shorttop.jpg (1907 bytes)

THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA
FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES

November 1, 1990
Signal Mountain Room
University Center

ELECTED MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Bell, Tom Bibler, Stan Byrd, Rick Callaway, Pedro Campa, Delores Craig, Betsy Darken, George Helton, Jim Hiestand, Chris Mawata, Gary McDonald, Ed McMahon, Gail Meyer, Lyn Miles, Peter Pringle, Tapan Sen, Edgar Shawen, Gavin Townsend, Margaret Trimpey, Jeannette Vallier, Paul Watson, Colbert Whitaker, David Wiley, Robert Wilson, Terry Zivney

ELECTED MEMBERS ABSENT: Stephanie Bellar, Terry Carney, Robert Dardenne, Steve LeWinter, Mary Tanner, John Trimpey, Ken Venters, Donald Weisbaker

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: Jane Harbaugh, Fred Obear, Sandra Packard

AMONG THE GUESTS PRESENT: Ray Fox, Carol Malone, Jim Poston, Patsy Reynolds

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by President Pedro Campa at 3:17 p.m.

Approval of minutes:

Approval for the minutes of the October 18th meeting was moved. Additions or corrections to the minutes were the following: Delores Craig was elected to the General Education Committee rather than the Grade Appeals Committee. Delores Craig was selected to replace Robert Rogers, not on the Grade Appeals committee, but on the General Education Committee. Professor Pringle was indeed at the last meeting. He recounted seeing Charles Kuralt and Ric Schonblom on television and Jim Hiestand tinkering with the television at 3:57 p.m. Also, he sat within inches of Janet Wixson's passionate plea for networking campus computing facilities. Pringle offered these examples as evidence of his attendance. Also, today's secretary pro tem was also present at last week's meeting. Although he did not sit within inches of Janet Wixson's passionate plea, he did enjoy seeing Charles Kuralt and Ric Schonblom on television.

Report from Admissions Committee

Professor Meyer reported that students who do not meet our admissions requirements are decided by the Director of Admissions or the Admissions Committee. The Admissions Committee had a heavy summer load meeting 15 times in the summer looking at 41 readmissions cases and readmitting 27 of those students. There were 11 cases of new freshmen considered by the Chancellor that the Admissions Committee originally denied. Nine were admitted by the Chancellor. The grand total is 137 new freshmen students were admitted by exception by the Admissions Committee, the Chancellor or the Director of Admissions.

Professor Darken was concerned that of 228 students who applied at UTC with unit deficiencies, 60% were admitted. This was a considerable increase from a few years ago. Professor Darken moved that sometime before February, the Admissions Committee report to Council the criteria it uses for making exceptions. The motion was seconded by Professor Wiley.

Chancellor Obear stated that for the exceptions that he made, he asks for an end of the next semester report of all of those students. Not all that he admitted enrolled, but of the ones who enrolled, the success rate is 50 or 60% for those exceptions.

The motion for the Admissions Committee to report to Council in February concerning criteria used for exceptions passed unanimously.

Professor Darken was also concerned about the amount of appeals to the Chancellor and that 82% of the Admissions Committee decisions were overturned by the Chancellor even though only 11 cases were considered. What was the Chancellor's rationale for these Committee decision reversals?

Chancellor Obear responded that all 11 cases dealt with individual circumstances. Two or three were CAP students endorsed by high school principals and counselors along with the UTC CAP staff. One student was a black male student with a 2.1 high school GPA, a 14 on the ACT, and deficient .5 unit in social studies. Another student, a black female, had been admitted one year ago but lacked the funds. She had a 2.45 high school GPA, a 17 on the ACT and .5 unit math deficiency. There were four minority students in the Fall report.

Professor Meyer stated those students admitted in the summer are not on the Fall 1990 admission list.

Chancellor Obear felt that the report should be changed to reflect who showed up Fall 1990, since it didn't reflect the Summer 1990 show-ups. In three instances, concern was about communication of the Tennessee unit requirements. Four of those didn't meet minimum high school GPA's and no one met the ACT or SAT requirement. The majority were ones who don't meet unit course requirements.

Professor Meyer next reported on the catalog copy on page 17 looking at the left hand column from the current catalog in the middle of the second paragraph.

"Students who graduated from high school in 1989 or after and are transferring less than 60 hours of semester credit, must also meet the minimum high school unit requirements as stated on page 8. Students in this category must submit an official high school transcript in addition to their college transcripts. Students whose records do not meet the standards required by the University for admission will be denied admission unless, in the opinion of the Dean of Admissions and Records, acceptance on scholastic probation is justified."

This is our current policy from the UT System since 1986.

Of the 168 transfer students who graduated in 1989 or later with fewer than 60 semester hours, 118 students enrolled. Of these 118 students, only 74 had proper high school transcripts. Of these 74 students, 31 of them had high school deficiencies. Then 43 students had no deficiencies. Transcripts are being requested from the remaining 44 students who were admitted without proper transcripts. The statement of holding spring semester registration on those students without proper high school records is not accurate. Since we admitted these students unconditionally, with consultation of the UT attorneys, we can't make them go back and make up newly discovered deficiencies. Our admissions policy was not upheld and there are 118 students on this campus which 30 of them have deficiencies that will not have to be made up.

Dean Fox responded that is was a "slip up", an error on the admissions process and he apologized for this occurrence. This is not an excuse, but at the time of making these decisions, the Admissions Office lost two of its important staff. Also, the transfer student evaluator left in this time frame. Dean Fox said he was very sorry for this situation.

The copied catalog requirements concerning Adult Freshman Admission was discussed. Reference to the handout titled "Proposed Revisions to Admission Requirements for Various Categories of Students" dated September 5, 1989 and its reverse side dated December 7, 1989.

In our catalog, the only reference to adult freshmen is on p. 4, last paragraph of our copied catalog where "freshmen applicants under age 21 years must satisfy minimum requirements for admission" which implies that adult freshmen don't necessarily satisfy these requirements, and on p. 5, last paragraph, stating the applicants 21 years or older don't need to meet the above stated high school unit requirements on that page. Also, they must be high school graduates. If their high school GPA was below 2.0, they can be placed on condition. This means that our current adult freshman policy is that anyone age 21 or older and has graduated from high school is to be admitted.

The policy passed on December 7, 1989 addressed this problem. Adult freshmen should meet the requirements of regular freshmen admission which is to take UTC placement tests. The ACT is questionable for use for adult freshmen.

A new statement on Adult Freshman Admission was devised by the Admissions Committee, and it appears in the right hand column which is the column for new proposed material for the catalog.

Professor Meyer moved to adopt this new Adult Freshman admission statement for the catalog. Professor Darken seconded this motion.

A question was asked about why we do not insist on all adult freshmen to take UTC placement exams.

Dean Fox stated that we see students who are considered on the adult status that are not qualified for admission to the university. There are times that we need to look beyond the high school transcript. The ACT or SAT are too often irrelevant for the 25 or 50 year old student. We feel that the UTC placement exams are good to measure potential success or failure for these students.

Provost Packard remarked that some of the restrictions on the admission of adult freshmen students are policies of UT Board of Trustees. So, the committee's statement to avoid violating Trustee policy gives us the flexibility to handle the adult freshman admission problem. She said the UT system has uniform requirements system-wide. If we made this proposal for system policy approval, it would have to be reviewed for its effect on all campuses possibly getting lost in the system. This proposal policy is an effective way to make admission decisions for adult freshmen without making a system-wide study.

President Campa states that the motion before the Council is to consider the new statement concerning Adult Freshman Admission on page 8, the right hand column.

Motion passed unanimously.

Discussion ensued about the catalog description of the admissions requirements. Professor Darken moved to have the Admissions Committee, in consultation with the administration, reconsider the first paragraph to conform to UT Board of Trustee policy.

Professor Pringle seconded the motion and asked that due to the catalog deadlines, could the Admissions Committee report this action at the next meeting concerning the first paragraph on page 7.

Motion passed unanimously.

Chancellor Obear moved that the Council approve this document of all non-controversial changes. If there are any substantive changes involving policy, those would come back to Council for consideration.

President Campa stated that this amends the original motion on the floor. He said that rewriting the catalog has not been our charge in Council. We could do this given release time for our teaching and research.

Professor Zivney moved that we approve all but the two paragraphs in question.

President Campa called for a vote on the original motion on the rewriting clarifications of the admissions requirements in the catalog with the exception for orientation and advising on page 1 and the College Access Program on page 12.

The vote was overwhelming unanimous with one abstention. Professor Hiestand questioned if we make decisions on admissions of black students differently than we do for white students. Professor Meyer and Patsy Reynolds responded that there is a difference. On the enhanced ACT, 16 is the cutoff score for admission of white students and 14 is the cuttof score for admission of black students. The scores of 14-16 on the enhanced ACT are equivalent to a score of 12 on the old ACT, which was our previous cutoff.

Report from Committee on Committees

Professor Bibler from the Committee on Committees moved that we need to nominate two members of Council to replace seats on Graduate Council. They are Professors Gavin Townsend and Donald Weisbaker. Motion passed unanimously.

The Proposed Smoke-Free Work Place

President Campa prefaced the smoke-free work place resolution from Dr. Schlereth as a concern from many faculty concerning smoking. The Executive Committee of Faculty Council has taken no position on this issue. The Chancellor has informed him that there may be some legal repercussions since this would violate state law. The matter is only for presentation at this time. To be acted on, we need a motion.

Professor Zivney made a motion to discuss this action. Professor Byrd seconded the motion. Professor Pringle stated that this smoke-free policy would prohibit smoking in every indoor space on campus.

President Campa said that the intent of the smoke-free policy is everywhere on campus. But, you could chew or dip tobacco.

Chancellor Obear stated that on December 1989, UTK adopted a smoke-free policy. But, Senate Bill 2092 of the Tennessee Legislature established:

"...that a policy that is implemented must protect the rights of smokers as well as non-smokers; that a designated place in each building must be found for smokers just as there are places for non-smokers..."

Professor Pringle was against the resolution. He stated that it is illegal to have a totally smoke-free environment. Pringle suggests that those concerned about smoking should work with the Chancellor to form a policy in compliance with the new state law.

Professor Zivney amended his motion to state indoor smoking be permitted in rooms in which all occupants are agreeable to smoking.

Professor Wiley suggested tabling this motion. Professor Trimpey seconded the motion, and it passed.

Report from the Board of Trustees Meeting

President Campa, reporting on the UT Board meeting, stated that based on the newspaper article (Knoxville News Sentinel, Saturday, October 20, 1990), the five-year plan for all UT campuses has been put on hold. The Chairman of the Board of Trustees discussed an article from a popular news magazine concerning the neglect of teaching at larger research institutions. Here, at UTC, he feels we are on solid ground with teaching and adequate research.

Member Concerns

Provost Packard stated that due to the threat of war in the Middle East, we must deal with the possibility for students who may get called-up on 24 hours notice to have a chance to complete the term's courses. Professor Bibler pointed out that the Standards Committee has considered this and was under the impression that there is a UT system policy concerning the return of tuition money and housing allowances. Provost Packard is concerned about the student who gets an incomplete and can not remove it in the time frame specified.

Professor Hiestand remarked for a colleague that there is no police to assist crossing Vine Street at all hours of class changes only certain select hours. Also, the smoke concentration in Grote Hall is too excessive.

Facilities Concerns

There were none.

Chancellor Obear reported to the Council about the recent SACS visit. We have received a most complementary verbal report from them for UTC. Typically, there are 30 to 40 recommendations given to a campus to address, but we only must address 9 recommendations. Of these 9 recommendations, some are challenging but some are technical changes, like changing some wording concerning the SACS accreditation. One reviewer on the SACS team said of his 15 SACS reviews, UTC is in a good state.

Motion to adjourn

Professor Pringle so moved at 4:59 p.m.

Respectively submitted,

Gary H. McDonald
Secretary pro tem


top.gif (189 bytes)