FACULTY SENATE MEETING
February 2, 2000
I. Call to Order.
CHAIR CAROLINE STROBEL - I would like to call the meeting to order. (The meeting was called to order at 3:04 p.m.)
II. Correction and Approval of Minutes.
CHAIR STROBEL - You have a copy of the minutes. Are there any additions or corrections? If not the minutes stand approved as printed.
III. Reports of Officers.
Good afternoon. It is nice to have the sun back. I will bring you up-to-date on a few things that are going on. This is a critical time, as you may know, with the legislature in session and the various committees that are contemplating the budget. Your Provost and I made a presentation on our budget to the Education Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee the other day. Our very first priority expressed to them was gratitude for the budget from last year and the bond bill and the capital outlays that we will be able to make during the next several years. Principly our priority is faculty/staff salaries, to keep our good people here. The kind of competition that we are engaged in compared to the other real research universities around the country make that necessary. We got a good hearing from Mr. Tom Keegan, and we are hopeful that we will be able to receive that funding.
We also represented some of the key capital projects that we have on-line which are the Law School for one and the renovation of the rest of the buildings on Gibbes Green, etc. We will continue to try to get these renovation monies to try to fix up all our buildings. You will hear we made some progress there.
Our biggest challenge continues to be inadequate operating funds. You know, we get some money for salary increases. We get some capital projects, but as we finish these buildings we need money to operate them. As you know we have not received sufficient increases in our operating budget. We are working with the CHE continuously. This year, they are trying to assess whether we have a correct business model so to speak from the Business School of the adequacy of funding for our kind of an institution. We have gone from a formula funding with head counts and square footage into a performance- based funding program, but we are still trying to get at the base of what we think the requirements are even if you use the old kind of formula. What institutions can you compare yourself to and were we adequately funded? We have a disagreement on that. Who are the peers you want to compare us to? That is what the CHE is doing first (assessing adequacy of current funding) and then the performance-based funding is going to come on top of that. Then maybe we pick a group of different institutions and our aspirational institutions of course for this campus are members of the AAU. And I donít care how big the gap is, but if that is the goal at least then we can move to close the gap and thatís what the Provost and I are trying to communicate.
In the meantime, we have some yearly challenges with our own budget. We had a slight decrease in enrollment in the fall. We want to be very cautious about that, and the Provost asked the deans to set aside about 1% of the budget just in case. It is cautions, but if we need it then at least we will have it. As you know, at budget time the deans are very pressing, very aggressive, and after all the supposed money under my desk and all the money under the Provostís desk, it doesnít leave for much flexibility. We have had some shifts in enrollment and deans crying for new faculty, and deans having to hire part-time faculty that werenít budgeted. You know what the lead time is to make any kind of faculty changes from one college to the next. If your total enrollment is not growing, it should be obvious that the enrollment is shifting. The people who have lost enrollment are begging for a couple of years to get it back and those who have new enrollments say, "I need faculty right now." Unless the Provost starts holding some money back then slowly giving it out, there is no solution. We are not allowed to run a deficit budget or the Board of Trustees will find another president and maybe some new deans as well. It is a challenge for us and you may hear about some of these particular problems throughout the University.
We had a very interesting and unique meeting with the governor last week. I said we: the Board of Trustees and key administrative staff were invited to meet with the governor supposedly on the lottery. We thought everybody in higher education was to be invited, but when we arrived there it was just the Board of Trustees and the key administrative people. What the governor wanted to do is not look for assistance on the pro or con of the lottery but wanted to share with us his program for how the monies--if the lottery were to pass-- would be distributed and the assurances given that the money went to higher education-- 90% the highest number percent--90% would go to higher education. This amount would be protected and wouldnít be influenced by general state budgets. So it would be set completely aside as a stand alone foundation income source. The regular budget would go on as it did in Georgia, but they were not successful doing that in Florida. This had broad support from the Board of Trustees and the administra- tion. Money is there to increase merit scholarships, need-based scholarships, tuition relief for the two-year campuses and technical schools. There is something in it for just about anyone in education. Remember, we gave and have given no endorsements for the lottery. Our job is to express the need we have for finances, but it is not our job to tell the legislature how it should raise that money. I wanted you to know this information was shared with us, and we expressed our appreciation to the governor for doing that.
We will have an annual retreat the Board of Trustees. Last year, you know the topic was AAU. We had a number of presentations from our faculty and our deans about what it tookto achieve AAU quality. We had the former president of the AAU present to the board and talk about the 3 most recent schools that were admitted to the AAU--the University of California at Irvine, the University of California at Davis, and Emory University. This year, we are going to continue that theme, but we are going to focus on what public institutions did as far as seeking and getting support from their states to leverage monies that would come to the institutions. Some of these newer members like the University of Florida had matching programs for endowment and special enticements with the formula funding rewarded them for outstanding production of graduate programs etc. That is what we are trying to create. We are going to try to get the key members of the legislature --the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, the Education Committee, the speaker of the house, etc. -- sensitive to that. The former president of the University of Florida, John Lombardi, is going to be here to address the board on these issues, so it should be a good discussion again sensitizing both the board and the members of the legislature about our particular needs on this particular campus.
I just wanted to express appreciation again for those of you who are working on the SACS self-study, which as you know it is not a traditional study. It is how technology is going to affect higher education. If you are reading things in the paper, technology is dramatically just changing what is happening in the world of education.
Jerry Odom, just before we came here, brought me a catalogue from the Univeristy of California extension programs. I guess it is their continuing education program. It is a big catalogue, and you can register for just about any course. You pay your tuition and you pay $50 to get on America On Line and you can take these courses and they are fully accredited. You can take your English and your history and anything else. The world is changing, and I hope you are sensitive enough in your departments to talk about how technology affects you. Many of you are using technology in your courses, and I want to commend you on that but think about what we could do on the outside as well. That is a market that will be growing, and somebody is there to try to capitalize on that.
For this purpose we have renovated 21 classrooms that seat about 3,400 students. Last fall, 220 faculty taught 240 sections and 23,000 students in these fully technolgoically enhanced classrooms. We are going to try to finish those up. I think we have done most of the large ones, Jerry? Okay.
The campaign is continuing to move along. We are going to regional kickoffs in California and San Francisco and Los Angeles and San Diego. We are about $270 million dollars toward the $300 million goal, and I am told by Charlie Phlegar that by this June we will be at the $300 million level, and we have another year to go. When we get through and reach the overall goal, though, we probably will not have raised about half the money for specific purposes that we said were part of the campaignís purpose. So we will probably have to continue to do this. Weíve got a good base of prospects, a good infrastructure for continuing this fundraising and we will just continue to raise money after that.
I am elated that we have had the kickoffs in Aiken, Augusta, and Orangeburg. Typical situation: the person hosting the event in Orangeburg, who made announcements at the event and introduced me, told people that they should have some soul searching. About 4 oíclock in the morning he and his wife decided to give us a million dollars. I said all that soul searching -- just keep doing it.
But people are really buying into the vision of the institution. I think that was our fifty-second $1 million gift to the university. There is a lot more out there. A lot of people are making a lot of money, and we are trying to keep Uncle Sam from getting that.
But you have led the way in the initial giving. I tell people everywhere we go and when they ask who were the first givers I indicate it was our own faculty and staff. You have pledged $5 million towards this campaign. I am pleased to report to you that we are at $5.7 million from your gifts to the Bicentennial Campaign. So give yourself a hand. It is just wonderful to write you these thank-you notes. I know that when you sit down and write those checks -- check-writing is not a fun thing -- and when you make that pledge to the university and write that check -- I want you to know how appreciative we all are in the administration and among alumni and the board as well.
Besides that generosity, you have set a new record with United Way, our partnership with the community. There are so many needs in this community. We have met more than our goal of $125,000 for the United Way. The average gift is up to $120, and in leadership gifts, we have 74 individuals giving leadership gifts that raised $55,000. The United Way community in Columbia is enormously grateful.
You may have read in the paper the news announcement about our partnership with a new company called Net Gen. It is a network company offering professional educational programs such as certification programs and masterís degrees in engineering. This particular company was initiated by one of our own graduates, Roosevelt Giles, who has three large super computers that will provide about 3,000 ports to students who can take these courses online in partnership with the technical schools in York and in Charleston as sites. When we announce it, there will actually be three sites talking together. This technology is going to make that possible. It is a for-profit company that was created through the Development Foundation, and it ought to be a very prosperous and very, very successful. That is the end of my report. I will be pleased to hear comments on any of these issues or answers.
PROFESSOR CHARLES MACK - ART - If you will, I would like to return to that 1% budget cut.
PRESIDENT PALMS - It is in reserve.
PROFESSOR MACK - Well in our department it is a cut. It seems to have hit a lot of us unexpected as even though 1% doesnít seem like much in departments that are tightly constrained any way it is really having an academic impact upon our programs. This is tied apparently to a short fall of enrollments for this year. Is that correct?
PRESIDENT PALMS - Obviously it is related to that, and to the economy that is doing so well, and to many of our students working part-time. The non-traditional students had better job opportunities and they have been asked to work long hours. Our enrollment is just different than the other four-year campuses in this state. The other is we have been rather generous in providing graduate student support, deferring tuition, giving small scholarships so that they qualify for in-state tuition, and we needed to do that to be competitive to look to see if we can project this better than we have in the past. It is difficult because we donít know exactly what all departments can be provided and when someone is going to pay out-of-state tuition or in-state tuition and things of that nature, so we are looking at that with John Finanís help and with the Provost, etc. You are right: it is cut if we implement permanently withholding the one percent, Randy, but we donít have to do it. It is a cautionary note. I hope I donít have to do it.
PROFESSOR MACK - We will be fine tuning our projections for next year, so we wonít receive post-Christmas presents like this.
PRESIDENT PALMS - Absolutely. Now I could hold it back. The uncertainty in this projection is plus or minus 2%. I could hold it back so that I could pull it out from underneath my desk when the news comes or give it out if it doesnít. But there is a lot of pressure from deans at the time that the budget is made. Up until this time the budget process is working, but this year, it might not, if we have to cut it, so we will try to work with what we learn. Any other questions? Thank you very much.
Randy, if I could speak right away to your question as well. About the middle of the fall semester we knew that our fall enrollment was down and it was down in terms of dollars about $600,000. So the Council of Academic Deans was told at that time we have a problem if we donít have an increase in enrollment in the spring. Something will have to happen. The President and Vice President Finan and I closely examined the spring projections right before Christmas and we decided at that time that we better institute a 1% cut that would be held in escrow until the end of the year. If we were able to have a correction then we would be able to give part or all of the money back. Right now I have to tell you that that does not look good. The other thing that I also understand because I was a chair and a dean is that when you have a 1% cut that is not really a 1% cut. Even halfway through the year you can say thatís a 2% cut. It is not a 2% cut.
Itís like a 40% cut because you donít cut salaries and so the only place you take it is from operating and I understand the pain that causes. Itís just the fact that we had a significant number of graduate students right now who have not come as we projected and I think that does have to do with the economy. We were down slightly in undergraduate enrollment but we saw in the middle of the fall semester that we were about $600,000 short. We felt like we needed to take some corrective action. I will tell you as well that it is not just the academic units even though this was an enrollment problem. Every single unit on campus took a cut - academic and non-academic. But I understand the hurt it causes the department. Yes, I do.
Let me start by offering my very sincere congratulations to Caroline Parler who was awarded a Rhodes Fellowship and she also has been chosen -- most of you probably know this -- she was chosen as the ODK National Leader of the Year. She competed with students throughout the country for that award as well. This young woman is just an outstanding student. She is a chemical engineering major and she minored in dance. She has been incredibly active in all kinds of extracurricula activities. She graduated in January and she is currently working with our Honors College and our Office of Fellowships and Summer Programs helping us recruit that kind of student. She will be speaking all over the state to prospective undergraduates, speaking to parents, and she will do a magnificent job. We are very happy that she is willing to help us in the spring semester.
When I congratulate Caroline I also have to congratulate the faculty that have given of their time and effort through our Office of Fellowship and Summer Programs. We have a number of faculty who are willing to sit down and interview these young people throughout the year, help them start in their freshman year. We have a dinner for students who are interested in any kind of fellowship. We have this in Capstone and they come and meet students at the advanced level who are interested in Rotary and the Rhodes Scholarship, and Truman and Goldwaters and this office has just done a great job. Congratulations to Caroline and thank you faculty for helping her.
At the same time we have just announced recently the University has four Rotary Scholarship winners this year and I would like to announce those: Christi Boyes, a senior English major who will study at the University of Leeds in England; Ryan Lindsay, a senior economics major who will study at the University of Cape Town in South Africa; Laura McFarland, a senior anthropology major who will study at the University of Glasgow in Scotland; and Reid Sherard, senior political science major, will study at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland. Again the faculty have been very giving of their time to help those students and we appreciate it.
Just a follow-up on one topic that the President covered -- this SACS task force. We have a number of committees that have been formed for this self-study. One of the ones that I am particularly interested in and I have had a number of conversations with Dan Barron and actually Chair Caroline Strobel and I have talked about it as well and that is the whole issue of intellectual property of faculty. I think that this is certainly a topic that we need to discuss and meet head on. Just for your information there is a task force in that area and I hope that you will be willing to talk to those individuals. Sandra Wertz and Steven Hinckley are the two co-chairs of that and they are working on intellectual property issues of faculty. I hope that if you are called upon you will meet with that committee and talk about your ideas.
Another very good piece of news, the President and I have been talking all the time to different people about awards for the faculty. One of our board members, Mr. Michael J. Mungo, has just doubled the number of awards for teaching that he is going to give. Currently we have five Mungo awards given every spring. We now will have ten. Of those new five, three will go to graduate teaching faculty primarily faculty that are being recognized for their teaching at the graduate level. I think these are the only awards that we have for graduate teachers. The other two of the new five will be awarded in the College of Liberal Arts. That was Mr. Mungoís college and he wanted to give something back to that college. So we appreciate that. Itís too late to do that this year but that will start next year. So we will be having ten Mungo teaching awards each paying $2,000.
In terms of searches, very briefly we have a candidate on campus, the last candidate we will have for Vice Provost for Research and this is Dr. Bill Harris who is currently a member of the Columbia University faculty and the president and CEO of Biosphere II in Arizona which is owned by Columbia University. We hope to make an offer in the near future and we will work through that as quickly as possible. The Chief Information Officer -- we have had a number of applications forwarded to us by the search firm and the committee is currently working to narrow those down. That is such an important position and we will try to make sure that all faculty have the opportunity to meet the candidates for that position when these people interview.
In terms of deansí searches, we have had one successful search and that is the University of South Carolina - Salkehatchie, Dr. Ann Carmichael. She assumed her new position yesterday as the dean of that campus and we congratulate her and look foward to working with her. The Darla Moore School of Business, the search committee chaired by John Montgomery of the Law School, is currently working with files and the President is also meeting with some people in trying to get them to come on board in that particular search. Dean Bruce Coull of the School of the Environment chairs the Education Search Committee. They are currently narrowing their choices down and preparing a short list. The College of Hospitality, Retail, and Sport Management met with the President and me earlier this week. We will invite two people to campus. One person from the outside who is from Cornell University and the current interim dean, Dr. Patricia Moody will be the second candidate. There maybe more invited but we have started with two candidates to interview. In the College of Engineering and Information Technology, Bruce Dunlap, in Chemistry and Biochemistry, chairing that search. Bruce divided that committee into three panels. They have each gone through applications. There are about 60 applications for that position and they are meeting first thing Monday morning to try to come up with a much shorter list to evaluate. In the School of Music, Gordon Smith, chairs that search. The President and I also met with them. We met yesterday. Three people will be invited to campus on that search -- a person from Florida State, a person from the University of Tennessee and a person from Ithaca College. We will have another vacancy as a dean and I would like to just inform the Senate that shortly before Christmas I received a letter from Dean Judy Turk who is currently on leave in Abu Dhabi, working with a new college in building a school of mass communications. Judy informed me that this was one of the most challenging things she had ever done in her life and she fully intended to return to the university at some point in the future but she would prefer not to return as dean. So we have formed a search committee for that deanís position. The faculty have met and elected the faculty representatives and I am currently constituting the remainder of the committee. Dr. Bob Herzstein from the Department of History will chair that particular search committee and I think he will do an excellent job. Those are the items that I had to report to the Senate but I will be happy to answer any questions.
PROFESSOR MICHAEL MYRICK - (CHEMISTRY) - I have a couple of things. First it is nice to know there are some tremendous students at the university who are getting awards to go elsewhere. But there also a few people who are coming here with awards. I want you to know of at least one Fulbright Fellow from Ireland who is about to arrive here next month.
PROVOST - Excellent. Is he in your department? Good.
PROFESSOR MYRICK - I have a question pertaining to the graduate stipends and tuition. A couple of months ago I asked a question-- you were not here at the time you were traveling somewhere -- about the work of a committee trying to determine whether tuition should be charged for graduate students on research grants etc. Is there any new information on that?
PROVOST ODOM - That was a task force that I appointed and that consisted of a number of deans, Mickey. Your dean was one of the members. Dean Roper, Dean Raymond, Gordon Smith from the College of Liberal Arts were on that committee. We met and we discussed a number of possibilities. At this particular time we are just simply looking at what the minimum stipend should be, for example, to receive a tuition waiver - that was one of the questions that we addressed. Another question that I would say is most pressing from my point of view that we need to address arose actually from a meeting that President Palms and I had with the Graduate Student Association. We really need to address insurance for graduate students and we are working on that with Dennis Pruitt and insurance companies to see what we might be able to do. We have taken no action but are still discussing first of all whether we should charge research grants. As you know, it is probably done at every other AAU institution in the country. Itís something that some faculty might argue because we donít do that it makes us competitive. I disagree with that. If we are competitive, we are competitive. If every other school is letting the tuition be paid by the federal agency then I donít see why we canít do that. I donít think it makes us more competitive because we pay the money instead of them paying the money. If the science is good and competitive they will pay will pay it. They will give it to us. But it is not something that we have taken any action on. This is something that we need to do slowly and with deliberation and with a lot of input. I wanted that report from those deans. I think those deans were probably most affected by what we were trying to do. We do know that we are currently giving about $10Ĺ million a year in tuition waivers to graduate students. I fully realize because of where I have been if you say well if we didnít charge that -- if we collected that we would be much better off. If we collected that, most of the graduate students wouldnít come here and I understand that. So we will move with a lot of deliberation and a lot of faculty involvement and discussion before anything happens. I do think that we need to move on this insurance issue. I think that is very important for the students.
PROFESSOR CAROLINE EASTMAN - I am from the department formerly known as Computer Science. The department tentatively known as Computer Science and Engineering is very concerned about space. Currently we occupy locations in three different buildings. For us to meet the challenges that are placed before us we think we need to be co-located in contiguous space where offices for faculty and staff and students from the adjoining units are comparable. We have suggested several options. None has been accepted and the only alternative or additional alternative that was presented was to have space in yet a fourth building which would be even more unworkable and we think it is the administrationís responsibility to find space for us. We agree that it might not be possible this time to find a permanent solution but we think it ought to be possible to find a short-term solution, hopefully, by next fall. It would have been nice by the time the fall schedule goes in so we would know what classrooms to go after. That probably wonít be possible.
PROVOST ODOM - Well I would say to go after the same classrooms you are using right now.
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - That is what we are doing. We donít think it is reasonable to transfer an entire department from one college to another without clearly transferring space. Our technology is not such that we can build virtual buildings that we can work in. We are moving in that direction but we are not there yet. Also, one of the buildings that we are occupying has space in it that is currently occupied by retired faculty occupying larger offices than many full professors in other departments in the university and several independent offices which donít have to be near the other offices in the building. So it is not clear to us why this building cannot be used. The space that we originally had there would have been enough to house the entire department at its current size, but it has been taken away from us in little bits and pieces over the past few years. Although I recognize that much of the decision on allocation of resources is done by the colleges and is assigned to the deans, this is not a dean level decision. This is a higher level decision and we hope you will make it.
PROVOST ODOM - Well, certainly. I donít know if you know or not, but two days ago I met with the transition committee.
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - I have talked with members of the transition committee about this.
PROVOST ODOM - And space clearly is an issue. Space is not just an issue with the merger of these two departments. The College of Public Health, for example right now, I think is in thirteen different places. It is an issue there. It is an issue with a lot of different people. But I understand this particular problem and will deal with it. In fact I looked at some space yesterday trying to see if this would be adequate for the merged departments. At the same time any space that you occupy is not going to have sufficient classrooms for all your classes to meet so the classroom issue should not be an issue and you should be prepared to teach in Sumwalt, in Swearingen, and anywhere else on campus that we have to put you. That happens with everybody. I talked to the registrar. She understands the situation. She is trying to accommodate the demands as much as she possibly can. I realize that this is not an easy situation when you merge two departments. There are all kinds of issues that have to be dealt with and the transition committee and the two departments I think have done a very admirable job. I couldnít be more pleased with what they have done. Space is the most precious commodity on this campus right now. There is just absolutely no doubt about it. We need more space in many different ways. I assure you that it is something that I am working on an almost daily basis. But I canít manufacture space. We have some possibilities but as you and I have discussed earlier they are not materializing as fast as we would like them to.
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - I recognize that we are not all going to be in the same building and teach all the classes in the same building. We are not doing that now. We werenít doing that last year and we know thatís not going to change. We realize we canít materialize new space on demand, but it sure would be nice to see some of it reallocated.
PROVOST ODOM - I agree.
PROFESSOR HANS-CONRAD ZUR LOYE - CHEMISTRY - You mentioned that you were going to look into insurance for graduate students. Thatís a great idea and I wanted to ask you to also include post docs in that group. It is very difficult, given how post docs are funded at this university, to always obtain health insurance for them. If you hire them on a temporary grant position using state funds, they cannot obtain benefits versus hiring them on a federal grant.
PROVOST ODOM - We are certainly looking into that as well. I recognize that problem.
PROFESSOR EVA VADOCZ - (PHYSICAL EDUCATION) - Could you speak towards the hiring process of the dean of the College of Education? I donít recall that you updated us on that.
PROVOST ODOM - Well, I said that Dean Bruce Coull is chairing that and they currently paring down the applications. I think Dean Coull is here. Bruce if you would like to make a comment about where you are with your committee.
DEAN BRUCE COULL - (SCHOOL OF THE ENVIRONMENT) - Presently we are at six applicants. We are doing our homework on that and, hopefully, in two weeks, unless more applicants come in, the search is going to close. We would be able to give the Provost and President a smaller list of names.
PROFESSOR VADOCZ - We in the Department of Physical Education, and I am sure other departments, are eagerly awaiting a permanent dean in light of our four-year wait and additional budget cuts that have occurred in addition to the university wide cut. Our particular department has been cut an additional $13,000 and it is affecting the academic environment in our department. I just wanted you to be aware of that.
PROVOST ODOM - Thank you.
CHAIR STROBEL - Hopefully, we will be able to get through the next reports more quickly.
IV. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.
A. Faculty Senate Steering Committee, Professor Sarah Wise, Secretary
PROFESSOR SARAH WISE - I would like to urge you to sign the roster and pass it because we have had some complaints saying that the roster wasnít passed. So once you sign it would you please pass it.
B. Curricula and Courses Committee, Professor William Jacoby, Chair:
PROFESSOR JACOBY - I will proceed quickly here. The first item that I would put up is a new course proposal from the Darla Moore School of Business for ECON 303. I move that.
CHAIR STROBEL - Is there any discussion? All in favor say aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - The second item is from the School of the Environment. Let me move these together here. There are two new courses - ENVR 101 and ENVR 101L. So I would like to move those.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any discussion? All in favor. Iím sorry - yes.
PROFESSOR GERALD COWLEY - (COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS) - I just wanted to inquire if it had been considered in the deliberations about this course whether it was to be one of those that would satisfy a science requirement?
PROFESSOR JACOBY - We assumed that it would.
PROFESSOR COWLEY - If so then why wasnít requested.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - I donít remember.
PROFESSOR COWLEY - I believe is should be requested.
PROFESSOR BRUCE COULL - It was not requested in our application because the application form does not, in any place, ask us to make a designation for science or not. Because it is a moot question. We didnít do that.
PROFESSOR COWLEY - It has been okayed by various departments within our college but within those discussions and the okays I donít think that the issue ever came up. And it is one that I think needs to be addressed. I would suggest that it needs further study. It would be first time outside of the College of Science and Mathematics.
PROFESSOR STROBEL - Would you like to withdraw this?
PROFESSOR COULL - Can I speak to this issue? I would urge you to vote on this particular course right now. The environment is a broad playing field. It does not belong totally to the College of Science and Mathematics. I have been a faculty member in the College of Science and Mathematics for twenty-seven years and the plan is at least in the first go around is for me to teach this course. Maybe since I have become an administrator I am not a scientist any more. Iím not qualified to teach in science anymore. The School of the Environment is a new entity. Of course there has never been this before because we are both virtual and of course virtuous and have only been around for five years. So this would be a course outside the College of Science and Mathematics but it is clearly a science course. In the course proposal that we gave you the textbook that is listed is Environmental Science. The curriculum that we gave you, the syllabus that we gave you is 80% science and 20% policy. And that seems that that is pretty smart if we are dealing with the environment we need to know what our science is doing in terms of policy issues. We proposed that this course be taught on rotating basis- on a three-year basis internally--one year by the Department of Geological Sciences, one year by the Biological Sciences which are clearly in the College of Science and Mathematics and one year by the Department of Geography. I have also spoken to the chair of geography and have asked her to ensure that when this is taught by geography that one of her very excellent physical scientists in the geography department teach the course. So I donít see what the issue is.
PROFESSOR GERALD COWLEY - Can I just respond once again? Bruce, I have no arguments that you are a scientist. There is no doubt. This was simply for clarification that it is going to be truly a science course and that it will be scientists teaching it and for this reason I request further study.
PROFESSOR COULL - Thatís why I spoke to that issue.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - I would be inclined to let the senate vote on it at this time.
PROFESSOR MIGUEL GONI - (Geological Sciences) - Our department, members of our department, have discussed this course. I was told by my chair and assistant chair to raise the issue that Dr. Cowley has raised mainly from the point of view of whether courses for science credit should only be taught in the College of Science and Mathematics. Not so much whether scientists teach the course or not but like English courses are taught by the Department of English and Chemistry is in the Department of Chemistry. Science courses, at least in our current way of operating, are only being offered by the College of Science and Mathematics and thus this course would be a deviation from that tradition.
PROFESSOR JAMES BUGGY - (MEDICINE) - It seems to me that this is a course proposal on the floor and the purview of the Senate is to approve the listing of the course for offering or not. Now an additional issue has been raised of whether that course counts as a science course towards Baccalaureate General Education Requirements or Major Requirements. I donít know who decides that but it seems to me a separate issue, and as Dr. Coull said, it is not even an item on the course submission form. So I donít know whether what is relevant to the question on the floor. Maybe that is an action that should be taken later by some other body.
PROFESSOR DAVID BERUBE - (THEATRE, SPEECH AND DANCE) - I also serve on Curricula and Courses so I do double dipping on this. We talked about this and the truth be told if someone finds this course deficient in some ways such that it shouldnít fulfill some science requirement in a given department that department when they submit their requirements for a major can specify what courses do or do not meet that qualification. That is what happens prior to this. All we are doing now is voting to let this course appear somewhere in our course offerings over the next three or four years. That is all we are deciding.
CHAIR STROBEL - Is there any other discussion on this? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - The College of Liberal Arts - this is a fairly large one but I would like to move it as a group and there are in fact a couple of typographical changes that I would like to mention to you. What I would like to do is to move all of the proposed changes for the Comparative Literature as one item. This includes a number of new courses on page 20 also some deletions on page 20 on to page 21. On page 21 there are some changes in number and cross-listings (on the top of page 21) and these changes in cross-listings include some typographical errors that I need to correct here. Nothing to serious. Under change in number and cross-listing, the first item there changes from CPLT 390 to CPLT 301, then it says on here it is cross-listed with English 301. That is to be cross-listed with ENGL 390 not 301. Then down below that on the next change in number and cross-listing it says TO: CPLT 302 and it lists the cross-listing as ENGL 302. That should be ENGL 391 rather than 302. And then finally in this part here, the third item there is from CPLT 392 to CPLT 303 and there, both of the cross-listings should read [=ENGL 392]. So those are the typographical changes. There is a change in title and description, a change in curriculum listing which goes over to page 22 and that is all for the Comparative Literature Program. I would move all those.
CHAIR STROBEL - Is there any discussion on this proposal?
PROFESSOR CHARLES MACK - This is not an objection at least I donít think so. I am a little bit confused by the terminologies and the equation with the English Department offerings. Is by implication, letís say CPLT 381 The Renaissance, does one assume then that this course is the English Renaissance because some of us in the Renaissance doubt there being one. This is purely a joke. I am an Italianist. But anyway, the Enlightenment, the Romanticism, is the assumption then that these are English periodizations rather than
PROFESSOR NANCY LANE (FRENCH AND CLASSICS) - The only new course in the proposal is CPLT 300. All of the others listed as new Comp Lit courses are in fact existing English courses and the point of having them now cross-listed with Comp Lit courses is to underscore the fact that it is not limited to the English Renaissance that it is in fact a comparative approach to Renasissance, Enlightenment and Modernism and so forth.
PROFESSOR MACK - the English Department?
PROFESSOR LANE - Both courses have existed for several years now. The only new thing is to add a cross-listing under Comparative Literature.
CHAIR STROBEL - Is there further discussion on the proposal? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The motion passes.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - Item II. B. Department of English- these are things from the Department of English that look pretty familiar. New cross-listings and deletion of several cross-listings. Of course these all correspond to comparative literature items. So, I move those as a group as well.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any discussion of this proposal? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The motion passes.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - The next item from the Department of Germanic, Slavic and Oriental Languages is a new course JAPA 351. Again there are a couple of minor typo-graphical errors here. It is listed as cross-listed with THSP 351. That should, in fact, be 369 which is THSP 369, listed on the next page of the agenda. The Bulletin description there also a couple of very small changes. It should say "Introduction to Japanese tradtional theatre and its influences on Japanese culture and society." There should be one more sentence there "Taught in English." But apart from that, the description of the course is as given and I would move the course.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any discussion? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - The next item, the Department of Government and International Studies, a new course, GINT 350 Public Opinion and Politics. I move this item.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any discussion about that? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - The next item is THSP 369 JAPANESE CULTURE AND SOCIETY THROUGH THEATRE which is identical to the Japanese course that we just considered a moment ago. I move that.
CHAIR STROBEL - Is there any discussion on this? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - The next item is a new course proposal MUSC 498 MUSIC PRACTICUM. I would move that.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any discussion on this? All in favor, aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.
PROFESSOR JACOBY - That is all I am going to put before you today. The last item, it was brought to my attention that there was a problem with the credit hours with MSCI J111 and MSCI J111, involving course in the high school as opposed to the regular MSCI 111. So I am not going to put that up for consideration now.
C. Faculty Advisory Committee, Professor Henry Price, Chair:
PROFESSOR PRICE - We do not have a formal report today. We do want you to know that we are working on the revision of the Faculty Manual. We hope to come forward very soon with it. We hope that it will be ready by the April faculty meeting. We are working now on the tenure and promotion section of the Faculty Manual.
D. Faculty Welfare Committee, Professor Caroline Eastman, Chair:
CHAIR STROBEL - Maybe you could just sort of briefly announce from there.
PROFESSOR CAROLINE EASTMAN - I have invited Mr. Derrick Huggins, director of Vehicle Management and Parking Service to speak with us at the March Faculty Senate meeting. As you can tell from the name, his office does more than just deny you your request for a parking permit you want and to give you parking tickets. He will talk about planned changes to the parking and vehicle system, and in preparation for this I would like to assign homework to senators. A change in plan includes additional perimeter lots and improved bus service and I would like to defer all discussion to the March meeting. Comments and complaints about inconvenient shuttle service and fringe lots in general will be unproductive unless you can back them up. Please check out the shuttle map. It is available on the web page and see if there are shuttles going places that you need to go--your work place, primary work place, secondary work place, parking, etc. For extra credit, you may actually try riding the shuttle bus, especially if you do not do so regularly or if you have not done so recently. Derrick Huggins put this challenge so I indeed took a shuttle one day from the PE lot back to Coker and it was a pleasant ride and it was only two minutes longer than it would have taken to walk. No, it was not raining. I was just at the wrong end of the line.
The other item I would like to report is that the Faculty Self Study focus groups that we planned have taken place and have proved to be productive. We would like to thank everyone who participated -- some of you may be here in this room. We are now in the process of preparing the survey and it should be distributed either shortly before or after spring break. It will be kept short and we encourage everyone to complete it. Any questions?
PROFESSOR CHARLES MACK - Another issue, does Welfare include health benefits?
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - It sure does.
PROFESSOR MACK - This is an issue raised by a colleague of mine. I will try to make it brief. This colleague when he examined the new drug prescription program finds that it is unfair concerning the co-payments the difference in co-payments between generic prescriptions and non-generic prescriptions drugs considering 60% of the drugs are not covered under the generic category. This colleague feels that this needs to be examined. A lot of drugs simply are not available on anything other than brand names and that this new system is going to work a hardship on those who are covered and I was wondering if you might look into that. This colleague has already corresponded with the state representative and he got back sort of a form "yes, we understand but so what". Perhaps this could be examined by your committee.
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - We are planning to examine it. This sort of snuck up on us as it snuck up on everyone. We didnít receive any more warning than you did, and we agree that this is an issue that needs to be looked at. If your colleague would be willing to share some of his correspondence with us, we would like to consider that.
PROFESSOR MACK - Thank you.
PROFESSOR WILLIAM BRANNON - (SCHOOL OF MEDICINE) - I think he is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Just ask your doctor when he writes a prescription to sign it "substitution permitted." There is no substantial difference between generic and brand name drugs and in most instances and instances where there is not a generic substitution if you write substitution permitted they canít do it you get the brand name anyway. It is not a big issue but you can make it a big issue.
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - Does this mean the co-payment is $5 instead of $20?
PROFESSOR BRANNON - All a physician has to do is write "substitution permitted" and that makes it a generic prescription.
PROFESSOR EASTMAN - That is something that we can check into.
PROFESSOR STROBEL - Why donít we wait and let the Welfare Committee investigate this? That was a very useful comment. But I does think --we have already talked about it because it needs to be investigated.
PROFESSOR RICHARD HUDSON - (MATHEMATICS) - If this has already been covered just cut me off. I have my teaching schedule conflicts with Faculty Senate and I donít have a creative solution so I had to come late. A handicapped member of my department said that he felt that the handicapped situation certainly had improved around LeConte but there were times when he certainly not get in close to LeConte. Those of us that have the inconvenience of walking an extra five minutes is one thing. But for a person who happens to be in a wheelchair not being able to park is quite another problem. So I hope you are considering this. I know you said not to talk about it now if you could mention that I am sure it would be very appreciated.
PROFESSOR CAROLINE EASTMAN - We have been taking this into consideration,
and one of the members of the committee uses a wheelchair and is certainly very concerned about it and very knowledgeable about it. So this is something that we are addressing.
PROFESSOR HUDSON - Every person who is handicapped in LeConte needs a place to park very close to the building.
PROFESSOR STROBEL - Any other questions of Caroline?
E. Committee on Admissions, Professor Stephen McNeill, Chair:
F. Committee on Scholastic Standards and Petitions, Professor Wiebke
G. Athletic Advisory Committee, Professor Peter Graham:
PROFESSOR GRAHAM - Recently we received a report from Barbara Blaney regarding academic performance of athletes last semester. I am really pleased to come back to this body and let you know what has transpired. 183 of these young men and women achieved a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Out of the group 79 had 3.5 or better and 21 had perfect 4.0ís. That is approximately 50% of our athletes making 3.0 or better. I also want to report that a couple of teams that had slipped down in past semesters we are very concerned about and they have made a concerted effort and they have significantly brought up their grade point averages. I am very pleased to bring that to your attention. Also our graduation rate for this university is 63% which puts us no. 2 in the SCC. We are only bettered by Vanderbilt. So I think that is a significant accomplishment. I believe the coaches, the assistant coaches and the academic support service and especially the athletes need to be commended for this tremendous performance.
CHAIR STROBEL - Letís all give the Athletic Department an applause. That is very good news.
G. Other Committees.
IV. Report of the Secretary.
V. Old Business.
VI. New Business.
CHAIR STROBEL - One item of new business, if you will turn to page 25 of your agenda. This is an addition we would like to make to Appendix II of the Standing Rules of the Faculty Senate concerning the availability of the minutes to the press. Is there any discussion? I shall move this.
PROFESSOR HENRY PRICE - (JOURNALISM) - Just meet the same editorial standards of the Faculty Manual. I would like to make a few changes to it. One is lower case for meetings on the first line. The other would be to change the word "following" to the word "after." Lower case the word "Senate" in the second line and secretary in the beginning of the third line and the word Office in the Faculty Senate office.
CHAIR STROBEL - Are there any other?
- Out of curiosity what would be the time delay because I guess the press likes to report news in what they consider a timely fashion so if the editorial corrections require waiting several more weeks and then that means the press canít get an official copy at a time that it is breaking and want to report it. So what are we talking about for a time after editorial correction? Is that ten minutes or ten days?
CHAIR STROBEL - It is more than that because it has to go out to the various people who spoke at the Faculty Senate meeting. They are not able to transcribe it in any sort of reasonable way. So it goes back out to the people who spoke at the meeting and they make corrections to it or fill in gaps, correct words that got transcribed incorrectly, and make it something that you can understand. Peggy, is that about two weeks.
PEGGY PICKELS - (FACULTY SENATE ) - Yes, about two weeks.
CHAIR STROBEL - This is of course under the Freedom of Information Act. All we are doing is complying with that. This is nothing new. They can have them anyway at the meeting. Generally when the press is interested in something that is going on here they are usually here to take their own notes. We also have had requests recently for the exact wording for example on our resolution on the confederate flag. That kind of thing. That was ready well in time to respond to those kinds of requests.
PROFESSOR ELDON WEDLOCK - (LAW) - The minutes are not official until after they have been approved by the body. So what you are talking about here is only a draft of the minutes. For example, I think the Fed doesnít release its minutes until after their next meeting. So the question is about what is being asked for and when. The "minutes" are not available until presented at the next meeting and are approved. Draft minutes are available.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any other questions about this? All in favor, aye. Opposed.
Ayes have it. Is there any other new business?
VIII. Good of the Order.
PROFESSOR JAMES BUGGY - When the university computer services ten or so years ago first started supporting optical scanning of exam answer sheets, there was a so-called "grader" program that someone at CSD wrote to run on a mainframe system to provide item analysis and student score reports. Many instructors still send their test results to this mainframe program that CSD maintains but this program hasnít been updated or revised in many years and, in some instances, refuses to report question quality if the sample size is small. I wonder if academic units felt that there was a need for central support of an item analysis type program that CSD could make available to units in an easier to use format such as a web based or interface.
CHAIR STROBEL - That is a good comment. We donít have a computer committee other what we have under this SACS accreditation. Who would it go to --this request?
PROVOST ODOM - I think the request should go to Stan Yarborough in Computer Services. I think he would be more than happy to help. Could you put that request in writing and send it to me and I will go ahead and follow through and make sure that we do follow through on that. Are there any other
Leigh-Anne Travers (STUDENT SENATE) - We just began our campaigning for the next election and thanks to Reggie Reiser in Computer Services we are going to have on-line voting for the first time for our student candidates and also something I guess that might bother some professors is that there is going to be posters. If any of these posters get in the way of any special bulletin board in your building I ask that you call the Elections Commissioner Emily LeMaster at Student Government which is 777-2654 because there all sorts of important boards and sometimes students donít pay attention to what they are stapling on top of. Let us know if there are any problems in your buildings. Thank you.
CHAIR STROBEL - Are there any announcements?
UNIDENTIFIED SENATOR - I have been asked to announce that faculty, staff and students can nominate faculty to be the outstanding freshman advocate.
CHAIR STROBEL - Any other questions or announcements? Seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 4:13 p.m.