University of North Carolina at Asheville
FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Minutes, February 8, 2001

Senate
Members: M. Burchard, P. Caulfield, F. Davenport, R. Dunning, C. James, K. Krumpe, J. Kuhlman, B. Larson, H. Lee, P. McClellan, C. Mitchell, P. Nickless, J. Rackham, D. Van Engelen, G. Wilson; T. Cochran.

Visitors: A. Brock, W. Bruce, S. Browning, J. Comstock, K. Frazier, M. Gibney, E. Katz, R. Maas, K. Moorhead, G. Nallan, B. Reynolds, I. Rossell, R. Sensabaugh, A. Shope, M. Sidelnick, K. Whatley.

II. Announcements
NCAA Accreditation
Faculty Athletic Representative Gary Nallan reported that UNCA is preparing for a periodic study of our athletic program mandated by the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA). The NCAA instituted a certification process similar to accreditation about ten years ago. UNCA is now beginning its 2nd-cycle certification. Dr. Nallan distributed the membership of the Steering Committee appointed by Chancellor Mullen and a list of important dates for the certification process.

The Committee is charged with examining: Governance and Rules Compliance; Academic Integrity; Fiscal Integrity; and Equity, Welfare and Sportsmanship. The over-arching purpose of the certification program is to assure thorough integrity in our athletics operations. Draft reports from the subcommittees will be made available to faculty via a website and on reserve in Ramsey Library. Upon completion of our study, an external team of peer-reviewers will conduct a four-day evaluation visit on campus. The membership follows:

Keith Krumpe, Chair, Report Writer
Gary Nallan, Vice Chair, Liaison to NCAA
James Mullen, Chancellor
Joni Comstock, Athletic Director
Michelle Cornish, Senior Woman Administrator
Steve Patch, Subcommittee Chair
Linda Nelms, Subcommittee Chair
Bob Yearout, Subcommittee Chair
Pam Laughon, Subcommittee Chair
David Mitchell, Associate Athletic Director
Brenda Greene, Assistant to the Chancellor
Chappell Carter, UNCA Board
Chris Young, Community
Jason Boyles, Student
David Black, Student

Athletic Report
Athletic Director Joni Comstock reported that the Athletic Department is concentrating on the following areas: student-athlete GPAs and graduation rates that reflect university rates as a whole; athletic teams at the mid-point within the Big South Conference; participation in community service; operating with complete integrity by following NCAA rules and guidelines; building more stability in the fiscal budget; and, building a fiscal base outside the university. Dr. Comstock encouraged senators to contact her if they have any concerns.

III. Approval of minutes
The minutes of January 18, 2001 were approved as written.

IV. Administrative Report
Vice Chancellor Cochran gave the Administrative Report.
Summer Reading Program
Dr. Cochran reported that the Start of School Task Force was initiated in response to a recommendation from the Retention Task force. One recommendation from this committee was to require all freshmen to participate in a summer reading program prior to entering school to facilitate the transition into college life. This summer the students will read I Am One of You Forever by Fred Chappell.

Advising Program
The Retention Task Force also recommended improving the advising program. The Council of Chairs discussed incentives for faculty participating in the summer program. Approximately 200 students will participate in each of the June and July sessions. Faculty will be asked to share our values, the skills we want students to learn, and what distinguishes UNCA from other schools.

Tuition Increase
Chancellor Mullen is presenting our case on the proposed tuition increase to the Board of Governors Planning Committee today. UNCA has been asked to present our case as a model for tuition increases.

Newspaper Article on School of Engineering
Dr. Cochran commented on a recent newspaper article regarding a School of Engineering in the western part of the state. UNCA is working toward finalizing the joint Mechatronics program agreement we have with NC State. Last month Dr. Cochran traveled to Raleigh to discuss the agreement and there was no conversation about the School of Engineering at that time. However, NC State faculty on our campus have expressed an interest and there might be some willingness on NC State's part to reconsider their fairly proprietary approach to engineering. Dr. Cochran stressed that the reference in the newspaper article about changing the bond funding was simply an uninformed comment by someone who does not know the requirements of the bond package. The Dean of Engineering indicated to Dr. Cochran that NC State is interested in expanding our 2+2 program into a 2+3 program -- where students would receive both a UNCA degree and an engineering degree -- but Dr. Cochran did not know if this was feasible. He explained that having a School of Engineering is an important issue to the business community. About 20 years ago there was a major community uprising because an engineering program was wanted in the western part of the state. President Friday had to convince the community that that was not the solution.

Dr. Larson added that UPC has also discussed this issue. He supported Dr. Cochran's contention that bond funds would not be used for engineering and quoted from a document entitled "Guiding Principles for Bond Funds" dated October 2000 from the University Chief Financial Officer: "...Only the General Assembly has the authority to alter the project list, including any deletions. Each campus and affiliate should have an official project description and cost estimate for each bond project." Dr. Larson noted that approximately 15 liberal arts colleges in the country offer Engineering degrees -- some of which are quite prestigious.

V. Executive Committee Report
Dr. Caulfield gave the Executive Committee Report.
Second Reading:
The following document was considered for Second Reading:
EC 1: Sense of the Senate Resolution to authorize a General Education Review Task Force (GERTF).

Dr. Burchard expressed concern over the composition of the committee -- particularly the lack of representation from the humanities division. Dr. Davenport noted that APC has not completed their review of general education and the Senate may wish to hear APC's report before writing a charge for a general education review committee. He also questioned whether this committee should endeavor to work on SACS and general education concurrently. Last, he questioned whether this committee was formed in the spirit of faculty governance -- the Senate is being asked to endorse this committee when no one on the group was selected by the Senate and there is no official Senate representative on the committee.

Dr. Katz explained that while establishing the GERTF they worked to put together a committee that reflected as broadly as possible the range of faculty constituencies involved in or affected by general education at UNCA. They aimed for diversity in terms of rank, division, discipline, program, gender and race and aimed to represent different intellectual, philosophical, and pedagogical constituencies on campus. They also consulted with the Senate Executive Committee at the time (Gregg Kormanik, Claudel McKenzie, Peter Caulfield and William Bruce) and reported to the Senate in 1999. Dr. Katz argued that working on SACS and GERTF simultaneously was an effective way of conducting the work as the committee was gathering information that concerned both issues. Finally, many members have served on the Senate and are aware of our history of faculty governance.

Dr. Mitchell stated that she shared Dr. Davenport's concerns at the beginning of the year because the committee was not communicating with APC and was not taking into account all the hard work APC has done the last two years in general education review. She approached Dr. Katz and suggested that the Senate needed to be involved. She insisted that EC 1 include a timetable, that the Task Force report to the Senate every semester, and that GERTF's proposal go before APC and the Faculty Senate. She too felt the process has not been driven by the Senate, and has heard complaints about the composition of the committee. However, she supports the document because this group already has a certain level of knowledge on the topic. Dr. Davenport noted that most faculty have no idea that people have been working on this topic and that they were supposedly authorized by the vice chancellor to be considering this topic. Dr. Katz explained that the committee had set up a website prior to meeting with Dr. Mitchell but it was not appropriate to publicize the committee's work until the Senate had considered EC 1.

Dr. Dunning remarked that he wanted a full range of opinions on the committee and questioned whether this was the case in the humanities. Dr. Katz stated they had strong voices in the humanities for diversity, the history of the program, and to consider new approaches to the curriculum. The committee plans to meet with chairs and faculty in individual departments to gather information and concerns. Dr. Dunning asked Dr. Katz how he felt about the head of the humanities program not being on the committee. Dr. Katz stated that he felt it was acceptable because the program is so broadly construed, the director of the program serves for three years, and there will be many opportunities for input into the process.

Dr. Wilson asked Dr. Mitchell if she and APC were comfortable with the document. Dr. Mitchell replied no -- she informed APC orally what they were doing -- but APC has not looked at the document. If the Senate wishes to send it to APC they can look at it.

Dr. Caulfield noted that this was a strong, well-represented committee, with several former Senators. Dr. Katz reiterated that they met with the Senate Executive Committee twice but that was obviously not tied closely enough to the Senate and its processes. Dr. Mitchell explained that the Senate is a rolling body whose composition changes yearly; although Dr. Katz met with last year's Executive Committee, the new members to the Executive Committee were unaware of this discussion. EC 1 is coming from the Executive Committee rather than APC.

Dr. Krumpe urged senators to vote for the document. APC has a clearly defined role in the review of general education based on the mandate of the Senate which is different from GERTF's job. He has served on the committee for a year and its members are aware of what APC is doing in the broad sense. They have focused on a mission and a vision -- the broad, philosophical issues associated with general education. It is now time to discuss the details of general education. Several members attended the National Institute last summer to learn about general education. Although the Senate did not initiate this process, it has been a faculty-driven process, it has the best interests of the faculty and the institution in mind, and it is not an administratively-driven issue.

Dr. Mitchell remarked that it was not in the best interest of this committee to approve EC 1 if the Senate does not have a consensus. It would be preferable to send it to APC if there is significant opposition to this committee.

Dr. James supported the committee membership and asked Dr. Katz to explain the committee's view of the mission statement. Dr. Katz stated that the committee reviewed the institution's mission statement in relation to UNCA's program within the liberal arts tradition. Following an exhaustive series of meetings they produced a mission statement as well as a statement of goals designed to facilitate the mission. They want feedback on these first drafts, so the mission will reflect a greater range of viewpoints and understandings. The information is on a website but it is inappropriate to publicize the document until they know if it is a SACS recommendation or if it is part of a larger effort. EC 1 passed by a vote of 12 to 1 with one abstention and became Senate Document 1501S. The Senate thanked Dr. Katz and the members of the committee for all their hard work.

VI. Student Government Association Report
There was no Student Government Association Report.

VII. Academic Policies Committee Report
Dr. Cathy Mitchell gave the Academic Policies Committee Report.
Free Electives
Dr. Mitchell reported that the issue of electives has come up as APC reviewed documents this year. A liberal arts education is a three-legged stool that should consider electives. The Council of Chairs discussed this issue in November 1999, and there were suggestions that we include in the Catalog the requirement of absolutely free electives. Currently the pressure of majors -- combined with the pressure of general education -- mean that many students can take no electives whatsoever. APC decided that this is a revolutionary step that requires campuswide discussion. APC referred this matter to the GERTF, suggesting that it be considered as part of the general education packet they produce. Dr. Larson added that this is a challenging issue and it is good that GERTF has the opportunity to bring the issue to the broader campus.

Motion to remove documents previously tabled
Dr. Mitchell moved to return APC 5, 8, 9 and 10 from the table and add them to the list of unanimous documents for second reading. The motion passed.

Second Reading:
Motion to approve following unanimous documents:
Dr. Mitchell moved to approve the documents unanimously passed by APC.
Dr. Rackham moved to consider APC 18 separately. Dr. Davenport seconded the motion, which passed. Dr. Nickless moved to consider APC 12 separately. Dr. Van Engelen seconded the motion, which passed.

APC 5: Addition of Earth Science with Teacher Licensure.
APC 5 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 1601S.

APC 8 Education: Allowing EDUC 315 to count for the General Education Arts Lab requirement.
APC 8 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 1701S.

APC 9 Education: Allowing EDUC 319 to count as both hours of required Health and Fitness credit.
APC 9 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 1801S.

APC 10: Catalog Changes in Mathematics.
APC 10 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 1901S.

APC 13: Additional Catalog Changes in Economics.
APC 13 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2001S.

APC 14: Addition of Undergraduate Research Courses.
APC 14 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2101S.

APC 15: Modifications of Curriculum Revision in Biology (Senate Document 6500S).
APC 15 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2201S.

APC 16: New and modified course descriptions for Computer Science courses and modified degree requirements for the Information Systems concentration.
APC 16 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2301S.

APC 17: New Description of the B.S. in Management, B.S. in Industrial and Engineering
Management, B.S. in Accounting, MGMT 300 Legal and Ethical Environment,
MGMT 350 Marketing Principles, and ACCT 330 Accounting Applications;
Delete Courses in Management; Change in Course Requirement in Managerial
Accounting Emphasis Area.
APC 17 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2401S.

Documents considered separately
APC 12: Add an Introductory Course and a Capstone Course to the International Studies Minor.
Dr. Nickless supported the document but was concerned with the requirement that students conduct a major individual research project. The capstone senior seminar experience in the Women's Studies minor is specifically designed as a research paper, not a major capstone experience. This requirement makes it nearly impossible for students to do the international studies minor. No one from international studies was present to address these concerns. Dr. Wilson asked if there was a policy to waive the final project for students who double major. Dr. Cochran responded that this was handled on an individual basis as the requirements vary depending upon the department. Dr. Nickless stated that UNCA is small enough to negotiate these overburdens for students individually until this issue can be resolved. She will discuss her concerns with Dr. Kelley. APC 12 passed by a vote of 13 to 0 with one abstention and became Senate Document 2501S.

APC 18: Addition of Legal Studies Minor.
Dr. Rackham apologized to his colleagues at APC for his absence when this document was discussed, and especially to Dr. Burchard and others who worked on the proposed minor. However, he considered the proposal -- as it is now designed -- to be both ill-conceived and poorly designed. The minor claims to be interdisciplinary, but two-thirds of the courses come from the social sciences. And of the thirteen courses offered in the social sciences, seven are located in a single department. More importantly, the proposal claims to be an 18-hour program with the parenthetical notation that some courses may have prerequisites. Depending on which electives the student chooses, this minor could require up to 16 additional hours of prerequisites, making a total of potentially 34 hours. That is more than some entire majors require at this university. He addressed the question of whether a student taking courses in a major can "double dip" and count those courses also for a minor. Apparently there are a number of minors and free-standing programs on campus with numerous hidden prerequisites. If it is a rampant problem, the Senate should charge APC with rooting it out and finding a way to eliminate it. Finally, he spoke about the conception underlying this minor. Although those who designed the program had no intent that it should be considered a pre-law minor, any reasonable reading of the proposal suggests that it could be interpreted that way by students.

Dr. Gibney replied to Dr. Rackham's concerns, noting that he emailed a missive inviting faculty to participate in the interdisciplinary minor and he hopes others will develop an interest in the program. He favored placing a disclaimer in the catalog to ensure students would know it is not a pre-law minor. Dr. Nickless commented that prerequisites do not cause a problem for the Women's Studies Minor because of the phrase "...or permission of instructor" -- instructors do waive the prerequisites for the minors. Dr. Mitchell stated that APC suggested that addition but Dr. Gibney and Dr. Burchard did not want it included. Dr. Burchard stated that the minor requires students take courses outside their own disciplines to broaden their understanding. Discussion turned to free electives and the role of a minor.

Dr. Rackham stated that he supported the concept and goals but would like to send it back to the original committee so it could be refined. Dr. Mitchell withdrew her motion to approve APC 18 and moved to return the document to APC. Dr. Rackham seconded the motion. Dr. Burchard and Dr. Gibney argued against returning the document to APC. The motion resulted in a tie vote of 6 to 6 with two abstentions. Dr. Caulfield broke the tie by voting to return the document to APC for further consideration. Dr. Mitchell requested that Dr. Rackham and Dr. Gibney collaborate on the document and bring it to APC.

Motion to waive Comer Rule and consider for passage:
Dr. Mitchell moved to waive the Comer rule and consider APC 19: Removing MGMT 221 as a required course. Mr. Kuhlman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. APC 19 passed unanimously and became Senate Document 2601S.

Dr. Mitchell moved to waive the Comer rule and consider APC 20: Changes in University Honors Program. This document changes the number of hours required to graduate with Distinction as a University Scholar from fifteen to twenty-one hours, and increases the minimum GPA to stay in the honors program from 3.0 to 3.25. It also increases the minimum GPA to graduate with Distinction as a University Scholar from 3.0 to 3.25. The net effect will be to shrink the number of participants in the Honors Program because of the higher GPA and the number of courses involved. Dr. Krumpe seconded the motion.

Dr. Nickless argued that the document was too complicated to consider without a first reading. The motion failed by a vote of 3 to 8 with two abstentions. APC 20 will be considered for second reading at the March Senate meeting.

Dr. Mitchell moved to waive the Comer rule and consider APC 21: Ban on S/U grading of Special Topics Courses. This document formalizes an existing tradition at UNCA. It adds language in the Catalog that disallows taking a special topics course for a satisfactory/unsatisfactory grade unless it is approved by the department chair/program director and the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Dr. Krumpe seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. APC 21 passed by a vote of 13 to 1 and became Senate Document 2701S.

Dr. Mitchell moved to waive the Comer rule and consider APC 22: Changes in Teacher Licensure in Sciences. This document reduces the number of hours required for teacher licensure in science by allowing some science courses to cover several competencies at once. Dr. Krumpe seconded the motion. Dr. Nickless argued that this document was too complicated to consider without a first reading. The motion to waive the Comer rule failed by a vote of 4 to 7. APC 22 will be considered for second reading at the March Senate meeting.

Dr. Mitchell presented APC 23: Changes in Environmental Studies for first reading as it is also a complicated document. It will be considered for second reading at the March Senate meeting.

Dr. Mitchell moved to waive the Comer rule and consider APC 24: Changes in Pre-law catalog listing. This document makes two changes in the pre-law catalog listing. Dr. Krumpe seconded the motion. Dr. Nickless argued against waiving the Comer rule. Dr. Mitchell withdrew the motion and presented APC 24 for first reading. It will be considered for second reading at the March Senate meeting.

VIII. Institutional Development Committee/University Planning Council Report
Dr. Bruce Larson gave the Institutional Development Committee/University Planning Council Report.
First Reading:
The following document was distributed for First Reading:
IDC 2: Guiding Concepts.

Report on UPC activities
Dr. Larson reported that UPC has discussed proposed tuition uses and the engineer program that Dr. Cochran addressed earlier. UPC wants the campus to create its own destiny rather than have someone else suggest what our destiny ought to be. We need systemically to discuss the concept of engineering at UNCA and to understand what is involved.

The enrollment report distributed by Dr. Gravely shows that we are within the enrollment window for this academic year. The administration anticipates receiving enrollment increase money next year which could potentially translate into three new faculty positions. Dr. Weast is confident that we will meet our enrollment target next year.

Upon completion of its work on the Guiding Concepts, UPC will review UNCA's vision statement and our environmental scanning process. The environmental scanning process examines external trend categories such as social, demographic, and economic trends.

IX. Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report
Dr. Gordon Wilson gave the Faculty Welfare and Development Committee Report.
Feldman Committee membership
The deadline for nominations for the Ruth and Leon Feldman Professorship is February 9, 2001. A call for nominations and a reminder has gone out to the campus community. The Feldman Committee membership follows:

Michelle Patrick (chair and member of University Teaching Council)
Deb Van Engelen (Faculty Welfare & Development Committee)
Gordon Wilson (Faculty Welfare & Development Committee)
Scott Walters (University Research Council)
Sheryl Sawin (University Research Council)
Sarah Bumgarner (University Teaching Council)

University Service Committee
Wayne Kirby called the first meeting of the University Service Council this week. The chair will be selected at the first meeting.

Update on Faculty Loads
FWDC has been meeting with Kathy Whatley concerning faculty loads. Dr. Whatley is assembling information the chairs were asked to turn in regarding their schedules for next fall and spring . FWDC wants this to be up front, transparent and fair, and they have the full cooperation and support of Academic Affairs.

Role of senators in faculty searches
At the Senate's request, FWDC prepared a draft memorandum clarifying the role of senators in departmental searches. The senator who meets with the candidate is not a member of the search committee and should not be asked to provide an evaluation of the candidate. The senator's function is solely to provide information to the candidates regarding faculty governance and service opportunities on campus. Following faculty input FWDC will prepare a first reading document for inclusion in the Faculty Handbook.

Faculty Elections
Following a few minor glitches, the electronic balloting process has gone smoothly. While some feel the election process is adequate and fair, there has been some controversy over the election process, the selection of committees, voter eligibility, and election results being controlled by a group producing slates. The Senate discussed releasing ballot information and ways to reform the process. Dr. Cochran commented that the total eligible voters and the percentage of total votes cast should be released. Dr. Van Engelen noted that 55% of eligible voters participated in the election. These issues were tabled until the March meeting.

X. Old Business
There was no Old Business.

XI. New Business
VCAA Search
Dr. Caulfield stated that the process to form a search committee for the position of vice chancellor for academic affairs will be discussed at the March meeting.

XII. Adjournment
Dr. Caulfield adjourned the meeting at 5:45 pm.

Respectfully submitted by: Sandra Gravely
                                        Gordon Wilson