NGCSU FACULTY SENATE
MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 10, 2002 MEETING

Call to Order

    The January 10, 2002 meeting of the NGCSU Faculty Senate was called to order by CEO Woods at 12:30 p.m.
Members in attendance: Armstrong-Williams, Biddy, Broman, VPAA Buckhiester, Campbell, Cavalli, Cronic, Delargy, Friedman, Gannaway, Gessell, Pres. Hansford, Larkin, Mann G., McCard, Morris B., Morris W., O'Neal, Reiselt, Richard, Weinberg, Westerfield, Williams, Woods, and Yeoman.
Members excused: Mann B., and Sumners
Members absent: Fuller, Shawe, Stucke, and Thompson.
Guest: Linda Roberts-Betsch.
November 8, 2001 Minutes
    CEO Woods submitted the minutes of the November 8, 2001 meeting for approval and called for any additions or corrections.  CEO Woods asked that attendance be corrected to show that Senator Yeoman had been present. Senator Reiselt moved that the corrected minutes be approved.  Senator O'Neal seconded the motion.  The corrected minutes were approved.
President's Report
    President Hansford informed the Senate that enrollment for the Spring of 2002 is up to a total of 3412 students (for all campuses and programs).  This figure represents an 8.5 to 9% increase over last Spring's enrollment.  The number of graduate students is up 14%. The number of students taking NGCSU classes in Forsyth and Gainesville is also up.
    President Hansford also reported that a meeting of Vice Presidents and other administrators had been held on January 8th to examine ways to accommodate increasing enrollment.  The July 15th application deadline for the Fall semester will begin to be enforced.  Previously, no data has been compiled to show the yield figure (how many accepted applicants actually matriculate). Calculation of this figure is now underway.  A second meeting of administrators examining enrollment issues will take place in February.
    President Hansford fielded several questions related to enrollment.
    Senator Yeoman asked what the constraints on enrollment are.  President Hansford responded that they are faculty and space.  Funding for faculty traditionally comes from State monies.  Proration of the budget (how it will be cut) may affect this funding.  This year some funding for faculty will come from tuition.  Traditionally NGCSU hires faculty and waits for students to come.  With rapidly rising enrollment, faculty is sometimes hired after student numbers increase.
Senator Campbell noted the lack of appropriate commercial (instructional) space in Dahlonega, and asked if there are more auditoriums on campus (i.e., Hoag) that could be utilized as classrooms. President Hansford said that the new Health and Natural Sciences Building will have an auditorium that may be suitable for large lecture classes.
    Senator Reiselt raised the question of the desirability of increasing class size in order to accommodate more students, citing that the low student to faculty ratio is a major selling point of this institution.  President Hansford concurred and said that administrators are aware that excessive growth has the potential to negatively impact the quality of the NGCSU education.
    Senator Armstrong-Williams asked if a new classroom building is being planned.  President Hansford answered that there is not one on line at this time.  Senator Armstrong-Williams followed up with a question concerning instructional space in the upcoming addition to the library.  President Hansford answered that nothing larger than a seminar room is being planned for that addition, but a couple of classrooms will open up when the Military Department moves out of Memorial Hall.  Additionally, more space may be created when Rogers Hall is renovated, and the basement of Barnes Hall may also provide some classroom space.
    President Hansford reported that a search committee has been formed to find a replacement for VPIA Diana Martin, who recently turned in her resignation.  Steve Ross has agreed to chair the search. Other members of the committee are:
Cliff Adams - Chair, NGCSU Foundation
George Coleman - Secretary, NGCSU Foundation
Clayton Grant - Chair, Department of Business Administration
Rufus Larkin - Faculty Senate
Vicki McCard - Faculty Senate
Jill Rayner - President, Staff Council
Tom Richardson - Chair, Department of Chemistry
Kathy Sisk - Dean, School of Arts and Letters
Barbara Williams - President, NGCSU Alumni Council
Stacie Morgan - SGA
    President Hansford reported that the new parking lot is open and that another new one - a portion of which should open within one week - is being built in front of the Alumni House.  The parking lot behind the new Science building should also be open by the Fall of 2002.
    Regarding the budget, President Hansford mentioned special initiative money that is being directed to the following programs: leadership ($750,000), off-campus, and non-traditional students.  Governor Barnes will present the 2003 budget to the legislature on Tuesday, January 22nd.
    Senator Reiselt asked what the plan is for Memorial Hall.  President Hansford answered that, when the new Plant Operations facility is completed, the Military Department will renovate the old Plant Operations building and move in there.  Architects are currently designing those plans.
CEO's Report
    CEO Woods reminded senators to initial the attendance sheet.
    CEO Woods announced that Chairs have been designated for all standing senate committees.
    CEO Woods introduced a request from the SGA that the Faculty Senate consider allowing students to use the Student Center Faculty/Staff Dining Room after 3:00.  Senator Friedman moved that the senate accommodate the SGA in this matter.  Senator Cronic seconded this motion.  Discussion of the request  took place for several minutes.  Senator Armstrong-Williams asked about the current status of the room, noting that the redecoration that was begun in the fall has not been completed.   Senator Gessell asked why not.  Senator Armstrong-Williams noted that various items remain unresolved.  Senator Weinberg reminded those present that a discussion regarding the desirability of preserving this space exclusively for faculty and staff had already taken place at a recent Senate meeting.  Senators Broman and Gannaway wondered about the feasibility of providing the SGA with a list of possible sites and allowing them to schedule meetings in other buildings.  Associate VPAA Roberts-Betsch said that the list of sites must be coordinated through Wes Thomas.  Susan Perry schedules events. There is no central office that controls the campus-wide allocation of space. Senator Weinberg observed that the redecoration of the dining room seems to be a low priority and wondered why.  At this point, CEO Woods called the question and first a voice vote and then a hand vote were taken.  The motion to allow students to use the Faculty/Staff Dining Room was defeated 16 to 4.
Agenda Item: Promotion and Tenure - Senator Donna Gessell
    Senator Gessell, acting on behalf of the Promotion and Tenure Committee of the College of Arts & Letters, brought forward for consideration by the Faculty Senate eight recommendations for changes to the pre-tenure, tenure, post-tenure, and promotions procedures set down in the NGCSU Faculty Handbook.
Note: These recommendations are included at the end of this document.
    After reading the rationale for the changes, Senator Gessell moved that the Senate accept the first recommendation.  Senator O'Neal provided a second.
    Motion 1) concerned the composition of the Committee on Pre-Tenure Review of the School of Arts & Letters (Section 4.4 of Faculty Handbook).  It passed after being amended to read: "For the purpose of this review, faculty members in Division of Academic Support Programs will be reviewed through The School of Arts and Letters and the Committee will include a faculty member from the Division, if a faculty member from the Division of Academic Support Services is under review."
    Senator Gessell then moved that the Senate approve Motion 2), which recommended that IAS summary sheets and a representative sample of trends in student comments be included with the analysis of the past three years' student opinion surveys in the documentation for post-tenure review (Section 4.6 of Faculty Handbook).  Senator Reiselt provided a second.   A great deal of discussion followed regarding the wording and the appropriateness of the recommendation.  After being amended to read "analysis of the past three years' student opinion surveys, which will include summary sheets and a written analysis of both quantitative data and qualitative data," it was defeated.  Senator Gessell will present it again at the February Faculty Senate meeting.
    Senator Gessell then moved that the Senate approve Motion 3), which recommended that the length of candidate dossier and documentation files for pre-tenure review, tenure, and promotion be limited to one or two three-ringed notebooks (Section 4.7 of Faculty Handbook). Senator Gannaway provided a second.  This recommendation also generated considerable discussion. VPAA Buckhiester questioned the accuracy of the recommendation's basic assertion that dossier and documentation files usually fit a single three-ringed notebook, because, at present, the majority of candidates submit either two or three notebooks.  The recommendation was then amended to read: "Dossier and documentation files should normally not exceed three three-ringed notebooks."  The motion passed.
    Senator Gessell then moved that the Senate approve Motion 4), which recommended that the phrase, "to include current academic year," be added to statements eliciting the number of years at present rank, and the number of years of teaching experience in the dossier for pre-tenure review, tenure, promotion, and post-tenure review (Section 4.7 of Faculty Handbook).  Senator O'Neal provided a second.  The motion passed without discussion.
    Senator Gessell then moved that the Senate approve Motion 5), which recommended the addition of "a self-assessment of one's individual teaching, scholarship, and service record" to the dossier requirements outlined in Section 4.7 of the NGCSU Faculty Handbook. Senator B. Morris provided a second. This motion generated discussion ranging from the desirability of consistency in dossier construction, and the possibility of penalizing candidates with poor rhetorical skills, to questions clarifying whether this narrative would be written in the first or third person.  The motion passed.
    Senator Gessell then moved that the Senate approve Motion 6), which recommended that candidates address teaching, scholarship and service goals in the Statement of Professional Mission (Section 4.7 of Faculty Handbook).  Senator O'Neal provided a second.  Discussion centered on the wording of the recommendation, which was amended twice to read: "Goals, with an overview of methods by which the goals will be accomplished."  The motion passed.
    Because of its similarity to Motion 2), Motion 7) was tabled until the February Senate meeting.
    Senator Gessell then moved that the Senate approve Motion 8), which recommended that candidates for tenure be required to include pre-tenure review documentation. Senator B. Morris provided a second.  Discussion focussed on the wording of the recommendation, and questioned what pre-tenure review documentation was being specified.  For the sake of clarification, the recommendation was amended to read: "For Tenure, include the report of the candidate's pre-tenure school committee."  The motion passed.
    CEO Woods thanked Senator Gessell for the recommendations she had brought forward, and said that he would forward them to President Hansford.
Announcements and Adjournment
    CEO Woods asked if there were any announcements.  There being none, the meeting adjourned at 1:40.
Respectfully submitted,
Vicki McCard, Acting Secretary
NGCSU Faculty Senate

Recommendations for Changes to the Pre-Tenure, Tenure, Post-Tenure, and Promotion Procedures
Brought forward by the Promotion and Tenure Committee of the College of Arts & Letters, North Georgia College & State University
Approved by Faculty Senate January 10, 2002

Overall Rationale: During our work Fall 2001, the Promotion and Tenure Committee of the College of Arts & Letters noticed a number of points that, if modified, would facilitate the task of Promotion and Tenure Committees.  We believe that such modifications would benefit the entire NGCSU Faculty by clarifying procedures, making them less ambiguous and more equitable.

Additions appear in italics.

1) 4.4 Pre-Tenure Review
IV. Committee on Pre-Tenure Review
. . . For the purpose of this review, faculty members in the Division of Learning Support Services Division of Academic Support Services Programs will be reviewed through The School of Arts and Letters and the Committee will include a faculty member from the Division, if a faculty member from the Division of Academic Support Services is under review.

Rationale: Although the path of the review is specified, representation on the committee is not.
[Please note that the policies on Promotion, Tenure, and Post-Tenure omit such a statement.]

2) Not Passed.  To be presented in February.

3) 4.7 Format for Dossier and Documentation File

Usually Dossier and documentation files should normally not exceed three fit a single three-ringed notebooks; occasionally two are needed.

Rationale: Without specifying a file length, faculty members are provided a guideline.  While some faculty members may exceed the amount, the guideline discourages excessive and unnecessary documentation, which wastes faculty members' time to assemble and the various reviewers time to review.

4) 4.7 Format for Dossier and Documentation File
Dossier
I. Cover Page
J. Number of Years in Present Rank at NGCSU, to include current academic year
L. Number of Years of Teaching Experience, to include current academic year

Rationale: Whether or not to include the current year is left open to interpretation, resulting in ambiguous information.

5) 4.7 Format for Dossier and Documentation File
Dossier
II. Statement of Professional Mission
A. A self-assessment of one's individual teaching, scholarship, and service record. (Exception: Not required for tenure or promotion).

Rationale: Including such a statement provides the Promotion and Tenure Committee further pertinent information: specifically, as to whether the faculty member has achieved effectiveness in the appropriate areas.  Furthermore, it gives a baseline for evaluating Future Goals (see #5).

6) 4.7 Format for Dossier and Documentation File
Dossier
II. Statement of Professional Mission
E. Future Goals with an overview of methods by which the goals will be accomplished, which should include goals for each of in the three areas: of teaching, scholarship, and service.

Rationale: Faculty members have omitted areas, necessitating the Promotion and Tenure Committee to seek more information.

7) Not presented. To be presented in February.

8) 4.7 Format for Dossier and Documentation File
Documentation
II. Annual Performance Evaluations [suggested, not required]  (For Tenure, include the report of the candidate's pre-tenure school committee.)

Rationale: The Pre-Tenure policy states that "Once the faculty member has received the report of the Pre-Tenure Review Committee, it becomes his/her responsibility to utilize the contents of the report to develop a record of teaching effectiveness, scholarship, and service that will maximize his/her chances of receiving tenure."  Having that documentation would provide the Tenure and Promotion Committee further evidence that the faculty member is striving toward effectiveness, based on subsequent activities.