shorttop.jpg (1907 bytes)


September 7, 1995
Signal Mountain Room
University Center

ELECTED MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Bibler, Mary Brabston, Martha Butterfield, Ken Carson, Prem Chopra, Betsy Cook, Neal Coulter, Robert Duffy, Nick Honerkamp, Bruce Hutchinson, Larry Ingle, Phil Kazemersky, Tom Kozubowski, Renée Lorraine, John Lynch, Jim Macomber, Bob Marlowe, Gail Meyer, Anna Panorska, Tom Payne, John Phillips, Verbie Prevost, Bill Prince, Barbara Ray, Katherine Rehyansky, Mike Russell, Joyce Smith, Maria Smith, Kristin Switala, Margaret Trimpey, Sally Young, Shela Van Ness

ELECTED MEMBERS ABSENT: Ahmed Eltom, Shawn Evans, Leroy Fanning, Doug Kingdon, Jim McDonell,

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: Sheila Delacroix, Fred Obear, Grayson Walker

AMONG THE GUESTS PRESENT: Bill Aiken, Deborah Arfken, Michael Bell, Brenda Davis, Dick Gruetzemacher, Joel Harrell, Charles Nelson, Nelda Orth, Greg Sedrick, Henry Spratt, Tim Summerlin, Marilyn Willis

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by President Martha Butterfield at 3:20 p.m.

President Butterfield welcomed members and guests and asked those present to introduce themselves. She announced that Professor Larry Ingle has agreed to serve as parliamentarian after today’s meeting.

Approval of Minutes

Professor Larry Ingle said that he wanted to call attention to the last sentence in paragraph 4 of the Honor Court report in the April 20 minutes. Although he might be out of order to bring it up at this time, he wanted to be sure that the fact that the second part of the charge had not been resolved and could be reopened without putting the students in double jeopardy did not go unnoticed by this year’s Honor Court.

President Butterfield acknowledged that such mention was out of order but agreed that it was important not to forget the unfinished business of last year’s committees. She said that Professor Tom Bibler and the special Honor Court committee would take the matter up again this year.

The minutes of both April 20, 1995 and April 25, 1995 were approved as distributed.

Committee Reports

Professor Ken Carson, Chair of the Committee on Committees, said that two additional pieces of information should be added to the distributed committee list. Professor Gene Van Horn has agreed to be chair of the Honor Court Committee and Professor Mary Chittooran will serve on the Academic Standards Committee. He thanked Professor Greg Sedrick, former chair of the Committee on Committees, for his hard work in getting the list in its current form.

President Butterfield added that Professor Bill Butterfield would be on the Faculty Administrative Relations Committee until September 12. At that time, Professor Fran Bender will take over as chair and a new member will be elected at the September 12 meeting of the full faculty.

Professor Greg Sedrick asked that the report from the Graduate Council be deferred until Dr. Deborah Arfken, Director of Graduate Studies, arrived.

Old Business

President Butterfield asked that the report of the Distance Learning Task Force be deferred until Professor Maria Smith got out of class.

New Business

Two members of the Faculty Council who are in departments which do not have graduate programs need to be elected to fill the vacancies created by Professors Larry Ingle and Robert Duffy. Professor Kristin Switala of Philosophy and Religion and Professor Anna Panorska of Mathematics were nominated. Professor Bob Marlowe moved that we elect the two nominees by acclamation. The motion was seconded by Professor Renée Lorraine and passed unanimously.

Because questions concerning custom publishing have arisen, President Butterfield appointed a committee to study the issue. She has asked the committee to try to have recommendations before the November 15 textbook order deadline. Those appointed to the committee are Gene Ezell (EHLS, Chair), Jeff Waskey (Bookstore), Randall Gray (Graphic Services), Linda Collins (Biology), Larry Ingle (History), Marcia Noe (English), and John Phillips (Philosophy and Religion and Foreign Languages).

Provost Grayson Walker said that the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC) currently has a moratorium on adding graduate programs and some undergraduate programs. The Occupational Therapy proposal will be on the Board of Trustees agenda soon, but first they will do some fine tuning with regard to projected enrollments and costs. The Board may decide to submit it to THEC despite the moratorium.

The Educational Specialist degree program is also in Knoxville. He expects, however, that the moratorium will last at least one year. It is apparently a response to the concern that while we add programs, we do not delete them. The Provost does not agree that this is what happens, but THEC is looking at the issue.

Chancellor Fred Obear said that he was at the THEC meeting when the moratorium was instituted at the suggestion of John Parrish of the Academic Program Inventory Committee. He said that the committee needs to look at low enrollment programs and redundancy. The Chancellor does not expect any exceptions to the moratorium to be made this year.

Professor Larry Ingle asked if the cost of programs was the issue. Chancellor Obear said that cost is an issue, but not the issue.

Provost Walker said that Chancellor Obear had the most up-to-date information about the Metropolitan Hospital acquisition.

Chancellor Obear reported that the Campus Planning Office through Knoxville and our campus planners here are all working with the Realtor and owners to effect the purchase. He believes that we are close to a settlement. The price is nearly agreed upon; however, certain environmental issues remain to be resolved. Chancellor Obear believes that although it would be fine for the University to take care of the small asbestos problems which exist, other clean up should be done by the owners for liability reasons. He hopes to move people between semesters so as not to disrupt departments in the middle of the semester. Assistant Vice Chancellor Richard Brown said that January 1996 is the target date for occupancy.

Graduate Council Report

With the arrival of Dr. Deborah Arfken, Council proceeded to discuss the proposal for a Masters of Science in Environmental Science. Professor Greg Sedrick noted that the proposal had passed unanimously on the first reading but that the Graduate Council had asked for the addition of a few items, such as letters of support from the community. It also passed unanimously on the second reading. He moved approval of the program. Professor Robert Duffy seconded the motion.

Professor Larry Ingle had a concern; he wanted to see the signed and dated cover sheets to see whether departments involved had expressed any concerns. He proposed that President Butterfield rule that we not consider proposals unless they have the cover sheet.

President Butterfield ruled that we did not need to have the cover sheets, but mentioned that she could be overruled.

Professor Nick Honerkamp recalled getting cover sheets with impact statements for curriculum proposals.

Professor Kristin Switala asked if we did not get the cover sheets because the Graduate Council and the Curriculum Committee approved the proposals.

President Butterfield explained that we did not get cover sheets for most items because the impact on other courses was what most people were interested in.

Dean Timothy Summerlin offered to go run off copies of the cover sheet if people wanted them.

Professor Mike Russell also remembers having a cover sheet. Professor Charles Nelson left to run off the cover sheets.

President Butterfield asked if it was the will of the Council to have cover sheets for all proposals.

Professor Shela Van Ness asked if we would even see the proposals if people said no.

President Butterfield said probably not if a dean or other administrator says no, but otherwise yes.

Professor Bibler reminded members that the cover sheet simply says that people have seen the proposal, not necessarily approved it.

Professor Russell said that he was confused. Is the MS in Environmental Science a two-year program? Do they expect to have ten graduates at the end of the second year as the Abstract (page 3 of the proposal) suggests?

Professor Nelson said yes.

Professor Russell said that he would like to know what areas the degree would train people in.

Professor Nelson said that there were three goals: to create people who are knowledgeable about dangerous materials in our environment and ways to correct the problems; to teach people about laws governing environmental toxicity levels; and to create people who can do water and terrestrial testing.

Professor Russell admitted having little knowledge about such programs, but asked where this program fits into the spectrum of similar graduate programs. Do other schools specialize more?

Professor Ingle reiterated that he wanted a cover sheet with dates and other information before making a decision about the proposal.

President Butterfield asked Dr. Arfken if the proposal had been presented at Graduate Council and whether it had passed.

Dr. Arfken replied that it had been presented two times and passed unanimously both times.

Professor Kristin Switala noted that we should take advantage of Dr. Nelson’s presence to ask questions.

Professor Honerkamp agreed; he has no qualms about proceeding without a cover sheet.

Professor John Lynch, who was examining a copy of the cover sheet, said that he did not see from it what other departments were affected.

Professor Nelson said that graduate programs do not have a cover sheet addressing that. The Provost had, however, adopted a policy of having community review of new proposals. Their proposal had undergone such a review. They also sent it to affected departments and concentration areas. They did get feedback even if it is not reported on any cover sheets.

President Butterfield reminded members that the graduate proposal cover sheet is different from the undergraduate one.

Professor Gail Meyer of Chemistry said that although the department had seen a rough draft of the proposal, they had not seen the final draft. She noted that some of the chemistry courses mentioned have not been taught for a number of years.

Professor Kristin Switala asked about the Seminar in Environmental Ethics, ESC 521. Who would teach that?

Professor Nelson said that Professor Pat Bytnar was now attending seminary and will be able to teach the course when she returns. The course was formerly taught by Professor Don Weisbaker before his retirement. Once the Philosophy and Religion Department has faculty to teach it again, the Biology Department will be happy to return the course to them.

Professor John Phillips asked what would happen if the proposal passes Faculty Council and gets approval from THEC but does not get the needed funding.

Professor Nelson responded that they would not teach the program without the money. They have applied to the UC Foundation for funding for the first year. For example, they need $18,000 to fund library acquisitions the first year.

Professor Prem Chopra noted that there is already a Masters in Environmental Engineering program but that the cover sheet does not reflect discussions with the Engineering faculty.

Professor Nelson said that he did not recall any discussions.

Professor Chopra said that he thought they should have had discussions because they could complement each other’s resources.

Dr. Deborah Arfken said that there is not actually a Masters in Environmental Engineering; it is a Masters in Engineering with an environmental concentration.

Professor Nelson noted that Engineering Professor Mike High, who is no longer at UTC, and Professor Bytnar did have discussions concerning the Ph.D. in engineering. He believes that Dr. William Gurley is now the person with whom to have such discussions.

Professor Larry Ingle admitted that he had not read the document as closely as he has some past proposals, but he is concerned about the library resources needed for this degree. He has heard at least one dean say that he will be telling faculty to reduce our periodicals budgets. He recalls that at a faculty meeting last year, faculty voted to have the library funded at the 6% level. He has been told that Masters programs bring in more money, so why do we need to cut the library budget?

Professor Ingle moved to postpone consideration of the proposed Master of Science in Environmental Science degree until we get assurances that the library periodicals budget will not be cut this year. Professor Mike Russell seconded the motion.

President Butterfield asked if Knoxville’s budget was being cut. Chancellor Obear did not know.

Professor Kristin Switala asked if Biology had a source of funding for the needed periodicals.

Professor Nelson said that if they received the requested UC Foundation money, it would cover the first year of the program, but not necessarily go farther than that.

Professor John Lynch noted that environmental science has been a big growth area for the University but it does not seem that they are getting needed budget increases now for what they are doing.

Professor Nelson explained that the MS in Environmental Science was not proposed to get new money; it was proposed for educational and community purposes.

President Butterfield brought attention back to the motion to postpone.

University Librarian Sheila Delacroix said that the library would have to decrease the number of journal subscriptions in the next months, but that all university departments would be involved in the process of deciding what is to be cut. Further, she noted that we do not want the library budget to stay the same; we want it to increase! She noted that Knoxville had agreed to take $400,000 from their continuing obligations budget to keep their library from suffering a cut. This money, however, will cover only this year’s shortfall. Their holdings will still have to be examined, and cuts will be made next year instead.

Professor Nick Honerkamp said he did not know how we would know the answer to question the motion addresses.

Professor Fred Obear noted that we cannot count on the UC Foundation to make up a shortfall in the library budget; their 95-96 budget was approved months ago.

President Butterfield noted that the decision has been made: the budget will be cut.

Provost Grayson Walker said that we might be able to find the funds as Knoxville did, but they are just keeping the wolves away from the door for six months or so. Do we want to spend this money to maintain the library status quo at the expense of other programs? We have not looked at periodical holdings for a long time and probably need to.

Dean Tim Summerlin said that he is against the motion because there has long been strong community support for the Masters in Environmental Science; we now have new faculty who enable us to go forward with this proposal. The proposal is central to the identity of this region and its agencies; many partnerships have already been created. He believes it is critical from an interdisciplinary standpoint.

Professor Mike Bell from the Library explained that the budget amount will not be cut, but that the number of subscriptions will have to be cut because they cost more this year.

Professor Katy Rehyansky encouraged Council to not get hung up on periodicals; she uses many periodicals, but with our new library databases, she can find out what articles are of greatest interest and request them through interlibrary loan.

Professor Honerkamp reiterated that we are not going to get assurance from any source that the periodicals are not going to be cut.

Professor Ingle reinforced his belief that for these reasons, we do need to postpone consideration. Both books and periodicals are getting more expensive. This program will drain resources from an already limited budget.

Professor Maria Smith called the question.

The motion to postpone consideration was defeated.

Professor Gail Meyer asked where the new faculty and laboratories were going to be located.

Professor Nelson said that was still to be decided. They think they may get some room when the Military Science Department leaves. They may also have to double up in existing labs. They are prepared to be adaptable.

Professor Ken Carson wondered how they thought the program could get six graduate assistants.

Professor Nelson said that they did not expect to have that many at first, but hoped to work up to that number. He hoped that their program could spur a consciousness-raising to provide more graduate assistants throughout the campus. He also believes that research grants from external sources may provide partial funding for several of them.

Professor Henry Spratt noted that he had been associated with a regional environmental science masters program that had eighteen assistants, so it can happen.

Professor Carson noted that the Industrial/Organizational Psychology program had more students than the Environmental Science program projected, and they have only three-and-a-half assistantships; it is not enough. He fears that psychology will lose out if biology gets what they want.

Professor Mike Russell said that he is concerned about Professor Meyer’s comment that chemistry has not taught some of the courses for a long time. Is he right that there is only one full-time geographer here?

Professor Nelson noted that one of the faculty lines requested is for a toxicologist; that person could teach the environmental chemistry courses. Although the geography courses are currently housed in the Geography Department, many biologists have knowledge of this area. He said that Professor Robert Litchford could easily teach this course.

Professor Prem Chopra supports the proposal but has concerns; he would like to have had the engineering dean sign off. He notes that the Senior Engineering Design Project this year is to design an environmentally compatible gazebo for the Challenger Center. He would like to see the programs integrated. Further, he suggested that in addition to being attractive to the biology and other graduates noted on pages 29-30 of the proposal, it would be attractive to engineering graduates. He thought mentioning the engineering graduates would add strength to the proposal.

Professor Greg Sedrick agreed with Professor Chopra. He noted that Professor Gurley is on Graduate Council, which approved the proposal.

Professor Lynch says that he does not have a sense that there has been good discussion of the proposal. If we are going to approve it, we should know about the resources.

Professor Nelson said there was no desire on his part to circumvent anyone. When the Head of the Chemistry Department saw the proposal, he raised the question about who would teach the courses in question and was satisfied with the answer.

Professor Meyer said that students desiring to enter the program without the appropriate undergraduate prerequisites would strain the Chemistry Department’s resources; they already have too few drawers for student equipment in laboratories.

Professor Ingle reminded Professor Nelson that he had said he did not want to mount the program until it was fully funded. He wondered if they expected to have the library sources and two new faculty by the Fall of 1996.

Professor Nelson said yes, he expected to have them; but finding two new faculty members on short notice might be difficult. If they do not get the money, however, they cannot start the program. The space, he hopes, will be available within the next five years.

Professor Ingle asked if much of the proposal was based on hopes and anticipation.

Professor Nelson responded, "Yes."

The motion to approve the Master of Science in Environmental Science passed 24-3-3.

More New Business

Ms. Brenda Davis reported that we have a head count of 8,331, an all-time high. This represents an increase in both undergraduate and graduate students. She asked Dr. Richard Gruetzemacher to supply some further statistics.

Dr. Gruetzemacher commented that he had more statistics than anyone would care to listen to at the late hour, but he explained that the higher enrollment would impact formula funding positively. He also reported significant increases in minority enrollment; in fact, we have already reached our minority goal at the graduate level.

Mr. Joe Harrell, Director of Financial Aid, reported on problems involving students who have loans being dropped for non-payment of fees. He said that his office and Ralph Moser’s office are working together to try to make fee payment work more smoothly by keeping students better informed.

Ms. Nelda Orth from the Bursar’s Office said that students are informed at each step when and where they should make their fee payment or process their fee receipt (for those who have tuition waivers). Students get a letter about four weeks before classes start telling them when to pay and informing them who to call if there are problems or if they need to defer payment. If students register late, they are given flyers with all the needed information, including the fact that they must process their waiver and receive a validated fee receipt.

Mr. Harrell said that they hoped to add fee payment days so that students can pay fees earlier.

Professor Margaret Trimpey asked if the scholarship money arrived before fees were due.

Mr. Harrell said not always. If his office knows that the funds are forthcoming, they give the students an extension. Sometimes, however, these students forget to process their waivers, even though their extension letter tells them to do it.

Professor Gail Meyer asked if this meant that we could terminate students for non-payment earlier than the second day of classes. She recalls that Faculty Council voted to do this several years ago. Did we need another motion about this matter?

Ms. Orth said that it could be done before the first day of class. Mr. Harrell said that they were working on the problem and did not need another motion at this time.

President Butterfield noted that summer school presents a special problem.

Because of the lateness of the hour, President Butterfield asked that Professor Maria Smith’s report on Distance Learning be postponed until the September 21 meeting. She said that the Distance Learning Standards from the Graduate Council and The University of Tennessee Distance Education Policies would be distributed with the materials for the next meeting.

She also reported that the City of Chattanooga has been contacted about painting the curbs along the newly repaved Vine Street to correct the dangerous parking problems in that area. For our amusement, she noted that the City employs two people for these projects—one to mark the places where the paint should go and one to do the painting. Because the painter is on vacation, the project will be completed next week.

She also ruled that from this day forward, proposals from the Graduate Council and Curriculum Committee would be submitted to Faculty Council with cover sheets.

Professor Robert Duffy questioned whether the cover sheet was an adequate instrument. President Butterfield said that Professor Greg Sedrick was already taking suggested changes back to the Graduate Council.

Council was agreeable to this ruling.

President Butterfield reminded members to return their envelopes.


The meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Sally Young


top.gif (189 bytes)