Fayetteville State
University
Faculty Senate
January 24, 2008
Minutes
Called to Order
The meeting of the
faculty senate was called to order at 4:10 PM in the Taylor Science
Annex Building. Dr. John Mattox, Faculty Senate Chair presiding,
Dr. Jonathan Breitzer, Parliamentarian, recorded the proceedings for
the meeting until Dr. Charletta Barringer-Brown, Secretary arrived
at 5:12PM
Roll Call
The following senators
were in attendance: Aghajanian, A; Autrey, D; Barlow, M;
Barringer-Brown, C; Bell, J; Brooks, J; Chan, A; Darnell, M; Davis,
G; Dilday, C; Gill, S; Goins, S; Han, S; Hernandez-Hinek, S;
Kassem, A; Johnson, O; Jones, C; Klomegah, R; Martin, S; Mattox, J;
Okhomina, D; Orban, M; O’Shea, M; Peacock, J; Swinford, D; Taylor,
A; Wang, D; White-Oyler, D; Williams, T; Wilson-Jones, L; Wood, P.
Excused Absences: Akbay,
C; Elliott, Gloria; M.; Frobish, T; Hackett, M; Han, S; Miah, F;
Montoya, D; Nickolov, R; Okojie, R.; Radford-Curry; Trouong, D.
Unexcused: Absences:
Ellis, R; Heastie, S; Mongkuo, M
Guests: Gillis-Olion,
M..; Hebert, V.
Senators were reminded to
sign the roll call.
Adoption of the Agenda
The agenda was adopted as
amended.
Adoption of agenda (unanimous)
Minutes: correction, Mattox did not vote on resolution from
Committee on Committees, so resolution failed because it failed to
achieve a majority vote.
Adopted with corrections (moved by Gill, seconded by Dianne White-
Oyler)
Provost report: a few items to provide info on. Written out my
comments, left with my secretary. To be posted on Senate website.
First issue: comment on status on programs app by FS. Several were
app in May and also in last meeting in Nov still pending. When they
get to my office, we typically read them bc it’s our first opp to do
so. All programs since May have been in that process. At this point,
all of the programs are in a holding pattern bc of the UNC Tomorrow
report (it’s on our Website so take a look at executive summary and
full report). Any new program to GA for approval has to be
responsive to UNC Tomorrow issues that have been raised. There are
some spec recommendations in 8 diff areas in programs and how they
respond to needs of state. Every program has to be responsible in
some way to that. We will be meeting with individual and dept chairs
in light of UNC Tomorrow.
Chancellor has shared that in his meeting with GA that c of rec came
out with UNC tom and each campus needs to responsible, they will
consider programs that respond to that document even if it is
outside our Carnegie classification. I will be meeting with authors
of those proposals over the next week or so to frame them in the UNC
Tom document. Whether they fit or not. If they do fit, we will
fast-track them straight to Chancellor and GA.
Q:
DWO: what about prop that don’t have to go to GA? Bell: Revisions
for courses etc. are in process will be moved on, they are not on
hold. Just intents to plan and authorizations to establish. JM:
revision of math minor, change of cse numbering…can we get
specifications of where each of these are? Bell: yes, I can do that.
Q: while I support UNC tom, faculty of my dept are asking why the
SWK UG program sat so long before UNC tom came down? Bell: they have
been in the process. That’s the best answer I can give. I don’t
think it would have made a lot of different bc GA has made it clear
that anything has to be responsive. Yours is, but needs to be
reworded some. Q: when do we receive a copy back? When you meet with
UNC Tomorrow or when they actually go? Answer: when they’re signed
by Chancellor. T and P proposals: for promotion, final action soon.
For tenure those have to go to GA. They have not indicated they want
them yet. They used to go to the office first, now they go to the
President. No later than mid-semester though.
Q:
UNC tomorrow, how that’s going to impact us? Committees formed. 8
subsets, ea require a report. You might be asked to serve on one.
They must go to GA no later than May 1. The report is extensive but
the executive summaries only 4 pages. We’re planning a rollout of
how we’re going to address UNC Tomorrow. Provide info and gather
input. Send recommendation in or comments. We’ll send out a notice.
Do a
good job on summary page (personnel action require BOG approval)
because that’s all they see. The GA doesn’t get your portfolio! But
we retain it in case of questions.
Reconstitution of College of Arts and Science: decision made that
effect Feb 1 the CAS will be reestablished and CHSS and CBAS will
cease to exist. Barlow will be Dean of CAS and James will be dean of
Grad studies. Search was suspended and decision was made to do
reappointments within University.
Phase retirement is going to be revised in light of GA
recommendations. Some suggestions for revisions that have come from
fac as well. All will be considered by committee. Plan to have
revised and thru process by Mar 15 which is the deadline for faculty
to apply for phased retirement. Will be having meeting early next
week.
Printer situation: printer policy is a PACE initiative. A year or so
ago ea campus was asked to come up with reductions in spending to be
reallocated to academic
core functions. There are approx 1.5 printers per fac/staff on
campus and spending about $1M a year on printer supplies. Institute
a shared printer policy. With that policy, ea area has one printer
for 3-4 fac/staff. Over the last week or two they were inventorying
the printers. Will be replacing them with network printers. Talked
with Gannesen: confidentiality: set up so you have a 4 digit code
that you punch in the printer. He is planning to do some info
sessions with units over the next week. Bottom line, we have
contracted to implement this policy. If there are strong
justification for keeping a printer you may be able to keep current
printer. They are going to take them even if you have a sign saying
“do not take”. Just found out today. Individual faculty and staff
are most likely not going to keep your printers. If in office where
3 or 4 people working you might be able to keep yours though. What
about printers and cartridges? There was a buyback for the printers
themselves in the contract. Q: printers purchased through grants
excluded? Answer: most likely; I’ll confirm. Units are charged a fee
for printers. Check you personal printers for stickers! Don’t know
if there’s going to be a limit, and it’s 8 cents per page. Not sure
what they’re doing with printers in computer labs or library. Copy
facilities for students? Ask Nick. DWO: our printers are in suites
in another building that are locked! Answer: if you have 30 some
faculty, you’ll get more printers. Email any questions.
Now
quorum: so previous motion to app minutes with amendment carried.
Report on Chancellor Search Committee;
Chair of search committee for Chancellor: chair’s report is general.
My report is more specific. We spent 2 days interviewing 7
candidates and we found them very impressive. 4 were selected for
further interviews. They didn’t want either number mentioned to the
public. Sel will be approved by BOT then president Bowles. Chairman
Brown from Dr. Jones resigned to spend more time will family. Dr.
Jones: I will prepare a brief document and send it out when I get
things off my plate.
We
move on to election. Doesn’t need to be a FS member. Dr. Marion
Gillis-Olion nom by Executive Committee . M Almeida moved and E.
Barlow seconded to close nominations. Gillis Olion is appointed by
acclimated.
Selection and Evaluation of Academic Department Chairs:
Senate position on selection and retention of chairs. You got email
on Jan 8 from me.
Chair policy: current policy was in the email on Jan 8 but I’ll link
it in Faculty
Senate.
Comprehensive evaluation: They told me (Mattox) that they did the
pilot study and they’ll soon have the data back. In my dept we are
doing it. The rest of you? CrJ I was supposed to be evaluation. The
stuff with writing goals, etc., did not occur. In my dept (SWK) 2
are being evaluated. We set up a committee and told to do a thin
portfolio. English and Foreign Languages, art don’t seem to be on
track. Seems to be varying by department. Elem Ed, received from
committee and received evaluation from students but haven’t done
portfolio yet. The senate finds that the pilot study is lagging and
the task force reports to us in detail in February. The chair is
Soni Martin. Tom VC said that this is a lot of work, especially for
Chairs.
Revision of criteria for TOY and BOG teaching awards:
Changing to be consistent with new evaluation system. TVC suggests
that the Task Force may be willing to take this on. We’ll ask them
to report on that at the same time. Bell: when’s the deadline? Bell:
it won’t affect things this year. In addition to how to modify
criteria, also how to transition to new criteria. TOY depends on 3
years of ratings, so if no more points or numerical ratings, what do
you do with a mixture? These will probably not be effective before
2010 because of need to have a full year of evaluations.
Post-tenure review: Bell, deadline? I believe until either May or
June, I need to check. Can you share with us doc from GA on what we
have to change? I will.
Revision of Code and post tenure review policy:
BOG
did not accept all proposed changes by their committee. One of the
main rev in guidelines was that it was not just an assimilation of
annual review, and we don’t do that anyway. What failed: chair or
committee review (choice). Requires committee review. We could have
the Faculty Welfare committee or committee on evaluation look at
this. We decided to have this on the committee on faculty
evaluation.
There has long been a push to revise fac evaluation. Bell: I asked
John to ask for a report on this bc each college would have its own
criteria for TPR. We need criteria established very soon. New TPR
policy applies to hires after July 2007. E. Barlow, Chen seconded
that Post Tenure Review be assigned to FS committee on fac dev on
evaluation by deadline to be provided by Provost. Passes.
I
urge committee chairs to post your meeting places.
Student Affairs: we met with SGA, vice chancellors to answer
students’ questions. Tap into concerns. Three things: ITTS
connectivity, advisement (Dr. Bell answered those), parking,
financial aid. Will be holding an open fac/staff Q&A on Thursday
Feb. 7. There are certain mysteries about how to proceed through
Financial Aid. We talked about inviting some guest speakers to
address our committee about stud concerns. Chief of police would be
invited as well, and the president of SGA is invited to attend our
meetings and we can chart an agenda of visitors to appear. We talked
informally about issues we have encountered. Possibly looking at
career services people, seeing how they are dev resources for
students. Commuters and Fort Bragg students, SGA and how to attend
their meetings. Please email us any concerns you have. The president
of SGA is Cliffort Parker. This resulted as a suggestion from our
Jan 4 workshop where we brought the president from ECU Fac Senate.
They regularly have the SGA president there, as well as having FS
pres in BOT meetings.
Budget and Planning: we established a Bb site for conducting our
affairs, but we’ll have to (does Open Meetings law apply to
electronic communications?). We’ll have a resolution ready: asking
Senate to approach Senate: 1) Transparency in budgeting. 2)
Budgeting process review. 3) Policies reg award of salary increases,
merit pay, etc. Consider this offering notice to present these at
the next FS meeting.
Faculty Welfare: Phased retirement. We have to revise our policy by
a certain day for GA. 2 years versus 3 years is an issue. It was
changed at some point from 3 to 2, Dr. Bell doesn’t know why. I have
not heard any negative comments about going to 3 years. There are
some limit on how many faculty in a dept can go up in a year.
Committee Reports:
Faculty Evaluation and Development:
We
failed miserably this year to meet. A meeting was scheduled for
yesterday but I had to cancel. But at our last meeting, we talked
about new faculty evaluation to be implement. Concerns: no
quantitative component. This could be good, but it’s very
subjective. I have not seen the new document. There’s a website to
see. Salary increases: Provost told us when they will be posted.
BD-119 is being finalized by our business office. Another issue:
Treva Williams to email all faculty their three most pressing needs
to be addressed right now. There is a great need for editing grant
proposals. Ask Dr. Valenti for possibilities. This should be easily
solved. Also: research papers need editing? Jones: traditional
method in academic
and
to send it to colleagues for feedback. But NSF suggested having a
non-specialist look at your ms for grant proposals. Bell: send list
of concerns to me in case some can be addressed immediately. Tanya
Williams-Jones sec resp. in Acad Aff. Q: Parking: gated lot at Lyons
Science, more ppl have access than there are parking spaces. Are
there more passes issued than spots? Bell: I believe they oversell
to some extent, but I don’t know how much.
Faculty in attendance: Dr. Cevdet Akbay, Dr. Shubo Han, Ms. Soni
Martin, Dr. Maurice Mongkuo, Dr. Maria Orban, Dr. Jane Peacock, Dr.
Kassem Abdelmajid
Dr.
Gray asked to be excused.
The
minutes of the October meeting were approved.
Dr.
Orban handed out to the members the charge of the committee printed
by Ms. Martin.
Ms.
Martin informed the committee about the progress of the new faculty
evaluation system. The committee members discussed the new system
and Dr. Mongkuo raised concerns about the system lacking a
quantitative component and relying only on a more subjective
qualitative evaluation. The committee discussed the intricacies of
the two options.
Dr.
Orban brought up the issue of salary increases not being posted on
the FSU website. Dr. Mongkuo remarked that being that FSU is a
public university – 503 (c) they should be public record. Ms. Martin
volunteered to check with attorney Jenkins on the issue.
Ms.
Martin also suggested that mentorship, an important point discussed
at the previous meeting should be part of the mid-year conference.
She also elaborated together with Dr. Peacock on the usefulness of
the Saturday Academy.
The
problem of faculty portfolios was revisited.
The
committee discussed imminent needs the faculty has. Dr. Han noted
that grant writing faculty struggle with editing their materials.
This was also found true for publications. Help with reviewing such
materials was considered very useful. Ms. Martin volunteered to
contact Dr. Valenti to inquire about such possibilities.
Dr.
Orban offered to ask FSU faculty to email their most pressing needs
they would like addressed by the committee.
After Dr. Orban informed the committee that no answer was received
from Dr. Charles upon the invitation extended to him to meet with
the committee, members of the committee discussed again the
limitations of the Title III funds and felt further discussion was
needed.
Student Affairs Committee
meeting held on January 10. 2008
Called to Order
The meeting of the
faculty senate was called to order at 4:00p.m. in the Rosenthal
Gallery. Soccoro Hinek-Hernandez, Michelle Darnell, co-chairs,
presiding. Angela Taylor, secretary, recorded proceedings.
Roll Call
The following senators
were in attendance: Darnell, M; Hernandez-Hinek, S;
Johnson, O; Taylor, A;
Adoption of the Agenda
The agenda was adopted as
amended.
Midyear conference
Hernandez-Hinek spoke
about attendance at the SGA mid-year conference,
where representatives of
the administrative elements of FSU met with students
to discuss aspects of
university function, and allow students the opportunity to
raise specific concerns.
Issues discussed included ITTS connectivity problems
(Nick Ganesan); issues re
advisement (Provost and Academic affairs concerns);
and the physical plant
–(parking, new initiatives concerning the gym and the
Lyons Science center).
She noted that the financial aid office is providing series of
information sessions for
students to learn more about specific processes
(F.A.M.E.).
Hernandez-Hinek also
introduced the idea of a reward (certificate) to areas of
student service that are
most improved during the course of the semester
Guest speakers before
the SA committee
Hernandez-Hinek broached
the idea to have the chief of police of FSU talk to the
student affairs committee
at the next meeting, to talk about issues of students
and campus safety.
She also talked about
having other guest speakers, in particular, the current SGA
president talk to the
committee. It was decided by members that the SGA
president should be the
first invited speaker, and that his visit would determine
which other speakers
should be invited.
Interspersed were
discussions of what sorts of issues the committee might work
on or at least gather
more information on. These included the following: career
services; and greater
help to commuter and Ft. Bragg students.
Faculty Liaison to
Student Government Association
General discussion of
whether there should be a rotating faculty liaison to the
student government
association. The liaison would attend each meeting, but not
be a voting of the SGA.
All members agreed that a
liaison would be a good idea. The question arose as to
whether the Committee
should start the process on its own or should bring it to
the Executive Committee
of the Faculty Senate, prior to examination by the
Senate as a whole. This
issue will be investigated by Hernandez-Hinek.
Student Affairs
Committee – What is the charge?
General discussion
occurred among members about the “charge” of the
committee – that is, what
is its scope of operations? That is, are we advocating for
faculty or advocating for
better student affairs? Further, what issues are
appropriate for this
committee to take on? Do they include judicial proceedings
around student
discipline? Issues around criminal behavior?
Johnson mentioned
attending a meeting of the FSU diversity council and thought that
there are issues of exclusion (sexual orientation, gender,
geographic location) that seem to be important at FSU, and but are
not very well addressed. He suggested that perhaps that the
Committee could have stake in those issues.
Hernandez-Hinek expressed
the view that a key goal for the committee should be to figure out
what its charge should be, with the current semester devoted to
exploring that issue. A revised statement on this matter will be
made at the end of the term.
Information gathering
Darnell suggested that we
should gather information from both students and
Faculty about their
specific concerns w/regards to student affairs. The members
suggested administering a
survey to all faculty eliciting their concerns regarding
students. Taylor
volunteered to help develop the survey. The ultimate aim is to
use the data to help
refine the charge of the Student Affairs Committee and make
it relevant for all
parties concerned.
Academic Affairs
Committee Report:
Dr. Dianne White-Oyler:
Thanked the following Senators for agreeing to serve on the
committee:
Dr. Cedvet Akbay
Natural Science
Dr. Daniel
Autrey Natural Science
Dr. Gloria
Elliott Education
Dr. Clara
Jones Psychology
Dr. Michael O’Shea
English & FL
Dr. Garestine Simmons
Accounting
She announced the next
Faculty Senate Academic Affairs Committee meeting for proposals
March 28, 2008 with proposals due to me by March 13, 2008.
UNC
Faculty Assembly Report
January 18, 2008 Meeting
General Administration Building, Chapel Hill NC
Linda Wilson-Jones and Victor Hebert: basically I did attend meeting
this past Friday. You remember UNC Tomorrow. I encourage everyone to
read this report. The findings were: UNC must be more actively
involved in solving pre-K-12 education. Post-tenure review is not to
be disciplinary but professional development. I serve on planning
(co-chair) we’re focusing on initiative on credit transfer between
community colleges. It’s supposed to be seamless from community
colleges to university so credits don’t get lost. Next meeting April
18, 2008. Hebert: teacher salaries and admission standards. Online
degree programs. Teacher education has the most so far. Council
established for this. Inter-institutional registration system to be
implemented. Hebert has a written report. What particular rights
each professor has to online course materials
The
morning Plenary Session started with messages/presentations by Jim
Phillips (UNC Board of Governors), Erskine Bowles (President, UNC
System), Harold martin (Sr. Vice President), Dennis Daley (HR),
Scott Jenkins (UNC Online), and Alan Mabe (UNC K-12 Activities and
Initiatives).
President Bowles spoke on the relationship of student achievement
and teacher salaries. His focus in this line of discussion was the
public schools of North Carolina. He stated that teacher pay affects
getting good teachers and that in turn affects student achievement.
Vice
President Martin presented information about the new admissions
standards and how information will be disseminated to schools and
parents throughout the state in the near future. Also, this
information will be communicated to Chancellors, Provosts/Chief
Officers, and Senate Chairs.
Alan
Mabe spoke about UNC Online.
Currently there are 160 Online Degree, Certificate and License
Programs. Teacher Education has the most programs. An Online Quality
Council has been established. This council will have representatives
from each campus. Advertising for Online Programs will begin to “go
outdoors” in February. One advertising stream will be about teacher
education, and 2 others will be about UNC Online. Starting August 1st,
there is to be an inter-institutional registration system. The
student can have one online registration to register for any UNC
school campus.
Dr.
Hebert: Attended the Technology Committee/Task Force session.
Frank Prochaska, Director of the UNC TLT Collaborative, and Lori
Mathis, Manager of the UNC TLT Collaborative met with the committee
and spoke about the upcoming TLT Conference and several Technology
Initiatives that were to be unveiled soon. The TLT Conference will
be held March 12-14, 2008 in Raleigh, NC. Richard Baraniuk will be a
Plenary Session keynote speaker. He will talk about his website that
has pieces of entire courses called “Connections.” Connections has
“print on demand” materials that can be used to build courses. The
conference Theme is “Mix it Up.”
Other items discussed was a Digital Objects Repository and Equella (http://www.equella.com).
Equella is an intuitive Digital Repository developed by Educators
for Educators. It is a huge database with metadata. It handles
Digital Rights Fees and details regarding use and managing of course
content by professors. UNC is working to have a statewide repository
with multi-campus collaboratives. and even multi-state
collaboratives.
A
new delegate total for 2007-08 is 3 and one alternate, and 3 in
2008-09 based on FTE %
Several Resolutions were passed:
1. Resolution Honoring Ms. Leslie Winner (Legal Counsel to
FA)
2. Resolution on Post Tenure Review/RPT Recommendations
(Refinement of Purpose)
3. UNC Tomorrow Resolution (Refocusing on Strategies and
sustainability)
4. UNC-NCCCS Collaboration (Seamlessness between UNC and
Community College Campuses
5. Amendment of Bylaws Concerning Assembly Elections
(Refinement of policies)
TLT
conference, money to attend? March 12 to 14, can still register.
Bell: there will likely be funds but how much I’m not sure. This
year they changed how they’re supporting it in GA. With PACE,
campuses have to pick up differences. We have faculty development
funds that are part of PACE and Title III but you’ll have to submit
a request as if you’re going to any other conference. No longer
requirement to present for Title III. Mattox will attend in a state
car, can take somebody.
Dean
Swinford to be FS member of Core Review Committee. Motion from FS
Exec Committee, approved. They haven’t met yet.
Any
FSU delegate to the UNC Faculty Assembly who is not a member of
Faculty Senate shall be an ex officio member of the Faculty Senate
bc of their status as FA delegate. Entitled to speak on any issue
but will not vote. Motion carries.
Dr.
Mattox discussed meeting will be held on February 21, 2008 at 4:15
in the Lyons
Science Annex Lecture Room 120
Meeting adjourned at 6:17PM
