FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Minutes, November 9, 2006
Senate
Members: L. Atkinson,
G. Boudreaux, B. Butler, K. Cole, P. Downes, M. Harvey, H. Holt, B. Hook,
D.
Lisnerski, J. McClain, C. McKenzie, M. Moseley, G. Nallan, B. Sabo, B. Wilson,
J.
Wood.
Alternates: C. Bell
Excused: S. Judson,
B Larson; M. Padilla.
Visitors: M. Alm, R. Booker, L. Friedenberg, E.
Katz, J. Konz, J. Kuhlman, A. Lange, B. Massey,
J. McKnight, A. Shope, B. Spellman.
I. Call
to Order, Introductions, Announcements
Dr.
II. Approval of minutes
The minutes of October 17,
2006, and October 19, 2006, were approved with an editorial correction.
III. Student Government Association Report
(SGA)
Anna Lange gave the Student
Government Association report in
Following are issues that
the Faculty Senate and SGA need to address:
Ms. Lange added:
IV. Chancellor’s
Staff Advisory Committee (CSAC)
JoAnne McKnight reported for the
Chancellor’s Staff Advisory Committee.
CSAC is in
the final planning stages of projects that are intended to be unveiled early
next semester. The projects include a
new CSAC website as well as the establishment of a format which will be used by
CSAC representatives to meet cyclically with staff in the area which they
represent. Both measures are being
developed to foster more viable and visible cross-communication with staff; to
slay the rumor-mill and replace it with a transparent process; to work in a
proactive manner to establish a positive attitude, first among staff and then across
all levels of the university community; and to solicit further input from staff
to create and implement creative ways to acknowledge the outstanding jobs that
employees routinely do.
The “new”
CSAC body and leadership that came into place in August, 2006, has been working
diligently on campus committees, to provide staff presence and input.
·
CSAC
served on the University Community Council (UCC) which held a series of campus
meetings and identified critical issues for staff. Most notable achievement of the Chancellor in
concert with this group is that the salary of every employee on campus is now
either at the base of or within the salary range that is appropriate for the
work which they do. UCC continues to
work to provide training opportunities for staff and to investigate and ensure
proper and consistent application of law mandated policies such as those that
affect how comp time is to be used to benefit employees.
·
CSAC
serves now as conveners in the Strategic Planning Process that is taking place
during this academic school year. Dr.
Ponder has a national reputation as one of the finest strategic planners in
higher education today.
·
CSAC
serves on the Distinguished Staff Member of the Year Committee. Every year a staff member is selected who has
served this campus in ways that are above the norm. This person receives an award and a monetary
boost in appreciation for the service rendered.
This year, the committee’s goal is to ensure that the recipient is
honored in ways that parallel the distinctions afforded the faculty member who
receives the parallel Faculty of the Year Award. It is also looking at innovations designed to
broaden the idea to include more than one staff member.
·
CSAC
serves on the Chancellor’s Office Support Study Team. This is a team that is currently seeking to
update the job descriptions of the administrative support teams that are so
vital to the academic function of the university.
UNC Staff Assembly
UNC Asheville
representatives to the UNC Staff Assembly are:
Connie Schaller, Jonalyn Crite,
JoAnne McKnight and Nancy Williams. As the Staff Assembly meets twice a year, the
real work of the Assembly will be done in the committees that are charged to
work in-between sessions. The UNCA team
has expressed an interest in serving on the following committees:
Communications
and Technology
Diversity
Human
Resources
Innovations
and Initiatives
Legislative
Priorities
Staff
Development
V. Administrative
Report
Dr.
Nallan announced that
Annual
Report of Vice Chancellor for Alumni and Development
Vice Chancellor Bill Massey reported
for Alumni and Development. The report
is available at: Annual Report of Vice Chancellor for Alumni and Development.
·
Mr.
Massey noted the impressive gain in the investment pool of the endowments. The Investment Committee which comprises
members of the Trustees Board and members of the Foundation Board decided over
a year ago to move 50% of our endowed assets to UNC Management Company. It was created by UNC Chapel Hill to manage
its $2 billion endowment. Several years
ago they were given permission to manage, upon request, the endowments or any
portion of the endowments, of the 15 constituents and the affiliated
organizations, such as public television.
It has a very aggressive, very successful, actively managed portfolio
that ranks in the top 10% of all university endowments nationally. This allows us to get into funds that we
would not be able to get into otherwise.
Fifty percent of the endowment was kept with the more passive management
in mutual funds. Now that we have
exceeded $20 million in the endowment, both in growth and additions to it, the
committee will be reviewing that portion of the endowment to see if they want
to move more of it into the more aggressive stance.
·
The
Friends of the University still tend to be non-alums rather than our own
alums. We had a drop last year in the
percentage of alumni who participated in giving to the university. We have addressed that and to date we are
showing progress and are recouping some of that. It remains to be an issue. If we do not have regular communication with
alumni, we have no right to expect their loyalty. Some departments do a good job of keeping in
touch with alums but the university has simply not made a commitment. There is nothing that we do any time of the
year that goes to all alumni. It is not
an absence of talent or ability or knowing that it is something that we need to
do – it is a cost issue. At one point we
only had the addresses of about 50% of our alumni; we now have the addresses of
95% of them.
·
Mr.
Massey’s main concern is the question – are we going to the same pool of people
over and over again and tapping into their generosity. He has never lived in a community that is
more generous to a university than the
VI. Executive
Committee Report
Faculty Assembly
Peg Downes reported President
Bowles’ top two priorities:
·
Need-based
financial aid: 25% of the proposed
tuition increase would go to financial aid.
·
Increasing
faculty salaries to bring each campus up to the 80th percentile of
its peer institutions. President Bowles
will request that this take place over the next two years. He is also requesting a 4% annual
cost-of-living increase to faculty salaries.
UNCA was particularly mentioned during the meeting of the Faculty
Assembly’s Budget Committee as in notable need of increase in faculty
salaries. The Board of Governors will
consider the proposed budget on November 10, 2006.
o
Other
items in the proposed budget include:
§
Resources
for summer bridge programs, to ease high school students into the universities
§
Resources
for research that is driven by NC economic needs
§
Scholarships
for more and better K-12 public school teachers
§
Resources
to support the “Arts & Sciences campuses” – that is
·
President
Bowles will try to convince the Board to pass the budget; if passed, it then goes
to the Governor, and then, the 3rd week of June, to the General
Assembly.
·
To
encourage the General Assembly to look kindly on us, the Faculty Assembly will
pass a resolution in January, supporting the increase in faculty salaries, and
they will soon be requesting that each campus’s Faculty Senate pass a similar
resolution in February.
·
Other
pertinent and interesting remarks by President Bowles:
o
He
stated a state-wide need for “teachers, nurses, and the liberal arts.”
o
He
declined to get into detail about tenure and post-tenure reviews, when someone
posed the question to him, but he emphasized that “Service has to play a very
important role on our campuses.”
o
He
had thought that to save students hundreds of dollars each semester, a textbook
rental system should be set up on each campus; he was persuaded that this would
be difficult and expensive to implement, and thus, at this point, asked
strongly that we exhort our colleagues to get their book orders in early – a
few months before a semester begins. He
said, “We must inform students earlier about what books they’ll need to buy for
their classes.”
o
This
week, a UNC System Grievance Committee is to be announced, but there is some
concern that it is composed of administrators mostly, not faculty. It includes two faculty.
o
In
a meeting of the Task Force on Assessment, chair Gary Jones strongly suggested
that the Task Force consider recommending three additions to the required
curriculum throughout the UNC System: that students learn about Ethics;
Sustainability; and Community Engagement.
o
Also
discussed in that Task Force meeting was the need to develop a new category for
assessing administrators – i.e., to list the characteristics of an Outstanding
Administrator. Meg Morgan at UNCC asked
that anyone with ideas send her suggested criteria: mpmorgan@uncc.edu. The understanding of this Task Force is that
each campus has some procedures for the faculty to regularly and confidentially
review the administrators who affect their work and their lives – in accordance
with the motion passed by the Faculty Assembly in April 2005.
Comments
SGA was encouraged to compare our Bookstore’s pricing
guidelines with the National Association of College Bookstores guidelines on
mark-up patterns to find the degree to which we are out of line with the normal
practices.
Senators discussed the importance of instructors ordering
books early; listing books on syllabi and emailing specific information to
students early; the need to give ISBN numbers; and the possibility of setting
up a web form that takes the data and sends it to the Bookstore and to a
website for students simultaneously.
Betty Wilson serves on the Textbook Task Force and will send to the
Faculty Senate a copy of its report which will be finalized next
Wednesday.
Faculty Assembly
Representation
Dr. Nallan explained that our
current Faculty Assembly delegates are Gwen Ashburn and
VII. Institutional
Development Committee Report
Peg Downes reported for the
Institutional Development Committee in Dr. Larson’s absence.
Guidelines
for Institutional Centers
IDC is reviewing a proposal on
guidelines for institutional centers at UNCA.
The proposal addresses how an institutional center can be established,
how and when these centers should be reviewed, and under what circumstances an
institutional center should be discontinued.
NEMAC (the National Environmental
Modeling and
We have other centers, such as the
VIII. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report
Second
The following
document was considered for Second Reading:
FWDC 1: Proposal to
establish the “Library, Information Resources, & Technology Committee”
as a
new Standing Committee replacing the Computing & Telecommunications
Committee and the Library & Media Services
Advisory Committee (Replaces SD7403S;
Faculty Handbook 6.5.3; 10.4.4; 10.4.13
The Senate discussed the composition of the committee and
the need to balance the number of faculty and administrators with voting
privileges. FWDC 1 was withdrawn; an
amended proposal will be forthcoming for second reading.
Update
on Faculty Mentoring Program
The coordinators of the faculty
mentoring program are working on a function for early spring semester. Surveys will be sent to new faculty (first
and second year on campus) to learn what areas they feel they need additional
information on and whether workshops may be needed. Additional mentors are needed.
Faculty Committee Sunset Policy
At the University Service Committee’s
request, FWDC is considering a faculty committee sunset policy as a way to
eliminate committees. Some committees
are only meant to meet once a year and they should not be eliminated.
Adjunct Faculty meeting
Dr. Lisnerski met with some adjunct
faculty members who indicated an interest in having the Adjunct Faculty
Committee continue. A number of issues
were discussed – the majority of issues tended to be department-oriented rather
than university-wide. Several adjunct
faculty members plan to call a meeting of all adjuncts to see if there is
interest in continuing the committee to deal with their specific issues.
IX. Academic Policies Committee Report
Sense of the Senate Resolution
APC discussed the
resolution distributed at the last Senate meeting. Ms. McKenzie noted the assessment period under section 2 and
the third paragraph of the rationale.
She moved approval of the Sense of the Senate Resolution on behalf of
the APC. The resolution follows:
Sense of the Senate Resolution: Deadlines
for Grades: Fall, 2006
1. CHANGE IN FALL 2006
CALENDAR DEADLINES
Current Schedule New
Schedule
Tuesday (December 12) finals end Tuesday
(December 12) Finals End
Thursday (December 14) noon: grades due Wednesday
(December 13) noon: senior grades due
Friday (December 15)
noon: all grades due
Saturday (December 16) Graduation Saturday
(December 16) graduation
Faculty are encouraged to submit their grades, especially
for seniors, as soon as possible rather than waiting until the deadline.
2. ASSESSMENT
The Registrar’s Office will report
to
complete their task in the time
allotted and the degree to which faculty complied with the deadline.
RATIONALE
This fall UNCA experiments with a
December graduation. Early estimates
indicate between 160 and 170 students will be eligible to participate. Before a student can graduate, the
Registrar’s Office must certify seniors as having met graduation
requirements. The complexity of the task
is one reason why senior grades must be submitted early. The traditional UNCA practice has been for
faculty to submit senior grades before the final examination period.
Realizing the difficulties
associated with submitting senior grades early, the individual responsible for
certification is willing to do what she can to alleviate the burden. The change in the deadlines for the Fall,
2006 semester permits seniors to take exams with other students, while still
allowing the certification process to be completed in time for the
ceremony.
This is a short term solution to a
burden placed on the registrar’s office.
The assessment report will aid in planning for possible future December
graduations and help
Ms.
McKenzie added that
Second Reading: [Unanimously
approved by
The following documents were considered for Second
Reading:
APC
1 passed without dissent and became Senate Document 0306F.
APC 2
passed without dissent and became Senate Document 0406F
APC 5
passed without dissent and became Senate Document 0506F
[Senators review Minor documents via
links on the agenda emailed campus-wide.]
APC 3
became Senate Document 0606F.
X. Old
Business
Dr. Nallan reminded Senators that Leah
Mathews chaired the Task Force on Student Rating of Instruction. Dr. Nallan and Bruce Larson (as Director of
CTL) met with Dr. Mathews to discuss the next step following the Task Force
recommendations. Dr. Larson volunteered
to convene a group to discuss issues concerning student rating of instruction,
how that information is gathered from the students, and how it is used by the
administration in evaluation. Dr. Larson
suggested that the group include former directors of the Center for Teaching
and Learning, Archer Gravely, and participants in the
Dr. Sabo suggested that Dr. Mathews or
another member of the Task Force participate in the discussions. The final report had a series of
recommendations that he would like to see addressed. This would eliminate duplicating work and
would keep the group on task.
XI. New
Business
Dr. Lisnerski asked Dr. Downes to
elaborate on President Bowles’ comment to the Faculty Assembly that “Service
has to play a very important role on our campuses.” Dr. Downes stated that President Bowles did
not elaborate on the type of service.
Dr. Lisnerski noted that FWDC has been discussing how to get faculty to
appreciate the need for service and how that is communicated through the
administration.
XII. Adjourn
Dr.
Nallan adjourned the meeting at 4:30pm.
Respectfully submitted by: Sandra
Gravely