FEBRUARY 3, 1999

I. Call to Order.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – I see a quorum. I call the meeting to order.

II. Correction and Approval of Minutes.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – The first order of business is the correction and approval of the minutes. Are there any corrections? Any amendments? Hearing none I’ll order the minutes approved as printed.

III. Reports of Officers.


Thank you. The President’s Office has been principally involved lately in explaining our perspective to the new governor. I can tell you the receptiveness and the kind of dialogue that has been taking place with this new administration as far as emphasis on education, not just K-12 but K through 16, has been very welcome. There have been very good discussions and a clear understanding. The governor was kind enough to come before the Council of Presidents of both private and public institutions when we met at Hilton Head and spent over an hour talking about his views on education and his commitment to higher education as well. Inez Tennenbaum was also there.

We are having a retreat of the Board of Trustees beginning next week – Thursday, Friday and Saturday and the whole emphasis at that retreat is going to be a better understanding of what it really means to be a member of AAU and what kind of resources and commitments and what it means as far as this institution is concerned. The governor has also agreed to come to that retreat and to spend several hours with us. We will also have the former head of the AAU, Dr. Neil Pings, to come to speak to the board. Those are all good signs. I think that the atmosphere in the legislature and the various committees is positive too. I made a presentation for the University in front of the Ways and Means Committee last week and I will give a presentation tomorrow morning in front of the CHE and then again will appear before the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate Education Committee next week.

Our number one priority – we start off with these presentations focusing on faculty salaries. We make it very clear that you can be on the average as far as teachers’ salaries in the southeast but you have got to help the college faculty as well, and what it means to have AAU salaries. So that is still the top priority with the salaries fully funded and not as it has been in the past, where salaries are only partially funded and we have to raise tuition in order to fund the rest of the salary increases.

The CHE has been pushing for a $10 million allocation to Clemson and USC to improve our research endeavors and we are certainly supporting that. We have been asking for increases in this matching fund they set aside last year to match the yield off of our new endowment. Last year, about $800,000 was allocated and we ask that the State increase that. We have numerous examples of adjacent states that have matching programs, especially during the major campaigns. As you know, the major campaign is going rather well – we are at a little bit over $205 million out of a goal of $300 million. I am sure we are going to reach the $300 million goal but we are in this so far for two years – we are just really beginning.

This breadth of interest that we have uncovered is wonderful. We have 700 volunteers working. We have now people in development in all of our colleges, and it is something that we should have initiated 20 years ago. I see it as a much longer campaign than just the Bicentennial Campaign and I am really encouraged by that. We need the state to show that they are in partnership with us. All the physical facilities that we are requesting, whether it is a new public health building or whether it is the Strom Thurmond Wellness Center, we are asking for a matching support philosophy. We will go out and raise the private funds partially. They will help us out, and we will try to get additional funds from the federal government if that is possible. So far that’s been a reason for our success, to be able to do that, and we are encouraging that again.

We are really not sure yet whether we are going to have a bond bill. The Senate seems to be for a bond bill but the House which is mostly Republican, is opposed to a bond bill. The bond bill is very important for us, and we are going to continue to build our facilities. We have the financial capability of doing that and Moody’s will rank us as far as our bond rating is concerned. We just want the authorization to be able to do that from the state so that will be an issue for us.

The Bicentennial Commission meets again next Wednesday, and we are encouraged about how much participation there is from the faculty and the staff and we hope that you will be sending in any suggestions or recommendations to Professor Compton, who is the chair of the Bicentennial Executive Committee.

Next week you will have my annual report. I’ve focused on facilities master plan

- the kind of environment we are trying to create for an AAU-caliber institution and each one of you will get a copy of that.

I hope you have read in Marcia Torr’s calendar that she sent out, the success that we have had in this last year. You know we are up to $92,000,000 in research support.

It is almost double what it was four or five years ago. I just want to pay tribute to the faculty for all of those grants that you have written – those that have been turned down and those that have been funded. It is a tremendous enterprise that we have ongoing now, I don’t know if we will make $92,000,000 again this year, but certainly last year was a great success, and it is only because of the hard work of the faculty.

It is that time of the year again. We are reading dossiers again for tenure and promotion. I’ve read about ten of them in the last two days, and I would like to compliment the faculty for their participation in their peer evaluations. The quality of the dossiers has improved immensely. The kind of letters, the care you are taking to make your comments about your colleagues, is a very important process, and I think we have made progress there also.

Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to answer any questions.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Before we take questions for the president, Sarah, would you reiterate the phone numbers. Do you have those?

PROFESSOR SARAH WISE – I don’t have those. Maybe it is on the back?

I’m sorry Eldon I do not have it.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Sorry out there. Any questions for the president?

PRESIDENT PALMS – I will need your help with the recruitment – we have 50 Carolina Scholars finalists on the campus on Monday. These are outstanding students that we are trying to recruit. In the applicant pool this year we are continuing to ask the departments – we are going to identify outstanding students who have expressed interest in majoring in a particular discipline and ask the departments to please help us recruit these students. Last year, we had 62 National Merit finalists. The only other school who had over 30 in this State was a private institution. We are winning out as far as increasingly getting National Merit scholars. We had 192 Palmetto Fellows – more than any other school attracted. We had twenty students from the Governor’s School. These students usually go out of state to college. We were able to get twenty of them last year. We had the largest majority of the students in the All-State Academic Team that The State newspaper sponsors. We have most of those. But this year it is a new ball game. There is a lot more competition out there – the private colleges and our other competition upstate, they have a lot of money for scholarships. We are trying to raise money for scholarships to recruit an outstanding class. They are a very top priority for us. We appreciate your being willing to call some students and invite them to the campus and help us recruit. There is more going on than just recruiting athletes here. Thank you.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Thank you, Mr. President, for that encouraging report.


Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to start my report by thanking somebody who is going to be leaving us before we have another Senate meeting. Richard Bayer, will you stand up please? Richard Bayer informed me that he is going to leave the University to go to the University of Tennesse at Knoxville and accept a higher position, a better position, and he is going to start bleeding orange. Richard has been a real pleasure for my office to work with. He has been a tremendous registrar. He had a tough act to follow with Luke Gunter but he certainly has done that and I would just like to express my appreciation and ask you to do the same. (Applause)

RICHARD BAYER – REGISTRAR – Thank you. It has been a pleasure for me to work with the faculty and students and Dr. Palms at this institution and it certainly has been my pleasure. Thank you very much.


I have a number of things to address today. First of all I would like to recognize those individuals who are the recipients of the 1999-2000 Instructional Innovation grants: Steve Darnell, Art; Katherine Faust and Shelley Smith, Sociology; Keith Kenney, Journalism; Deanna Leamon, Art; Jed Lyons, Mechanical Engineering; Daniel Steele, Darla Moore School of Business; Dan Streible, Art; David Tedeschi, Physics and Astronomy; Steven Whisnant, Physics and Astronomy. Congratulations to those individuals.

Let me move to our reaccreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. I don’t know whether at the last meeting I was able to inform you that our proposal was accepted for the modified reaffirmation reaccreditation. That proposal has to do with technology with respect to teaching and learning. Dan Barron as I have said before and Peter Becker will be involved as the leaders in our efforts. Peter with the normal part of the visit and Dan Barron with our new proposal. We will establish a Web page devoted to the SACS reaccreditation. The proposal will be there. You will be asked to serve on committees having to do with this visit and planning for the visit and I hope that you will seriously consider that invitation. Dan and Peter and Marcia Welsh and Harry Matthews and I attended the SACS annual meeting in Atlanta in December and we were able to talk to a number of people who have recently been through these visits. In fact, Virginia Tech is probably the most recent that has done something similar to what we want to do and a number of us will visit Virginia Tech for a day later this month. Also we will be receiving our first visit from SACS. Mr. David Carter will visit us and will talk primarily to the people who will be directly involved with the SACS visit.

The President and I and a number of other people will be going to IBM later this week to talk to them about strategic planning with respect to technology. This is something that they do with academics and I’ve told other people you think what they want to do is really sell you IBM equipment but apparently that is not the case based on some conversations with other schools like UNC-Chapel Hill who had been up there for a day and a half and been involved with them.

Last year when we put together the academic affairs budget I asked the Board of Trustees to approve a budget that included additional classroom enhancement money. I would just like to report to you that hopefully in every classroom now there are overhead projectors with carts – we bought 132 of those. We put 47 projection screens in classrooms that didn’t have them. This year we are authorized to spend and have already spent $60,000 for classroom enhancements. Starting July 1st in addition to our five classrooms that we enhanced this summer, we plan to spend $350,000 on new classroom furniture primarily desks for the students and we will investigate all chalkboards to see if they need replacing. In some classrooms I know they do. If you have any particular classroom that you would like for us to examine we would be happy to do that. We have certainly set aside some of this money to be used in LeConte College because the condition of the classrooms in that building is very poor. But this I hope will help you in your teaching and enhance the environment that you and your students are in during the period that you teach.

Let me mention deans’ searches. We have interviewed three candidates for the College of Liberal Arts’ dean. I think at this point what I would really like to do first is thank the search committee for a job well done. That committee was chaired by Bruce Coull. I asked them to see if they could get names to President Palms and me before Christmas. They did that. We have interviewed the three people that we wanted to have a look at first. I got tremendous feedback from the faculty in the College of Liberal Arts. I would like to thank you for that. From that feedback there was one candidate that had overwhelming support. I talked to that candidate on the phone this morning with a verbal offer and she will receive a written – I shouldn’t have said that – the candidate will receive a written offer in the mail in the morning. I am very hopeful that we will be successful and I think we will. So I would like to thank all faculty who participated in talking to the candidates. I think that one overwhelming message I got back from the candidates when I met with them at the end of their visit was how cordial and collegial everyone seemed to be. They were very impressed with the mood in the college and for that I thank the chairs of the departments as well as Gordon Smith as well as the faculty.

For Business Administration, John Montgomery is chairing that search and we have also engaged a search firm. That search is going very well and John, I know, is keeping the faculty in the College of Business Administration or the Darla Moore School of Business informed about the progress of the search. It is my understanding they have so many outstanding candidates that they are going to conduct airport interviews with a substantial number of candidates and will narrow the list and bring several candidates to campus.

In the College of Education, I polled the faculty before Christmas for their input in continuing Fred Medway’s appointment as interim dean. I had basically unanimous support for that while we continue to search for a permanent dean. So Fred Medway kindly consented to continue as interim dean for the time being.

I think that completes my report but I would certainly be glad to answer any questions.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK - Any questions for the Provost?

PROFESSOR LAUREN TUCKER – JOURNALISM – I should ask if you read whether you finished with my dossier before going into this but I guess I will take the risk. I wanted to make a statement really that has been – I’ve been called on by my faculty and other members of faculty down in the Coliseum. This transcends Faculty Welfare and the University Parking Committee. We’ve got what we consider to be a fairly serious situation down in the Coliseum area now in terms of the tensions in the parking situation. We have had three incidents in the last week that have involved faculty members and non-students or students in terms of confrontations over parking where the police have been called. I think that part of this transcends the issue of parking. What really appalls me is that we are not seeing the kind of respect that I think faculty members deserve and being the main people doing the business of this University. Some of these confrontations really do involve our relationship with the Athletic Department – the Athletic facility down there. I have members of my faculty who have memorized the EDU license plates of everyone of the athletic coaches that are parking, double parking, etc. We’ve given solutions to the Parking Committee to take care of some of the short term problems but I really think it just transcends that. This is an issue that I am really fearful of being the parking representative of people coming to blows at this point. I think that it is something that really – I question what happened to the Futures Committee that was supposed to come see down the road when it came to planning the building of these buildings. I would assume somehow kind of common parking plan which doesn’t seem to be happening with this new building across the street which has taken up tremendous amounts of faculty parking away from the people that teach there. So the combination of that and the fact that the Coliseum is always going to be dominated by the circus coming into town, or the basketball team, or what have you; it is just hard to get the business of teaching done there. I’m just afraid that somebody is going to be hurt. Although, I guarantee you, it might be me.

PROVOST ODOM – Okay, Lauren. I was not aware of this but maybe this is a good place for us to try out what Chairman Wedlock has long advocated and that is gates with some kind of admittance card.

PROFESSOR TUCKER - We suggested that as a solution and the concern there was when we talked to Mr. Finan about these things we came back with huge sums of money that the College of Journalism along with the College of Applied Professional Sciences is going to have to foot to have that happen. Our budgets, as we all well know, are kind of slim to begin with and that concerns us, although that is probably the best solution as this point.

PROVOST ODOM - I’ll tell you my solution. I’ve got a different solution. I think we ought to put out for bids to the various wreckers in Columbia and let them patrol the lots and if you don’t have a sticker you get towed. They make money and we could accept the lowest bid and we could get a little bit of money. That is done at other universities. I will look into this.

PROFESSOR ANNE BEZUIDENHOUT – PHILISOPHY - This is a question on the subject of post tenure review and I am speaking as a representative of the Philosophy Department. The Philosophy Department is concerned with the post tenure document that was returned to us with comments from your office. We have a general concern and also a more particular one. When our post tenure document was returned to us, it was returned with a list of seven mandatory points that all post tenure documents in the University have to include and comply with. Our general concern is with this mandatory list, because not all the points on this list were ones that have been agreed on by the faculty as a whole when we voted last year about post tenure review. Our question is whether it is right at this point for the administration to mandate these points without prior faculty discussion.

PROVOST ODOM – May I ask you a question? Where did the word "mandate" come from?

PROFESSOR BEZUIDENHOUT - I am not sure. In the covering memo that came with it.

PROVOST ODOM – Can I read you what it said? "I would request that this unit make sure its post tenure review document addresses the following." "I would request." That is simply saying, "let’s see if we can deal with these issues."

PROFESSOR BEZUIDENHOUT - But we do not have to comply with them?

PROVOST ODOM – Absolutely. This is a dialogue. We are really, if you think about it, in uncharted waters. We are floundering just like you are floundering. I must tell you that when I wrote the interim dean of the College of Liberal Arts back, I said I applaud the work that these departments have done; however I would request that we address the following issues. That doesn’t say that these issues are mandated that each department must follow these issues.

PROFESSOR BEZUIDENHOUT - Our document doesn’t actually have point 3 on your list. So that wouldn’t go against our document then if we send it forward even though it disagrees with point 3.

PROVOST ODOM – I would say let’s just discuss this. Point 3 has to do with associate professors being involved on a post tenure review committee with full professors. We have discussed this within the Provost’s office and I think our original thinking was that tenure and promotion guidelines say that full professors will evaluate full professors and so that was our initial thinking. At the same time I recognize that this whole system is built on the unit developing its criteria. So what I would say is—let’s talk about that. There were two thoughts: (1) Do the full professors want associate professors evaluating them? (2) Do associate professors want to evaluate full professors who may later then serve on their promotion committee? That was the thought within the Provost’s office. However if the unit feels that that’s what they want, I would just like to have a dialogue and make sure.

PROFESSOR BEZUIDENHOUT - Actually what we wanted to have was something of a mixture. We wanted to have full professors be on the committee to evaluate full professors. But if they judge the candidate to be unsatisfactory then that judgement has to be ratified by a two-thirds majority vote of all the tenured faculty. The reasoning there being this is not revocation of promotion – it is revocation of tenure. It seems the whole process instituting tenure in the first place was voted on by all tenured faculty in our unit. It should be the whole tenured faculty that starts the process which could lead to revoking tenure.

PROVOST ODOM – Well, I really am walking in dangerous waters here because I don’t want a post tenure review within a unit to be thought of as revoking tenure because that is a whole different process and that’s not where I want to go with what the unit does.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Mr. Provost, thank you. Maybe we could address this between the department and your office.

PROVOST ODOM – That is exactly what I would like to do.

PROFESSOR BEZUIDENHOUT - Perhaps this is something that we can try to justify.

PROVOST ODOM – Absolutely. I would be happy to talk to the Philosophy Department or any other department. In fact most departments have called and said look I would like to do the following. Is that okay? You suggested or you asked us to address these issues—can we do this? And the answer has been "yes".

PROFESSOR CHRIS DONAHUE – SPANISH, ITALIAN AND PORTUGUESE – I have been senator here for close to two years now, and so far it has been an easy job for me. For some reason, however, over the course of the past several weeks-since the beginning of the semester-colleagues of mine have brought up a number of complaints having to do mainly with the condition of the Humanities Office and Classroom buildings. One of the main concerns, and it was suggested that I mention it in order that it appear in the minutes, so as to verify if there were similar complaints from other parts of the University, has to do with the incredibly slow network connections. This complaint would seem to be significant taking into consideration the supposed importance of our informational technology, and the status of the University in relation to other universities. We don’t know whether the problem is University-wide or whether it is just our building or our school that is experiencing these complaints. Two other things: Typing into the previous comments regarding parking, there are complaints about parking on this side of the campus as well. One professor has expressed his dissatisfaction about the parking near the Humanities buildings saying that it is to the point that if he can’t park, he might as well turn around and go home; if there is no place for us to park and to come and teach, we just won’t teach...

PROVOST ODOM – I think that is a problem here .

PROFESSOR DONAHUE – The other complaint has to do specifically with the Humanities Office Building and its elevators. At the beginning of this semester, both elevators shut down for at least half the day, forcing faculty members to have to walk up as many as nine stories. These elevators commonly breakdown. Also, the cleanliness of the bathrooms and the classrooms in the building is inadequate. You mentioned projectors: there are no projectors in our classrooms that we don’t get from the lab downstairs...

PROVOST ODOM – Overhead projectors?

PROFESSOR DONAHUE – Overhead projectors. We have to ask for everything as far as I can tell.

PROVOST ODOM – There is supposed to be an overhead projector in every classroom.

PROFESSOR DONAHUE – I might be wrong. I might be wrong. Anyway, for the first time since I have been senator, I have been addressed with these overwhelming concerns that have mostly to do with the physical plant of that area of the campus.

PROVOST ODOM – I appreciate your comments and I am aware of some problems. Certainly the slowness with respect to the internet. I am certainly aware of that problem. It may be more pronounced there and we have looked into that to see how much it would cost and what we can do. I am aware of the problems with the restrooms. I know there is a custodial care problem. I have met with our facilities management director, Charles Jeffcoat and we will try to address these problems.

Parking. It is just a different kind of monster that we are all dealing with and I am afraid that it is going to get worse instead of better. I am very concerned that we are eliminating parking lots for other uses. I think it is a matter of time before our Welfare Committee, our Parking Committee will look into this. I know there is some dialogue there, but it’s going to get to the point where there is going to be faculty parking in the core or near the core of campus, but it will cost. And, after that you will have to be willing to ride a shuttle bus. If we ever get to the place that we are in possession of the Bell South building, there are thousands of parking spaces over there. You need to ride by sometime. It is a tremendous lot. There will be parking available but it is not going to be out of your car and two minutes to class.

PROFESSOR ROY SCHWARTZMAN – THEATRE, SPEECH AND DANCE – I want to extend my colleagues’ concerns about the physical aspects of the buildings specifically instructional technology. I realize it is probably not cost effective to convert every classroom into a multi-media classroom which would of course be ideal. But particularly not cost effective for individual sections of 20-25 students that are in the smaller classrooms. However, there are some things that I think we need to work on prioritizing, in particular I am thinking about instructional support down in the basement of the BA building and their other sites as well. Routinely we find that the equipment they have is not only old but often nonfunctional and even when it is fully functional it doesn’t have some fairly important features—pause buttons on the VCR so we can examine what is happening in a video. More importantly what I am especially concerned about is preparation of students for the technology that they will actually be using outside of the classroom and particularly with my courses, public speaking courses, I am thinking about presentational software that they will be employing that they simply can’t use. This is an important skill that we simply haven’t been unable to teach -- not that we don’t have the resources in terms of personnel but just the physical equipment. Now, you might say,

"Well, it is very difficult to solve because it would need laptops and things like that" --but not really. There are very cost effective solutions such as simply the connector cables that would enable you to hook up a lap top computer to the existing monitors that we already have and that are cable ready. I think some solutions to that might be very productive to explore at least in the short term for just a couple of thousand dollars. We could set up enough connections where we would handle the vast majority of the need for this type of presentational activity while we are doing further classroom innovations. So I simply would like to request that we look more closely into some of those fairly simple solutions of perhaps peripheral things like that that would enable us to actually teach the skills that our students desperately need to acquire in the competitive market place.

PROVOST ODOM – I agree with you and if you would just send me in writing what you are proposing I would certainly like to see that. In terms of these small classrooms money is set aside every single year and we started with the large auditoriums. We are now down to rooms with about a hundred desks but we will continue every summer to do a number of rooms. The further we go the more rooms we can do because the smaller the rooms are they will not require as much renovation so we certainly hope to get to those 20-25 classrooms.

PROFESSOR SCHWARTZMAN - The smart classrooms are fine, but some classrooms are much smarter than others. Well, for example, in Coker the multi-media classrooms do have CPU’s in place and things like that whereas we don’t yet have that in some of the liberal arts classrooms.

PROVOST ODOM – Well in fact that’s what we’re –some of this $59,000 or $60,000 is being spent to enhance classrooms.

PROFESSOR MORGAN MACLACHLAN – ANTHROPLOGY – I would like to underscore my colleague’s comment regarding the Internet server – Garnet in the College of Liberal Arts. It has been an inconvenience for a long time and it is getting to be an embarrassment. Those of us who try to do the business of professional associations over the Internet, which is standard operating procedures these days, have difficulty doing it.

I spoke to Caroline Eastman on my way in earlier and she mentioned the possibility of establishing a committee to deal with problems of this kind. Am I to understand that your office is already looking into this matter and it will be dealt with?

PROVOST ODOM – We have been made aware of this by Dean Smith and we have discussed within a committee that is trying to deal with what is happening all over campus. As you might imagine we have a long list and we have to establish priorities and we have to see how much money we’ve got and where it is going to go but we are certainly aware of this problem and try to address it. Any other questions?

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Thank you, Mr. Provost. Thank you for the discouraging questions. I have been noted to remind you to pass the roster so we have an accurate count of the presence and guess what the Provost took my agenda and the President took my resolution if not my resolve.

IV. Reports of Committees.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Reports from Committees.

A. Faculty Senate Steering Committee, Professor Sarah Wise:

SARAH WISE – SECRETARY – Yes, I move approval of the resolution that I passed out. Would anyone like that read or are you comfortable with?

PROFESSOR WILLIAM STANLEY – GEOGRAPHY – Please read it. Many of us do not have copies.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK - I’ll read it. [See Attachment 1. for resolution]

Any questions? Any amendments? This has been moved by the committee. Any questions? Any amendments? Hearing none, are you ready for the question? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. So ordered. One dissent - 3 or 4. Okay, it has passed. Anything else from the Steering Committee?

B. Grade Change Committee, Professor Ernest Wiggins, Chair:

PROFESSOR ERNEST WIGGINS – Mr. Chairman, I apologize for missing the December meeting. Thank you for ushering through the committee report.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – You are very welcome.

PROFESSOR WIGGINS – The Grade Change Committee does present to the faculty the grade changes on pages 19-24 of your agenda. We move their approval.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – You’ve heard the report. It has been circulated. Are there any questions? Hearing none are you ready for the question. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. It’s approved.

C. Curricula and Courses Committee, Professor William Jacoby, Chair:

PROFESSOR JACOBY – First of all, let me introduce myself. I am William Jacoby from the Department of Government and International Studies. I became Chair of the Curricula and Courses Committee approximately a week ago so I am brand new at this and I would like to acknowledge Professor G. B. Lane who stepped in very graciously last semester and for the first month of this year to take over the chair’s duty when there was an unexpected vacancy there. With that out of the way, the report of the Committee on Curricula and Courses is on page 25 – 26 and I would like to move Point I changes in the School of Music.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Point I of the School of Music. You have the proposal. Are there any questions? Any amendments?

PROFESSOR WOLFGANG ELFE – GERMAN, SLAVIC AND ORIENTAL LANGUAGES – Could someone from the School of Music explain the rationale for lowering the language requirement below basic proficiency?

PROFESSOR ANDREW GOWAN – SCHOOL OF MUSIC – This particular degree program is shaped by three forces: the University core curriculum, the National Association of the School of Music guidelines as well NCATE standards for education.

We have a degree program with 138 hours in it. We thought that most of you would see that as somewhat excessive. We are making an effort to get this down to 132 so that it is commensurate with other programs within the School of Music. As it turned out, we had few choices of places to cut, and the proposed language requirement as it is stated is still above the University minimum. I will tell you that many of our faculty have mixed feelings about reducing the language requirement. We value language, but something had to go. That was one of the things that went.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Thank you. Any other questions? Comments? Ready for the question. All those in favor by signifying aye. Opposed. Let me have the ayes again.

Ayes have it.

PROFESSOR JACOBY – Point II, I don’t think there is anything that needs to be moved here it but is presented for the Senate’s information. The May Session courses offered by the Department of Art.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Thank you very much. Are there any questions or disapprovals of these? You can’t approve them but you can disapprove them. Okay, thank you.

D. Faculty Advisory Committee, Professor Margit Resch, Chair:

PROFESSOR RESCH - Well, I told Don (Wedlock) that I didn’t have anything to report because we are still working on issues that I reported on last year – revisions of the Faculty Manual. But I heard in the meantime from Provost Odom that both the amendment to the nepotism rule as well as to our harassment policies have been approved by the administration with slight revisions and moved on for implementation. That’s good news. I am here to answer questions if there are any.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Any questions for the chair of the Faculty Advisory Committee? Thank you, Margit.

E. Faculty Welfare Committee, Professor Caroline Eastman, Chair:

CHAIRMAN EASTMAN – I have a few comments relevant to some of the issues that have already been raised here and a few that haven’t been raised yet.

Let me start out with parking. The committee has met with Derrick Huggins,

Director of Vehicle Management and Parking Services to discuss short term and long term plans for parking at this University. Everyone recognizes that the current situation is not viable in the long term let alone the short term. There are no major changes in parking for this Fall; however, the longer term planning includes a move to more peripheral parking, much improved campus transportation system, more and better buses in particular and a change to charging for parking. This is one of the few universities that does not levy at least a nominal parking fee on faculty and staff and it looks like we will be losing that particular status. Neither I nor the committee see any realistic alternative to this. We are certainly willing to entertain possibilities as long as they do not violate laws of physics. So the current thoughts are to have more reserved parking, more of the core parking as reserved spaces that would be yours but for which you would have to pay. The details of this plan are yet to be worked out and we anticipate that the committee will have some input to these as well as the Parking Committee.

I was a bit horrified to hear about the Coliseum area parking problems and I will certainly report this to the committee. If you have any further information there’s not too much we might be able to do about them, but we will work the rest of the University in seeing what can be done. We don’t want the problems associated with the Club Mercedes to move elsewhere. So if people have any input to the committee on this please let us know collectively or individually. We won’t promise you a convenient parking space but we will see what we can do. That can’t be guaranteed.

Let me move on to computer questions; on some of the computer policies that we were asked to comment on our comments have been attended to but not always followed. These policies have now been approved and are in place. They can be found on the University Web pages. Those of you in particular in Liberal Arts that have concerns and comments about Garnet and slow downs in service in general – email, internet, etc., let me comment that these are not restricted to Liberal Arts. I am a faculty member in the Department of Computer Science and we have slow downs. Monday of this week, I could not get email because our server was overloaded. We are taking too much advantage of this technology and rushing at it faster than folks have been able to sort of keep up with it. We just need to work with the rest of the University and make sure that we do the best we can to have the technology and support to keep up with our use of it to the extent that is feasible.

A couple of other issues. The Child Development Center Committee has been hard at work. We have a member of our committee as a representative there – Judy Alexander. They have visited other campuses to see what they are doing and have worked on a mission statement for the center clarifying a research focus for it. We on the committee feel that there are much broader issues associated with child care that are not going to be addressed by the Research Center and we are looking into those. We will possibly participate in having a campus wide survey on child care needs. If you have input to this, let me know. It has been sometime since the last one was done so it seemed appropriate at this time so we will have a better handle on what the needs that we can’t meet are. Maybe we will be able to meet some of them.

We have also been working on some issues associated with non-tenured faculty. We got some information from the Division of Human Resources. It is not completely accurate so I won’t give you the exact numbers but there are over 300 non-tenure track faculty members on this campus. Well over 200 of them are instructional faculty and we are concerned that they be treated as full citizens of the faculty community and are looking at a couple of ways of increasing participation.

Those of you who made comments earlier relevant to some of the Faculty Welfare Committee concerns: I have taken notes, and I will be in contact with some of you and will bring them up at our next meeting.

Any questions?

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Any questions?

PROFESSOR JOHN SPURRIER – STATISTICS – Going back and informing faculty that they will have to start paying parking isn’t a pleasant task. They would like to know what has changed from the past to the present to make that requirement.

PROFESSOR EASTMAN – I do not have data on this. I will see if I can get it. Clearly we have been losing parking to construction of new buildings, so there is a decrease in parking spaces. There have been I think some peculiarities in the ways in which permits have been allocated. It is possible that there will continue to be parking with little or no charge, but it is likely to be peripheral. Do you think our parking system is working?

PROFESSOR SPURRIER – Yes. I get here early and there is always a spot.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – At 9:30 it gets more difficult of course. We need not have this debate right now.

PROFESSOR EASTMAN – I think it is clear that it would be useful in what is likely to be an ongoing discussion to have a bit more data than I have on hand right now. I will make a note of that.

PROFESSOR BOB FELLERS – BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES – I would just like to make you aware of the attitudes that students have about parking that may reflect on a wider issue. I am aware of some students who have generated $600-$700 in parking fines per semester and I asked one of the students why they like to throw their money away and this particular student who was female and said that my parents said that if I ever felt that I was unsafe that I should park wherever felt safe and they would cover my bills for me.

No problem. So it’s a safety issue involved in the parking as well. I would like to make your committee aware.

PROFESSOR EASTMAN – I am certainly aware of that. I am one of the people who is concerned about how safe it is to park here. This is more of a concern after dark, and it may be that we need different daytime and nighttime policies.

PROFESSOR DANIEL FELDMAN – BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION – Caroline, I would just like to make you aware that last week in Business Administration the concrete blocks starting falling off the ceiling and damaged a car. Fortunately, no one was hurt but I think at some point that is going to be a problem and paying for parking won’t solve that because we do and the person whose car got crushed was not too happy about it. When you go through with the parking problems to be solved probably the person whose car got damaged in that incident would be happy if that was addressed sometime.

PROFESSOR EASTMAN - Were these in the garage?

PROFESSOR FELDMAN – Yes, in the garage.

PROFESSOR EASTMAN - This may be representative of a broader incidence of what is often euphemistically referred to as deferred maintenance this has been touched upon by a number of people today, both people giving reports and people asking questions. It is reflected in the condition of our parking structure, our classrooms, our buildings, etc. We have buildings the ceiling tiles are falling down, where there are regular leaks. I have ants swarming in my office every year.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – That is not a parking problem.

PROFESSOR EASTMAN – It is not a parking problem. It is a welfare problem because it affects our conditions.

PROFESSOR LAUREN TUCKER – JOURNALISM – As a point of information, I believe last semester we had the meeting of the University Parking Committee there is something like more than a thousand –we have lost more than a thousand parking spaces on campus in the last year or so because of building construction and so for the person who asked about that. And the other point of information not all of us have schedules that are morning oriented. Many of us are evening oriented and so to come at 9 o’clock in the morning and then to be here until 9 o’clock at night is something that is really asking a little bit too much of certain people. Those people come around 12 o’clock and what have you and try to find parking that’s when things get kind of tight. So those –not all of us have the nice 8:00 to 5:00 schedules and I think that is something that needs to be considered and it is being considered. I also think that I know from my faculty in talking about these issues that they would rather pay the money so that they have a parking space available than to find themselves basically hunting around and wasting their valuable time. I mean these are people- they are faculty members and if the university goes and finds people to teach at this university and pays them serious cash to do so only to have these very expensive employees driving around using their time for parking spaces. I think that that is something that is a waste of resources. I think that at this point most of the folks that again are in my area of the campus are willing to pay money for parking spaces in order to be able to get to their business on time and be able to prepare. I also think though there will be –I don’t think that they have a problem with satellite parking issues either. I think the primary problem these things have been discussed and discussed until we are disgusted. Nothing is happening. And so I think now it has gotten to the point where we need some solutions to happen not two years from now or not a year from now but really immediately. I am just really afraid that the confrontations which seemingly seems to be the small stuff that sets people off and I am joking about the gun thing –I am really a gun control person. Don’t get me wrong but I do worry when police are getting involved in confrontation that means that these are getting much more out of hand than they should be and these are the main employees –what I consider to be the main employees of this university and I think it is an issue of respect that they are not feeling at this point.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Any other comments or questions?

PROFESSOR EASTMAN – I would agree with those sentiments.

GEORGE TERRY – VICE PROVOST AND DEAN FOR LIBRARIES AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS – Caroline, I would just like to thank you for pointing out the problem with the thirst on campus where in some ways, in terms of the network we are victims of our own success. Four years ago, the campus backbone was complete. First of all it was completed by rapidly patching old networks with new networks across campus so there is a mixed bag in response time and things of this sort. But I think one of the things to remember is that over the last four years probably the traffic on the campus backbone has increased by about 30 times. It is incredible when you think of that. Four years ago we did not have a homepage. The way we are moving we are moving very fast. We are trying to respond as rapidly to problems as we can. We have an ATM network that is just about complete which will increase response time a great deal. Every month now we go over a list of pending projects with the Provost such as upgrades to various buildings in terms of the wiring first and then moving from token ring to ethernet. A mistake I think the institution made probably 10 or 12 years ago was going with the token ring instead of the ethernet. We should have done that back then. Finally, the Internet 2 Project is held up right now in state procurement but once that comes along the research scientists will see a much greater band as well as you would with the ATM network.

Another observation, we had the AAU consultants here and they made the observation that they had never seen a computer backbone that was so decentralized. In other words, every college historically has wanted their own network. Every college until just a few years ago could manage that network because all they had to deal with was their servers and their labs. Once the campus back bone was complete and every office had a workstation the clientele got much greater to serve. Thus all of the local network managers and folks of this sort are beginning to feel the strain of this decentralization and it is something that the self-study can address in some regard. I am not advocating total centralization or anything of this sort but I would point out that we have 132 servers on this campus which are being used only about eight hours a day. That is a lot of wasted space and a lot of wasted response time that we can take advantage of by clustering those types of things. I do want to thank you for pointing out the thirst because the response time troubles me as well since I have problems with it in my office too. We are working on it and we are trying to be as responsive as we possible can.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Any other comments?

F. Committee on Admission, Professor Stephen McNeill, Chair:

PROFESSOR McNEILL – Yes, I just wanted the Senate to be aware that next time we will be bringing to you a resolution to increase the number of units starting with the high school of 2001 entrance into the university. This will be to bring us in line with the state’s increase from 20 to 24 units for high school graduation. It will be in the minutes for next time and I would like to get faculty input as soon as possible.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Are you going to post that resolution on the Web by any chance?


G. Committee on Scholastic Standards and Petitions, Professor James Day, Chair:

PROFESSOR JAMES DAY – I’ll mention briefly a couple of deliberations that have occupied the committee of late. One of these concerns the option available for faculty who have to make-up for lost class time in the case of seminars that are deprived of a class meeting due to a holiday. To help us resolve this matter Richard Bayer, Registrar, met with us and proposed revisions and clarifications to the wording concerning this that is inserted into the fall and spring class schedules. Our committee was also asked to investigate the feasibility of having the university require all undergraduates to enroll in a section of University 101. In light of evidence proposed it was decided to recommend against this.

V. Report of the Secretary.

No report.

VI. Unfinished Business.


VII. New Business.


VIII. Good of the Order.


UNIDENTIFIED SENATOR – Yesterday I received in my mailbox a statement from the administration that there was some consideration to raising the necessary TOEFL scores in order to enter the university. Are you aware of this?


UNIDENTIFIED SENATOR - As this is a matter which really reflects on the character of this institution in the global arena, I would hope that any decision be run by the Faculty Senate and as well the character of the memo seemed to suggest because neighbors have a higher score we should to. I would like to suggest that any revision of the current policy be more substantive perhaps with evidence reflected with those people with lower TOEFL scores weren’t as successful as those with higher TOEFL scores.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – I believe the matter of the entrance scores for the Graduate School are matters for the consideration of the Graduate School and not for the Senate. I will communicate your concerns to Vice Provost Welsh and suggest you contact her with these matters. Any other remarks for the Good of the Order?

PROFESSOR DAVID WILES – THEATRE, SPEECH AND DANCE – I just wanted to announce the Department of Theatre, Speech and Dance has its spring production season next Friday with the production of Eugene O’Neil’s Ah, Wilderness with a terrific cast of both MFA candidates, actors, and undergraduate actors. Thank you.

PROFESSOR MALISSA MARTIN – PHYSICAL EDUCATION – Yes, I would like for every one to know the Department of Physical Education is hosting two conferences – one for professionals on Muscle and Tendon Injuries in Sports corporate sponsoring with groups in town. Then one that is the only one of this kind in the country, the College Student Athletic Trainers Conference which will be hosted in the College of Education on March 5th and 6th.


UNIDENTIFED PERSON – There are TOEFL scores for undergraduate students too as part of the admission requirements to the University.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Those would be properly handled by the Admissions Committee. I think the memo is directed towards more or less the Graduate School.

I see the body has moved the agenda on to "announcements" so we have an announcement here.

IX. Announcements.

MR. JONATHAN SHARP – STUDENT LIAISON – What I would like to tell you about is that around a year ago the issue of academic advisement came up to the Student Senate. With the help of the Assistant and Associate Deans Council, we went to the Provost’s Office and expressed our concerns about improving academic advisement. This year with the help of Drs. Carolyn Jones and Don Greiner we wrote and the Student Senate passed unanimously this past week the resolution endorsing a trial run of centrally managed advisement. This would take place in the following units during the fall: Biological Sciences, English, History and Psychology. By centrally managed we are talking about modeling the College of Business Administration’s non-faculty employees that are able to coordinate advisement. By freeing faculty up of the clerical minutiae of the advisement process, I feel that advisement will be more effective and more efficient. If any of you would like a copy of the resolution that we passed, I would be glad to get one for you. We are continuing our discussion with the Provost’s Office on this matter. We hope to see advisement improve at the University.

PROFESSOR STEPHEN MCNEILL – For Engineering the accreditation board for engineering requires that faculty be involved in that advisement process. We had decentralized but when we came up for accreditation we were hit very hard on this.

So there may be limiting features.

MARY ANN BURNS – ASSISTANT DEAN, LIBERAL ARTS – We applaud the Student Government Association for seconding and endorsing our recommendations. But I would like to point out that we described the Department of Psychology as a model. They do have faculty advisors who are coordinated by professional staff advisors. So they are not in need of help. They are really a model that should be followed.

CHAIRMAN WEDLOCK – Thank you. Any more announcements?

Seeing none I declare the meeting adjourned.

Meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m.








WHEREAS, the faculty of the University of South Carolina consider the safety and well-being of its students and personnel to be of paramount importance; and


WHEREAS, the Club Mercedes is located in close proximity to the campus and directly across

Devine Street from the School of Law; and


WHEREAS, in recent months, many violent acts, including shootings resulting in one death,

have occurred on or near the premises of the Club Mercedes; and


WHEREAS, these violent acts are apparently connected with persons patronizing the Club

Mercedes; and


WHEREAS, the continued operation in this fashion of the Club Mercedes unreasonably

endangers the safety and well-being of the students, faculty, and staff of the law school and the

university and constitutes a general public nuisance.


NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Senate of the University of South

Carolina-Columbia hereby demands that the appropriate university and governmental authorities

take any and all steps necessary to eliminate immediately the threat posed by the operation of the

Club Mercedes to the safety and well-being of the students, faculty, and staff of the law school

and the university.




February 3, 1999 _________________________

Sarah Wise

Secretary of the Faculty Senate





The following Senators did attend the February 3, 1999 meeting:







































French & Classics





Germanic & Slavic & Oriental













Religious Studies





Spanish, Italian & Portuguese


Theatre, Speech & Dance
























Environmental Health Science


Epidemiology & Biostatistics


Health Administration


Health Promotion & Education








zur Loye

Computer Science








Physics & Astronomy


















Continuing Education











The following Senators did not attend the February 3, 1999 meeting:




















Aerospace Studies







French & Classics





Military Science


Naval Science








Spanish, Italian & Portuguese













Exercise Science












Physics & Astronomy

















This page updated 23 February 1999 by the Office of the Faculty Senate,
and copyright 1999, The Board of Trustees of the University of South Carolina.
URL http://www.sc.edu/faculty/senate/99/minutes/0203.minutes.html