments on campus.  FWDC is considering restructuring the Feldman Committee, the Scholarship Committee, the Teaching Awards Committee, and the University Service Council.

          Adjunct Faculty

          FWDC members John McClain, Greg Boudreaux and Don Lisnerski met with some adjunct faculty to discuss concerns regarding pay, retaining email accounts and meeting with students during office hours.  Dr. Lisnerski communicated the fact that there is very little that the Senate can do about pay, but there are common issues across departments that every adjunct faculty should be entitled to.  The adjunct faculty will submit a list of items that they would like to see, many of which are professional common courtesies.  FWDC will facilitate a meeting with a representative from Academic Affairs to work on these issues.

          Establishing a Textbook Committee

          At President Bowles’ request, FWDC is working toward establishing a Textbook Committee. 

          Status of Academic Related Non-Departmental “Specialty Funds”

          While reviewing the status of the Distinguished Scholarship Committee and the Honorary Degrees this semester, several faculty raised questions about a variety of funds that were set aside for specific purposes over the past years.  Questions include whether the following funds exist and, if so, their status:  the Highsmith Visiting Scholar Fund, the Feldman Fund, and an Adjunct Faculty Fund. 

          FWDC is asking the University Relations Committee (URC) to work with Academic Affairs and the Development and Alumni Office in determining the status of these and any other similar funds which may exist, and their purpose(s) and use over the past several years.  The URC will also work with the Alumni and Development Office to determine a reasonable reporting mechanism to the Faculty Senate on the status of these funds. 

          Administrative Offices Review

          FWDC is working on an administrative offices review document.  There is general agreement that it needs to be broken down into a more meaningful review of the administrative units instead of reviewing them all at one time.   

          Center of Teaching and Learning  

          FWDC is recommending that the Center for Teaching and Learning create a centralized resource for faculty development opportunities.    

         Shared Governance Review

          FWDC needs to complete the Shared Governance Review and related documents. 

         Nominees to Standing Committees appointed by the Faculty Senate

          Senators received a list of nominees to Standing Committees that the 2007-08 Senate will consider at its organizational meeting later today.  Some appointments have not been made because documents are either going to be voted on, or the committees are still on review.  

          Thank You

          Dr. Lisnerski thanked FWDC members Greg Boudreaux, Mark Harvey, John McClain, and Merritt Moseley for their efforts this past year. 


IV.     Executive Committee Report 

         Gary Nallan gave the Executive Committee Report.

         Office Support Study

          Dean Lisa Friedenberg reported that the Office Support Study Team is going through data collected from individuals in office support positions, their direct supervisors (department chairs/program directors), and Institutional Research about the number of faculty (full and part-time), number of students served, number of budgets managed by departments, and number of students supervised by office assistants at this time.  This information will be distilled into a career ladder defined primarily by two dimensions: differences in complexity, which reflect the skills and knowledge needed, and workload.  The committee hopes to meet with the Chancellor next Monday to solidify its recommendations.   


          Dr. Moseley asked which office assistants were on the committee.  Dr. Friedenberg said an attempt was made to create a cohort using staff from academic programs, academic departments, co-curricular units under Dean Katz, and staff under Academic Affairs that is supervised by the four academic deans.  The office assistants in that pool are part of this phase of the project. 

         Policy for Service on the Faculty Senate

          Dr. Nallan explained the need to have a formal policy to handle cases where a Senator takes professional development leave.  He asked that next year the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee address this issue and bring a proposal for a written policy to the Senate.


V.      Institutional Development Committee Report 

         Bruce Larson reported for the Institutional Development Committee.

         National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center (NEMAC) Review

          IDC recently reviewed the National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center (UNCA’s only institutional center).  The relevant Faculty Senate document for the establishment of NEMAC is SD3405S: (  Dr. Larson distributed “IDC Recommendation and Report on NEMAC.”  

          The review took place on 26 April 2007, at which time IDC, along with Lisa Friedenberg (Dean for Social Sciences), Archer Gravely (Director of Institutional Research), and Gregg Kormanik (Interim Dean for Natural Sciences and Chief Research Officer), met with John Stevens (Director of NEMAC) to discuss the document “National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center:  First Annual Report (10/1/2003 – 12/31/2006),” dated March 23, 2007. 

          During its three years of operation NEMAC’s activities have been consistent with the mission of UNCA and with its establishing document (SD3405S).  It has been quite successful in attracting funds to the university.  It has engaged 50 UNCA students with employment opportunities and many opportunities for undergraduate research.  It has involved the work of 14 UNCA faculty from a variety of disciplines, and 20 different educational and business organizations in relation to their work. 

          As NEMAC looks forward to the next five years, its External Advisory Board indicated the need to develop a professional business plan which NEMAC intends to do.  Space is an issue for NEMAC.  To solve space issues in the short run, NEMAC is looking beyond the campus: part of its operation activities will take place in Enka, and it may have a downtown presence. 

          It is the judgment of the IDC that NEMAC has contributed a lot to the university and has even greater opportunities to contribute in the future.  It is the hope of IDC that the activities of NEMAC and UNCA will become more fully integrated over time, as was noted by John Stevens in his initial comments to IDC on April 26, 2007.  This would include:  (a) developing more undergraduate research, employment, and learning opportunities, and (b) creating more opportunities for UNCA faculty (and a broader range of faculty) and NEMAC staff to interact with one another, for example, in colloquia and scholarly activity.  Both of these ends will be supported to the extent that UNCA faculty, students, and staff come to be better informed about the activities of NEMAC. 


          Dr. Moseley asked if NEMAC generated overhead money for the university.  Jim Fox and Susan Weatherford reported that $300,000 has been generated in the three years that NEMAC has been in existence.  The Senate approved IDC’s recommendation that NEMAC be continued until its next review period.    

          Second Reading

         The following document was considered for Second Reading:

         IDC 2:    Proposal to Revise the University Planning Council

                       (Revision of SD4201S; Faculty Handbook Section 10.1.1)


          Dr. Larson reported that IDC has heard throughout the year that we need to have a fully functioning University Planning Council (UPC).  Since February, members of IDC along with Chancellor Ponder, Kathy Whatley, Sam Schuman (when available), Christine Riley, Lisa Friedenberg and Archer Gravely have met four times to discuss the existing UPC document and work towards a document to better serve the university.  IDC 2 is a result of their deliberations.    

          Dr. Sabo questioned the effectiveness of such a large UPC and reiterated his earlier request – to include a review process through which the Planning Council would review actions of the administration and the faculty to the degree to which they conform to our mission statement and the statement of shared values.  This is not in the proposal and he thought the review process was extremely important.    

          Dr. Larson said size is not a matter of concern to him and he hopes it is not a matter of concern to others.  It is the size that it needs to be.  It has significant faculty and staff representation.  The Chancellor is able to work with a larger group of people as demonstrated by the strategic planning activities over the last year.  He agreed that it is important that someone have an opportunity to examine the consistency of various programs and activities with regard to university values and other aspects of our planning activities.  The UPC, in his judgment, has been created toward and helped with planning, and to assist in thinking about the decisions that we have to make in relation to planning activities.  That is what this document reflects; he thought concerns raised by Dr. Sabo would be addressed.   

          Dr. Downes suggested adding the word “values” under Duties (c):  “Review periodically the University mission, goals, values, and strategic plan, and progress towards realizing these.” 

          Dr. Sabo said he was less interested in reviewing the mission constantly than he is in various activities, decisions, and actions that are taken by the university to judge their conformity to the mission and to the goals and to the values.    

          Dr. Wood noted that the phrase “monitoring institutional effectiveness” alludes to oversight.  UPC may be about our vision; the faculty, the Faculty Senate and IDC may be the watchdog.  What came out of the conversations last semester was that the Faculty Senate is charged with overseeing the welfare of the community; perhaps we can reinvigorate the Senate and particularly IDC’s responsibility for doing that in companion with UPC.  IDC is on UPC but we also have an independent role as faculty to ensure the mission and the goals of the institution are being followed.   

          Dr. Sabo argued that things can slip through the cracks when no one is responsible with the task of review.  The Senate agreed to look at IDC’s role as it is defined by the Standing Rules and Rules or Order and to possibly modify those at the first Senate meeting next academic year to address Dr. Sabo’s concerns. 

          Dr. Larson added that there is institutional effectiveness and there is programmatic effectiveness.  Throughout the year IDC has been talking about reinstituting a review process that would look at majors and other programs in the academic area; we could think of it as educational or programmatic effectiveness in the academic area.  He envisioned that the broader role of institutional effectiveness would fall under UPC.   

          In a friendly amendment, the proposal was edited by IDC to add “values,” under Duties section C. 

IDC 2 passed as amended without dissent and became Senate Document 8407S.

         Thank You

          Dr. Larson said he was honored to work with all the folks on the Faculty Senate and beyond this year.  He and Brian Butler have been on IDC for the last three years and he enjoyed their time together.  IDC had a wonderful group this year -- Brian Butler, Peg Downes, Herman Holt, Bruce Larson, John Wood, Betsy Wilson.  A round of applause followed.


VI.      Student Government Association Report:

          There was no Student Government Association report.

          Dr. Nallan reported that the SGA appointed Ken Betsalel to serve as 2007-08 Alternate Faculty Conciliator.     Peter Caulfield is the 2007-08 Faculty Conciliator. 


VII.    Chancellor’s Staff Advisory Committee 

          Joanne McKnight gave the Chancellor’s Staff Advisory Committee report.

          Ms. McKnight reported on the Staff Assembly’s semi-annual meeting.  The Assembly developed guidelines for its six representatives who will serve on the task force President Bowles is initiating to redefine our relationship with the Office of State Personnel (OSP). 

          The Initiatives and Innovations Committee of the Assembly is developing a policy that would allow staff members to train other staff throughout the state and save the system money. 

          Senators received a draft of CSAC’s Planning Retreat set for May 14th. 


VIII.   Administrative Report 

         Interim VCAA Kathy Whatley gave the Administrative Report.

         Information from General Administration:  Tuition by Credit Hour

     General Administration (GA) plans to initiate a new system regarding tuition that will charge students tuition by the credit hour.  GA is setting up a scale so that students who are taking 15 credit hours would pay approximately the same thing that students pay now for full-time status.  One reason for the change is to allow more students to take advantage of other course offerings whether it is online or distance learning at other institutions.  Students would pay their own institution for credit hours taken there and would pay other institutions for the credit hours taken at other institutions. 

          Only UNCA and Chapel Hill spoke against the proposal.  UNCA’s argument is that it may actually repress our graduation rates because students will decide how many courses to take based on how much they have to pay as opposed to what they need to graduate.  General Administration said via email that they could grandfather UNCA in for up to three years.  Dr. Whatley noted that this is something that we need to start planning for and she wanted the faculty to be aware of this change. 


         Several suggestions/concerns were expressed during discussion:


  • Students could be full-time at UNCA, live in the dormitories, take six credit hours from UNCA, six hours from ASU, and three hours from UNC-CH.  It would not be a healthy situation.
  • We need to consider carefully the implications of this change. 
    • Reconsider a lot of policies or make sure there is plenty of publicity about them for students.  For example, policies such as receiving permission in advance before taking courses at other institutions and taking the last thirty hours at UNCA.  A student who tries to take distance courses their senior year would run into problems.   
    • What are the implications in terms of our income?  This is a complex problem; we do not know how the difference in charges per credit hour will affect what students actually take. 
    • Consider other policies that could be affected such as drop/add and changes in dollar amounts associated with students adding/dropping hours.  It would increase the workload.
  • The administration argued that UNCA should be exempted because we are the designated liberal arts institution; that argument got us the offer for a three year grandfather and time to cope. 
    • Consider limiting the number of those kinds of classes that students can take.
    • Structure our curriculum to at least not hurt us by the change.
  • We developed a series of policies years ago to deal with online classes.  The fundamental principle was that in the liberal arts personal contact is essential.  There were certain “skill courses” that might fit that category but generally the online experience is not compatible with the liberal arts. 
  • A lot of our faculty teach independent studies on a regular basis to help our students graduate.  This may provide a little relief by being able to pick up some of those classes at other campuses.    
  • This is bad news for us because it will likely make experimentation and taking additional courses too expensive for some of our students.  It will make it very difficult for us to calculate aid fairly.  And it will reduce the number of double majors that we graduate. 
    • Dr. Padilla and Dr. Whatley spoke against the proposal. 
    • Chancellor Ponder spoke against the proposal in a Chancellors meeting, in a meeting with President Bowles, and in the Educational Policies Committee of the Board of Governors. 
  • Set it up to be revenue neutral at 16 - 18 credit hours. 
  • Our 4-hour classes will be problematic.    
  • Accept the three year grandfather and lobby effectively before the extension expires.
  • Work with Chapel Hill – ask if they can track how it went the first year and send negative consequences to President Bowles. 


          - Faculty Teaching Workload Report for 2002-2004 through 2003-2004

          A chart showing the schools who have exceeded the standard course load for their campus as defined for their campus was distributed at the Chief Academic Officers meeting.  Every school exceeded the course load expectation except UNCA and Winston-Salem State.  While WSSU does not meet the baccalaureate standard, it would meet the master standard. 

          Dr. Whatley noted that UNCA is still officially a 24-hour load institution.  Part of this is trying to give faculty a little time to work on scholarly work and part of it is the reassigned time given for administrative duties for chairs and program directors.  Dr. Whatley, Dr. Gravely, and the Deans will work this summer to make sure we are accurately reporting everything we do. 

          UNC Tomorrow

          UNC Tomorrow is an initiative by the Board of Governors to ensure that the UNC system is being responsive to the future needs of the state.  To plan for our campus visit in early June, Dr. Whatley has requested input from chairs and program directors.    

          One Stop for Students

          Planning is underway to relocate several offices to one area of campus to provide better services for students.  Students will go to one place for registration, financial aid, cashier, bursar, and advising issues; staff will be cross-trained to improve coverage and service.  A task force has been meeting most of the semester in an inclusive process facilitated by Eileen Buecher. 


IX.     Old Business

         Email message from Maggie Weshner

          Dr. Nallan read the May 5, 2007 email message from Maggie Weshner:

          To the Senate -

          I’d like to again thank the faculty, staff, and students for your support.  I am particularly appreciative of the Faculty Senate’s resolution asking for my reinstatement.  As a result of all your efforts, I have been “collocated” to MAHEC’s behavioral medicine program until the end of December 2007.  Although my heart is, of course, still with the Counseling Center, I believe that I will truly enjoy working with the MAHEC program and that I have something to offer there. 

          While I have been seeing the ten UNCA students that were of concern to me and waiting for the MAHEC agreement to be completed I have been required to exhaust approximately seven weeks of my accumulated leave.  I will, however, be able to continue seeing the students through May as part of the MAHEC agreement (although not at that location).

          Again, my heartfelt appreciation to all of you for your concern about mental health on the UNCA campus and for all your efforts on my behalf.

          Sincerely, Maggie Weshner


X.      New Business

         Thank You

          Dr. Nallan thanked Sandra Gravely for her administrative assistance this year.  Six Senators conclude their service – thanks to our colleagues for their service:  Leigh Atkinson, Brian Butler, Brian Hook, Bruce Larson, Don Lisnerski, Gary Nallan.  A round of applause followed.

          Ms. McKenzie thanked members of APC for their hard work this year.  She then presented Gary Nallan with a gift as a small token of the faculty’s appreciation for his hard work this year.  A round of applause followed.    

         Dr. Nallan arranged to have a photo taken of the 2006-07 Senate to commemorate the year. 


XI.     Adjourn

          Dr. Nallan adjourned the meeting at 4:30pm.


Respectfully submitted by:   Sandra Gravely

                                           Don Lisnerski