shorttop.jpg (1907 bytes)

THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA
FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES

February 20, 1992

Signal Mountain Room
University Center

ELECTED MEMBERS PRESENT: Dave Anderson, Tom Bibler, Martha Butterfield, Stan Byrd, Terry Carney, David Carrithers, Joe DePari, George Helton, Arlie Herron, Debbie Ingram, Doug Kingdon, Irene Loomis, Ed McMahon, Gail Meyer, Fred Nixon, Peter Pringle, Marea Rankin, Tapan Sen, Edgar Shawen, James Stroud, John Trimpey, Margaret Trimpey, Jeannette Vallier, Ken Venters, Donald Weisbaker, Robert Wilson, Terry Zivney

ELECTED MEMBERS ABSENT: Stephanie Bellar, Pedro Campa, Don Cassell, Robert Duffy, Betty Pickett, David Shepherd, Gavin Townsend

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: Joe Jackson, Ralph Moser, Fred Obear, Sandra Packard, Charles Renneisen

AMONG THE GUESTS PRESENT: Richard Brown, Jim Poston, Robert Swansbrough

Summary of Actions

President Butterfield issued a charge to the General Education Committee and the faculty on the General Education program.
Council amended part of the draft of Chapter 3 of the Faculty Handbook and referred back to the Handbook Committee an entire section in the same chapter.

Call to Order

President Butterfield called the meeting to order at 3:20 p.m.

Approval of Minutes

Professor Jeannette Vallier questioned the appropriateness of the adjective "used" to refer to Admissions Committee Chairs (Announcements, page 2). She suggested that "former" would be a better term. Professor Carney, who had compiled the minutes, insisted that "used" was most appropriate. "Former" was inadequate to characterize these "battered individuals."

ENGL 333 was changed to ENGL 336 (Committee Reports, Curriculum Committee, page 1), and the minutes, as corrected, were approved.

Committee Reports

Executive Committee
President Butterfield announced that she had just received a letter from the TEA Department of Higher Education soliciting support for the higher education budget by the previous day! She advised Council that she would remain in touch with the department.

She noted that it had been ten years since General Education had been looked at and that, in the interim, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) had made comments on it. Accordingly, she issued the following charge to the General Education Committee and to the faculty as a whole, starting in fall 1992:

To undertake a study of General Education and its meaning for this campus; to review the current program; and to make recommendations for change.

Handbook Committee
Professor Carney (chair) noted that the Faculty Handbook had not been revised since 1984. Members had received a draft of the contents of Chapter 2 (UTC Faculty Organization and Faculty Governance) and of Chapter 3 (Appointment, Evaluation, Promotion, Tenure, and Termination).*

He announced the following changes to the draft:

Page 20, Section 2.3.8.: insert "the President" after "Chancellor" (line 6).
Page 21, Section 3.1.2.: replace "junior" with "tenured" and "senior" with "tenure-track" in number 3, lines 5-6.
Page 24, Section 3.1.9.: insert "by the department head" after "made" (line 16) and replace "copied to" with "with memoranda of support from" (line 17).
Page 24, Section 3.1.10.: insert "by the department head with a supporting memorandum" after "memorandum" (line 7).
Page 25, Section 3.4.1.: replace "offer the results of several years of student ratings" with "serve as an information resource" in number 3, lines 7-8.
Page 27, Section 3.5.1.: remove "and salary" in number 3, (lines 2,7), and remove the comma and insert "and" after "reappointment" (line 1).

Motion 1: To approve the draft of the contents of Chapters 2 and 3 of the Faculty Handbook. Moved by Professor Carney, seconded by Professor Weisbaker.

Noting that a department head would be given an opportunity to appear before the department's rank and tenure committee, Professor Anderson inquired if the same opportunity would be granted to a candidate for promotion or tenure (page 25, number 3). Professor Carney replied that there has been no such provision. Committee members usually know the candidate very well and have access to the candidate's dossier. Professor Weisbaker pointed out that the proposed language would not preclude such an opportunity. However, Professor Anderson was concerned that failure to make such a statement gave the appearance that the candidate had lesser standing than the head. Professor Herron observed that a rank and tenure committee meeting is not a legal proceeding. Committee members would continue to weigh the information provided by all sources, including the candidate.

Motion 2: To amend Motion 1 by inserting the following after "March 1" in number 3, page 25: "If a candidate requests an interview with the committee, it will be granted." Moved by Professor Herron, seconded by Professor Anderson.

Professor John Trimpey warned that this practice could have a serious impact on the timeline for the committee's procedures. Provost Packard advised that the proposed insertion should include a statement that the request would have to be in writing and that it should be submitted by a certain date.

Professor Bibler was troubled by the Council's procedure. Would it not be more appropriate to refer Professor Herron's suggestion to the Handbook Committee and request a recommendation?

Motion 2 was withdrawn.

Continuing discussion on the same item, Professor Carrithers said that he was concerned that a department head could appear before a rank and tenure committee and tell members what he/she wanted them to do. Was there a UT policy on this matter? Was our policy based on the practice of other institutions? Professor Shawen shared the concern.

Motion 3: To amend Motion 1 by eliminating "to discuss the candidates and to serve as an information resource." Moved by Professor Shawen, seconded by Professor John Trimpey.

Professor Anderson offered an amendment to the amendment.

Motion 4: To amend Motion 1 by eliminating the sentence "The head will be given an opportunity to appear before the committee to discuss the candidates and to serve as an information resource." Moved by Professor Anderson, seconded by Professor Stroud.

Professor Jeannette Vallier wanted to know the intent of the motion. Professor Anderson responded that he did not want to give to a department head a right not available to a candidate. "That's not right," he added.

Motion 4 was approved, with 19 votes in favor, 4 against, and 1 abstention.

Since Motion 4 was technically a substitute for Motion 3, no vote was necessary on Motion 3.

Professor McMahon recommended that the last sentence of number 3 on page 25 ("The head will not be present during discussions leading to final recommendations.") should be clarified. Professor Carney said that the Handbook Committee would consider the recommendation.

Provost Packard wondered if Council should refer back to the committee Section 3.4.6. (page 27), titled "Standard Dossier Format." She was concerned that removing the opportunity for the appearance before a rank and tenure committee of a department head could exclude relevant information from consideration. Professor Carney replied that a committee was still empowered to ask a department head to appear before it.

Professor Nixon noted that a change was necessary in the wording of Section 3.4.6. suggesting that a faculty member could withhold certain information from the dossier. Such a provision was illegal.

Motion 5: To refer back to the Handbook Committee Section 3.4 for revision based on the Council's deliberations. Moved by Professor Bibler, seconded by Professor McMahon.

Motion 5 was approved by voice vote.

Professor DePari was concerned about the research requirements set forth in Section 3.6.3. ("Criteria for Granting Tenure") on page 29. He said that his concern arose from his experience. He was nearing the end of his second year as a UTC faculty member and had not received the support necessary to conduct research and introduce a program in molecular biology. He was unable to engage in such research with the resources available to him. For this reason, and because of other demands on his time, he feared that he would be unable to satisfy the prescribed research standards.

Professor Nixon agreed. He said that the Computer Science Accreditation Board had concluded that universities with a 12-hour teaching load should not require research.

Professor Helton asked that a correction be made on page 20, under "Teaching Education Program: Membership": "special education and counseling" should be changed to "educational psychology and special education."

Professor Ingram asked that a check be made to determine if the Health Sciences Career Advisory Committee (page 19) had been abolished.

Professor Stroud observed that information on the Continuing Education Committee (page 17) should not be eliminated. The committee was revising the statement of its role and should be included in future drafts.

Professor Shawen drew attention to three items: 1) there was no provision for the award of emeritus or emerita status to a Chancellor (page 24). Provost Packard replied that such an award was not a campus prerogative; 2) three different retirement dates were given (page 33). What is the effective date of retirement? Provost Packard replied that the wording reflected UT System payment policies; 3) there was a discrepancy in the timing of the election of an adjunct faculty representative to Council (page 11, 12). President Butterfield referred the discrepancy to the Handbook Committee for a resolution.

Professor Bibler recommended that the committee examine the length of the term for which the Faculty Council president is elected (page 12). In effect, we have been re-electing presidents. The practice should be reflected in the policy. Professor Weisbaker cautioned that a two-year term might result in a lack of candidates.

Professor John Trimpey noted that the General Education Committee entry (page 18) did not include recent changes approved by the Council.

President Butterfield announced that discussion on Motion 1, as amended, would continue at the Council's next meeting.

New Business

Facilities Concerns
Mr. Jim Poston, of Facilities Management, asked if any facilities requests had not been met. Professor Nixon noted that the emergency lighting system appeared not to have worked during a power drop in Grote Hall. Mr. Poston said that he would arrange for a check to be made and would advise faculty and staff in advance so that they could take appropriate actions.

Mr. Poston reported that Assistant Vice Chancellor David Butler had been ill. He is expected to report back to work the week of May 25.

Announcements

President Butterfield announced that the Council would meet again on March 5. She promised a heavy agenda.

Adjournment

Council adjourned at 5:02 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Peter K. Pringle
Secretary

*Because the cost of reproduction is great, the draft will be distributed with the minutes of the meeting of March 5, 1992.

top.gif (189 bytes)