Faculty Senate Meeting, March 11, 2004

Senators present:  K. Biddy, P. Buckhiester, E. Combier, B. Friedman, R. Fuller, F. Corotto, A. Ghafarian, M. Gilbert, N. Hansford, S. Irwin, E. Lewis, K. Mace, G. Mann, G. Olsen, B. Reiselt, S. Sampson, A. Schaffer, S. Smith, A. Sumners, S. Wiedmann, J. Woods.

Senators excused:  K. Hislope, M.(Pomphile) Stone, C. Powell, L. Reeves, A. Stucke.
Senators absent:  K. Benton, C. Chastain, C. Dare, A. Lu, D. Morris.

CEO J. Woods called the meeting to order at 12:30.

Minutes from January 8, 2004: M. Gilbert moved to accept the minutes and this was seconded by B. Reiselt.  Motion carried and minutes were approved.

President’s report: Our budget is to be approved.  The governor warns that additional cuts in future are possible.

There has been a Hope scholarship compromise: it will remain intact as is for fees and books; however, in case there are not enough funds as expected, books and fees will be limited.  The first year that the balance dips below the previous year, there will be a cap of $500, the second year funds for fees will be deleted, and if it dips for 3 years books will not be covered.
A minimum GPA of 3.0 is required, not just a B (letter grade).

CEO Wood’s report:  There has been a call for nominations to standing committees.  Once this election is complete, the COC can write its report and the Senate can consider it at the April meeting.

Thanks to Kaye Biddy, the faculty affairs committee has a new chair, Marc Gilbert.

Calendar: Phil Buckheister presented the 2004-2005 calendar and thanked the committee for their work.  As requested, Linda Roberts-Betsch worked in a fall break by having faculty return for fall faculty meeting on Tuesday.  INTRO and orientation sessions were moved to Monday. Fall break is tentatively set for Oct 7-8, 2004.  In fall 2005, fall break will be October 6-7 with new faculty reporting one day earlier again.

Extensive discussion was held on the problems this break presents for Thursday classes, in particular for laboratories and synchronization of MW versus TR classes.
Suggestions included adjusting laboratory schedules or moving the scheduled two-day break from Thursday/Friday to Monday/Tuesday of the same week.
P. Buckhiester promised to address the concerns of the science professors with L. Roberts-Betsch.

Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee: Visitor Jennifer Wallace presented information on alternative dispute resolution on campus. This group of trained mediators began as an initiative from the BOR to lessen conflicts on campus.  As an alternative to grievance, mediation is encouraged between any combination of faculty, staff and students. Both parties communicate and resolve conflict on their own.  No adjudication is involved; mediators serve to counsel and to advise only.  No paperwork of any sort is kept.

Bylaws: CEO Woods presented the proposed bylaws changes.

The graduate council proposes changes to the current bylaws: these can be viewed at http://www.ngcsu.edu/academic/senate/Ay03-04/proposals/proposal2.htm
These changes will be voted on in the next meeting.

Faculty Affairs: M. Gilbert presented several concerns resulting from items brought to the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Item 1: D. Waddell forwarded the following to FA, and M. Gilbert moved that "The Faculty Senate supports a formal request to the Board of Regents that it:

        one, include "sexual orientation" in its commitment to non-discrimination in Board Policy 802.01 and
        two, adopt policies and procedures which treat married coulpes and domestic partnership couples in an equal manner and ensure that system-wide benefits are available to both married couples and domestic partnership couples.
B. Friedman seconded this motion.  Many senators noted the necessity of discussing this with the faculty they represent.  B. Reiselt moved to postpone the vote, the motion to postpone was seconded by A. Schaffer and the Motion carried.

Other comments were that the BOR is looking at this issue and may decide legislation rendering this discussion moot,  this issue involves implied costs as well as other aspects, there was no complete agreement even in the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Item 2: There are two issues related to promotion.  No one wants overly specified guidelines but no one wants deserving faculty to fail to be promoted.

1.  The first issue is that of coming up for early promotion.  According to the Faculty Handbook, the faculty member must have strong justification.  Gilbert questioned: should the Senate revisit the handbook or explore the term ‘strong justification’ and what it means?
P.Buckhiester pointed out that those with rank at another institution before coming here would not want to come here and begin all over again at a lower rank.  Many situations are possible and do not have explicit definitions.  Discussion continued and conclusion was that vague terms should remain to allow for departmental interpretation for appropriate field.
2.  The second issue concerns faculty that are up for promotion from assistant to associate professor.  The Faculty Handbook states for promotion one must demonstrate excellence in teaching and be noteworthy in either service or scholarship, but, aparently, there have been cases where a faculty member was not promoted specifically for not excelling in scholarship.  The question was raised: should we then make that requirement specific? The requirements for promotion from associate to full professor are explicit  R. Fuller requested a clarification.  Comments included desires not to codify more rules; however there must be correlation between what is in writing and practice.  Interpretation depends on each individual committee and this may present a problem for a candidate; it has left some faculty members feeling betrayed.  Senators noted that some shift has occurred in expectations.
B. Friedman made the motion for the chief executive to appoint an ad hoc committee to discuss requirements in terms of writing and practice and was seconded by S. Wiedmann.  J. Woods pointed out that that is what the faculty affairs committee is doing.  Any specific cases must be investigated from top down.  The committee should to look at what is in writing, what is happening in practice and what should be in writing, and to suggest faculty handbook wording to reflect this change.
There was no further discussion. The Motion carried.
Item 3: There are other promotion/tenure issues.  There was a list of recommendations from the 2002-2003 FA committees.  Many of these things still need to be considered.

CEO Woods closed the meeting at 1:55pm.

Respectfully submitted by E. Combier.