shorttop.jpg (1907 bytes)

THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA
FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES

October 20, 1994
Signal Mountain Room
University Center

ELECTED MEMBERS PRESENT: Valarie Adams, Jim Avery, Martha Butterfield, Ken Carson, Betsy Cook, Neal Coulter, Lloyd Davis, Robert Duffy, Aniekan Ebiefung, Fritz Efaw, Howard Finch, Phil Giffin, Nick Honerkamp, Larry Ingle, Renée Lorraine, David Levine, Jim Macomber, Anna Panorska, Loretta Prater, Katherine Rehyansky, Mike Russell, Greg Sedrick, Maria Smith, Jim Stroud, John Tinkler, Margaret Trimpey, Ling-Jun Wang, David Wiley, Sally Young

ELECTED MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Bibler, Prem Chopra, Ahmed Eltom, John Garrett, Doug Kingdon, John Lynch, Jim McDonell, Jeannette Vallier

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Obear, Grayson Walker

AMONG THE GUESTS PRESENT: Richard Brown, Anne Chien, Linda Fletcher, John Fulmer, Cherry Guinn, Lyn Miles, Tom Payne, Robert Pullen, Leland Robinson, Jocelyn Sanders, Tim Summerlin, John Trimpey, Dan Webb

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 3:17 by Vice-President Greg Sedrick.

Introduction of Guest

Chancellor Frederick Obear introduced Robert Pullen of Troy State University who is serving an ACE (American Council on Education) internship at UTC.

Approval of Minutes

Professor Martha Butterfield asked that the minutes of September 1, 1994 be amended. The Report of the General Education Committee should read that "English 219 (African American Literature) had been approved as a Category G course and will be cross-listed as Humanities 219."

Professor Larry Ingle noted that in the October 6 minutes, he moved to "postpone" rather than to "table" his motion on the EDO. This correction should be made in both the first and fourth paragraphs on page 7.

Professor Mike Russell moved and Professor Phil Giffin seconded the motion to approve the minutes as amended. The motion passed by voice vote.

Report from the Curriculum Committee

Professor Ken Venters, chair, asked that members make the following changes in his report: Under item 5, the Committee also accepted English 335 as part of the Black Studies Minor. Under item 6, the vote was to approve 10-0-0. Under item 7, part b should be withdrawn because of lack of required signatures on the approval sheet. Under item 7, part d, Music 311 is also listed as Humanities 311 and required for music majors.

Professor Larry Ingle had a question about the revision of the nursing curriculum. Did it require no change in the number of hours?

Professor Margaret Trimpey confirmed that it did not.

Professor Martha Butterfield moved approval of the package. Professor Jim Avery seconded the motion.

Professor Mike Russell asked that Professor Trimpey outline the changes more fully.

Professor Trimpey responded that the American Association of Colleges of Nursing recommends that nursing programs have a stronger humanities component. The nursing department consulted with former students and other universities concerning possible changes while trying not to add more hours to the curriculum. Students need to have some knowledge of history, philosophy, and ethics, especially with new health care considerations. They also wished to provide a bit more flexibility in social science. They are trying to provide the best education possible.

When it was noted that the Chemistry Department had had a negative reaction to the proposal, Professor Trimpey responded that they are working with the Chemistry Department to develop an organic biochemistry course. If the proposed change in the nursing curriculum does not work, the department will change it again.

Once the nursing proposal was discussed, Vice-President Sedrick asked that we consider each item in order. There were no comments on items 1 and 3.

Professor Ingle remarked that he was confused by the title of item #4. It appears that one of the controlling words is "tradition."

Professor Immaculate Kizza said that Professor Ingle was correct; the emphasis is on tradition. Later writers such as Wright use aspects of the slave tradition in their works.

Professor Ingle noted that coverage is broad, with at least four texts referring to tradition.

There were no comments on item 5.

With respect of item 6, Professor Ingle questioned the proposed course Anthropology 315, Primate Behavior. Why would an anthropology course be dealing with primates?

Professor Lyn Miles noted that we share much of our genetic makeup with primates, so both human and nonhuman primate behavior will be considered.

With respect to item 7, Professor Honerkamp said that he would like to see Music 111 cross-listed as an anthropology course; it is a cultural anthropology course concerning music.

Professor Venters said that had been discussed at the meeting.

Professor Renée Lorraine said that ethnomusicologists are often accused of being anthropologists. She would be happy to teach it in the other department.

Professor Jim Stroud said he would be concerned about the pressure of teaching a new course as another department’s offering.

Professor Lorraine said that she was not sure about anthropology’s criteria, but she does not have credentials in sociology/anthropology. However she feels comfortable with social science students.

Vice-President Sedrick suggested that the question of cross-listing be discussed later.

Professor Venters agreed.

Professor Miles noted that such courses are often treated that way. She would be happy to see the course taught in her department.

The motion passed by voice vote.

Report from the Graduate Council

Professor Greg Sedrick presented a new course proposal for Council’s approval: BFIN 518.

Professor James Stroud moved and Professor Nick Honerkamp seconded the motion to approve the course.

Professor Tom Payne noted that the course is basically a broad ranging course in markets. It introduces graduate students to stocks, bonds, and other securities; pension plans; and mutual funds. The course Is needed because many students who enter the MBA programs do not have a business background. This course prepares these students for advanced finance courses.

Professor Larry Ingle spoke strongly against the motion. Although he is not an authority on business courses and in fact never had a business course, he has had courses on the 500 level. In the course proposal, he noted that no written assignments are required. Further, textbook requirements seem sparse. He believes that one distinction between undergraduate and graduate courses should be the writing component. He raised these points in Graduate Council.

Professor Mike Russell agreed with Professor Ingle. Freshman history courses have more reading assignments than the proposed BFIN 518.

Professor Payne noted that BFIN 518 is a fairly standard course around the country. It is especially for students who lack background in this area. He says that forty articles and two high-level textbooks do not seem minimal reading to him. Students must understand theories plus work out problems mathematically. These courses are different from other courses at the University.

Professor Ken Carson asked for clarification. The reading is two texts plus forty articles from what source?

Professor Payne noted that many were from the Federal Reserve Bank and academic journals in the finance area, some of which are very technical.

Vice-President Sedrick asked Professor Payne to distinguish this course from an undergraduate course.

Professor Payne noted that the level of reading was much higher; further, some of the topics such as arbitrage and international markets are not covered in undergraduate courses.

Readings are done by all in class; the information in them shows up on examinations. Also, they will stimulate class discussion.

This course provides more extensive coverage, thus more breadth and depth, than an undergraduate course.

Professor Mike Russell asked for clarification. How many students might take the course, only thirteen or so?

Professor Payne answered, "Approximately."

Professor Russell asked if a quantitative skill was required.

Professor Payne noted that economics is required. Also, introductory finance courses have been taken. Thus students know evaluating and pricing.

Professor Ingle noted that on the reading list, nine of the twenty-six readings have eleven or fewer pages; only one has twenty-five. How much time would it take to read these? Professor Ingle is embarrassed by this kind of course.

Professor Sedrick noted that engineering articles with only two pages can be rigorous; he believes these articles could be as well. He urged caution as we look at areas these reading cover.

Professor Anna Panorska noted that the formulas for option price, put and call, and the like require a lot of math. Are prerequisites in statistics and probability required?

Professor Payne said that the School of Business did have statistics courses for masters students.

With regard to Black-Scholes, it is a math issue. It takes time to explain that and have students understand.

Professor Katy Rehyansky noted that the course requires four examinations which count much more than students’ presentations. In addition the students read the texts and the Wall Street Journal.

Professor Butterfield asked if essay questions would require analytical thinking and comparison.

Professor Payne answered yes. That expectation on examinations is there. "What do you think and why" questions are used to get students to apply what they have learned to specific situations. Articles often express opposing views.

Professor Howard Finch spoke about the texts. Both text authors are very well known and highly respected. The texts are often used in Ph.D. seminars around the country.

He believes there is misunderstanding about the MBA. A masters degree in most disciplines is a specialist degree, but an MBA is a generalist degree geared for students without background in Business Administration. He also called Council’s attention to the rigorous outside reading.

Professor Stroud agreed that there is room at UTC for more than one kind of master’s degree. In liberal arts, writing can certainly be a measure of rigor. But in other degrees, cognitive content and skills other than writing are more a measure of the rigor.

Professor Russell is convinced of the rigor of the reading assignments, but we now have an emphasis on Writing Across the Curriculum, even in math courses. He still believes there should be a paper in a graduate course.

The motion passed 24-4-1.

Motion for Moment of Silence at Commencement

Professor Renée Lorraine noted that her motion came out of a concern expressed in Professor David Wiley’s memorandum. Many people on campus want to lead a spiritual life but are concerned about separation of church and state. She moved and Professor Honerkamp seconded her motion for a moment of silence.

Professor Mike Russell said that this was an excellent proposal. If we were to be sued, he thought that we would be in good shape. He will support the motion, but noted that a moment of silence is not appropriate for Islam and many Native Americans.

Professor David Wiley is concerned about the motion. Did she also mean at convocation, football games, and other places where prayers have been included? He does not want to be a mugwump and abstain; he would like to have the motion apply to other events.

Professor Lorraine said that she would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion.

His other question was this: If Council passes the motion, what would happen?

Professor Lorraine said that it would go to the Chancellor as a recommendation to him. She supposed that it could also go to the full faculty.

Professor Martha Butterfield noted that at some high school graduations with moments of silence, students jumped to their feet to lead a specific prayer; she is concerned about that.

Chancellor Obear said that he will react to a formal motion if he gets it, but the moment of silence was considered earlier and not put into the recommendation he previously made. He does not plan to change his earlier decision unless he gets different advice from legal counsel.

Professor Wiley agreed that the moment of silence does sidestep the idea of religious discrimination. He wonders, however, if it would pass constitutional muster. If the purpose of a moment of silence is religious, it will not. If it is not, it will.

Professor James Avery noted that the invocation at convocation was generic. He has not heard any negative reaction to that. Wouldn’t all of us be satisfied with that type of remark? It satisfied him. In fact, "amen" was the only word which jarred him. He voted no on the original proposal.

Professor Honerkamp noted that it would be all right if Professor Bill Butterfield, who did the convocation invocation, were always asked to do it. We frequently get sandbagged by others who say they will be generic, but are not. He asked if a shaman would be given a chance to do the invocation. He thinks the moment of silence is a good idea.

Professor Stroud remarked that even if it is a moment of silence, we know it is set aside for a spiritual reason.

We are trying to promote ourselves in favor of international education; thus, there is something incongruous about a moment of silence or a prayer.

Professor David Levine believed that people are happy now. Let’s keep the situation like it is.

Professor Mike Russell noted that the tyranny of the majority exists in this case.

Professor Robert Duffy said that he was prepared to vote for the Moment of Silence as a non-prayer. He does not like secular prayer; he would prefer to have people speaking their beliefs.

The motion passed by a vote of 10-4-15.

Report from the Provost

Provost Grayson Walker first reported on maternity leave. There is no mention of it in the Faculty Handbook. He talked with UTK and UTM and found out for nine-month faculty, they handle it on a case-by-case basis. There is a well-defined policy for twelve-month. Generally the person requesting maternity leave of short duration works with the dean and provost. The person on leave is paid, and her courses are taken care of collegially. For extended leave, the woman usually takes unpaid leave.

With respect to the tenure clock, if the maternity leave is of short duration and no paperwork is involved, the tenure clock continues to tick.

In order to get the tenure clock to stop, the woman would have to take unpaid leave.

Professor Wiley asked if the Family Leave policy passed by the federal government affected UTC.

Provost Walker said yes. We have to be consistent with the body of the Family Leave and Medical Act. When people can take leave without incurring disadvantage, we are in compliance.

Mr. Dan Webb of Human Resources said he was not prepared to respond to questions about this issue today.

Professor Martha Butterfield said that there is a paper trail here because she and several others worked on a maternity policy under the direction of the previous Provost. She believes the document may be in Knoxville now. At that time, nothing in the policy spoke about faculty positions. She recalls that Professors Renée Lorraine and Jocelyn Sanders were on the Committee. The report left Chattanooga and has not been seen since.

Professor Margaret Trimpey asked if it was different from sick leave.

Provost Walker said no; it is the same policy.

Professor Lorraine asked if a semester’s leave could be handled in a collegial way.

Provost Walker said no. It is extended leave without pay. Sometimes people have been able to handle the faculty member’s absence with adjuncts.

Professor Lorraine asked how many weeks a person might take.

Provost Walker said we would handle short leaves collegially on a case-by-case basis.

Mr. Webb noted that statutes address unpaid leave but not paid leave.

Provost Walker said that you could use sick leave days for maternity leave if you had a twelve-month appointment. We have no sick leave policy for nine-month appointments.

Professor Panorska recalled a situation where a faculty member became ill before the beginning of the semester. People took his classes for a whole semester, and that person was paid. Is maternity to be treated differently?

Provost Walker said that he thinks the two should be treated the same. Those who covered that professor’s courses were partially paid to do that.

Professor Panorska asked if you could work overtime for a while (that is, "bank" courses) in order to accumulate the time off? She would prefer not to have to be grateful to her colleagues for an indefinite period of time.

Provost Walker said that we ought to do this on a case-by-case basis without having to formalize it.

Professor Lorraine said that while that sounds reasonable on paper, it is frightening to many women. Could the Provost appoint a committee to study this?

Provost Walker agreed that it is scary when there is just a one-paragraph sick leave policy and a one-paragraph maternity policy. If Council agrees, he would be happy to appoint such a committee.

Professor Stroud moved to establish such a committee. There was no second.

Professor Rehyansky noted that even when you plan maternity, the birth does not always cooperate with your time schedule.

Professor Ling-Jun Wang expressed the concern that in a small department, a single illness or maternity arrangement could be devastating. He does not want to jeopardize teaching quality.

Provost Walker agreed. He saw temporary full-time appointments as a possible solution.

Chancellor Obear asked if the spirit of the suggestion—that is, looking into a maternity leave policy—could be assigned to an existing committee.

Provost Walker thought that was a good idea.

Professor Trimpey noted that the group which did the study before came up with guidelines. She suggested resurrecting them before starting over.

Professor Butterfield noted that the committee did finish their report; it is in Knoxville.

Professor Stroud asked if Professor Butterfield could resurrect it.

Provost Walker agreed that we should try to find it. He asked Chancellor Obear if there was a Women’s Issues Committee.

Chancellor Obear answered yes.

Professor Sedrick and Provost Walker will work on finding an appropriate committee to deal with this issue.

Provost Walker also reported on advising at UTC and distributed a handout which quoted sections on advising from the Faculty Handbook. He noted that a number of changes in the registration process had been proposed. At other campuses students can register for classes at any terminal on campus. When we think about that for UTC, we get questions about advisement. No system should work against student advising.

A key sentence in the handout on advising is "Every student is required to see their advisor at least once a semester to discuss the many choices and goals that need to be considered." If we implement computer registration, we would have to reexamine this. We would also have to look at the Faculty Handbook section on tenure, which requires quality academic advising.

Provost Walker is appointing a very, very ad hoc committee to think about doing something, including looking at the Handbook, with respect to advising. The committee consists of both undergraduate and graduate students, staff from the records office, administrators, and faculty who have volunteered. He invites others to participate and notes that it will be informal.

Professor David Wiley said that the Handbook Committee needs to look at the phrasing again.

Professor John Tinkler said that the sentence containing "every student" and "their advisor" needs to be reworded to correct an agreement error.

Professor Russell said that students cheat the system now.

Provost Walker agreed that we all know of instances of secretaries advising and students forging names.

Professor Betsy Cook said that the Communication Department developed a handbook for their majors. They are required to keep it filled out and retained in their permanent file. The department developed it for accreditation purposes, and Professor Cook will send a copy to those who request it.

Old Business

Professor Honerkamp said that his report comes out of last meeting’s discussion of whether or not EDO’s are required. Page 35 of the Handbook says that the University has to have a procedure for evaluation. It does not mention another instrument. The following paragraphs show the procedure which we all know as our EDO process. When he was on that committee years ago, they could not find an alternative. When Faculty Council accepted his report, they in essence accepted the EDO. The Head could have individual agreements with faculty members.

Professor Ingle noted that his motion that all tenured faculty choose not to participate in the EDO process this year is on the floor already.

Professor Honerkamp believed that voting for this motion could be considered grounds for dismissal. A better motion would be directed toward lack of consistency in salary adjustment. The motion should address merit raises.

Professor Stroud asked the Chancellor what the consequences of not participating in the EDO process would be for an individual.

Professor Obear noted that in the past, some have chosen not to participate. These people did not receive raises.

It is possible that we might get merit money in mid-semester. Then those people would not be eligible. He agrees that we have had only across-the-board raises recently.

The policy of UT presidents has been that every employee will have an annual evaluation. His position is that we will do the EDO unless someone comes up with a better instrument.

No action was taken other than to take those who refused to participate in the EDO process off the merit list.

Professor Lorraine asked if we must be evaluated and we do not do an EDO, how would we be evaluated?

Professor Ingle noted that the EDO process is top heavy and hard to administer. He was here when the system was imposed. The faculty had no voice, and our reactions and concerns seem not to have been heard. He wants to take action that will get attention.

If we tell colleagues we think they should not participate, it will send ripples. He will go to the department head, show the head what he has done, and the head will evaluate him on the basis of what he knows.

Professor Lorraine asked if the only difference would be not to use that form.

Professor Ingle said "right." It’s an empty gesture. We have not been given merit pay. He would like to spend his time doing what he was hired to do, not writing the EDO.

Professor Russell said that he likes the idea of a simple report. The EDO invites you to spread yourself thin. If you won the Pulitzer Prize but did not attend enough Kiwanis meetings, you might not get a merit rating.

Professor Butterfield wondered if the money is not there for merit, why are we protesting? The Committee to Evaluate Teaching was concerned with this problem. If faculty members wanted to work on teaching, could they be excused from being evaluated for a year? Knoxville does not require an annual one.

Provost Walker said that the Dean’s Council is considering some of the recommendations from this committee now. Although it would address one component, it would not address the whole instrument. Maybe it is time to revisit the EDO issue. It may be better to do that.

Professor Stroud noted that each time we talk, we reexamine an instrument. Any instrument sets forth a formula which is rigidly applied. The simple conference with the department head sounds good, but there is a reason for an instrument and standard because of a basic mistrust between faculty and administrators.

Professor Trimpey asked if the State legislates raises.

Chancellor Obear noted that any employee with a satisfactory rating gets the across-the-board raise.

Professor Trimpey asked if a number of tenured faculty resisted, would that create a merit pool?

Going back to Professor Stroud’s comment, Professor Russell noted that the MBO preceded the EDO. President Boling said that there were too many lazy professors. He wanted each professor to have goals and reach them.

Professor Lorraine called for the question.

The motion failed by voice vote.

New Business

Professor David Wiley thanked Health Services for giving flu shots to faculty and staff. A round of applause followed his public thank you.

Announcements

Professor Martha Butterfield said that although the advertised flu shot days have passed, faculty and staff may still call to schedule a flu shot. Spouses are also eligible.

She also asked if everyone received HMO information. Human Resources has been asked to extend the window for enrollment. Faculty should call Human Resources if they need information. She explained concerns about retirement.

Mr. Dan Webb said that two more meetings concerning the HMO had been scheduled at 1:30 and 3:30 on October 25 in Grote.

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 5:02.

Respectfully submitted,

Sally Young

Secretary

top.gif (189 bytes)