April 5, 2001                                                               Signal Mountain Room                                                                                                          University Center


Elected Members Present:                Rob Bailey, Tom Bibler, Beth Craig, Linda Cundiff, Susan Davidson, Joe Dumas, Fritz Efaw, Steve Eskildsen, Diane Farone, Phil Giffin, Ron Goulet, Lee Harris, Jim Hiestand, Michael Jones, Claire McCullough, Gail Meyer, Sarla Murgai, Burch Oglesby, Oralia Preble-Niemi, Verbie Prevost, Ed Rozema, Mike Russell, Valerie Rutledge, Marsha Scheidt, Ken Smith, Mac Smotherman, Chris Stuart, John Trimpey, Steve Underwood, Judith Wakim


Elected Members Absent:                 Roland Carter, Dawn Ford, Zibin Guo, Charles Knight, Mike Long, Irene Loomis, John Mies


Ex-Officio Members Present:           Bill Berry, Richard Brown, Sheila Delacroix, Francis Gross


Among the Guests Present:              Deborah Arfken, Herb Burhenn, Leroy Fanning,

Dick Gruetzemacher, Bruce Hutchinson, Lanny

Janeksela, Ted Miller, Deborah Parker, Barbara

Ray, Cheryl Robinson, Mary Tanner, Pam Taylor,

Randy Walker


Call to Order:

President John Trimpey called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.


Approval of the Minutes of March 1, 2001

The minutes were approved as written, copied, stapled and distributed.


Report from the Honor Court

Professor Barbara Norwood, chair, reported she was here to clear up any confusion on

Honor Court procedure. She referred the Council to the Faculty Handbook, chapter 5,

page 6 of 10 for clarification. Recent issues brought before the Honor Court have been

students copying from one anther and downloading papers from the Internet.

Professor Norwood cautioned faculty to remember to inform students

of the Honor Court procedure and particularly the appeal process. If faculty decide to

handle the violation, they still need to submit a report to Student Development so that if

future issues of cheating occur involving this student in other courses, there will be a

record. Professor Norwood recommended that faculty bring the issues to Honor

Court along with sufficient documentation and evidence. The Honor Court is made up of

students and faculty. Professor Norwood commented that the students on the committee

were sometimes more harsh than the faculty in rendering judgement.


Report from the Curriculum Committee

Professor Bruce Hutchinson began by thanking his committee members for their hard work this past year. He commented that they had reviewed a record number of proposals this year. The student representative, Peter, has not only attended every meeting this year but also contributed significantly.

When curriculum proposals come to this Council from the committee unanimously approved, it is not a rubber stamp to this Council. What the Council sees is the end product after a review by the committee and revisions when needed.

After his opening remarks, Professor Hutchinson presented a stack of proposals for Faculty Council approval.

Professor Gail Meyer had a question about the Food & Nutrition chemistry requirement on pg. 3 of that proposal, second option, which was answered to her satisfaction.

Professor Ed Rozema asked about Math 131- Why was it chosen? The faculty chose this particular math because it is a required basic course as well as a SACS requirement.

Proposals passed 24-0-0.


Report from the Graduate School

Professor Barbara Ray submitted 5 proposals for approval. The athletic training worksite proposal has been approved as far as curriculum. Final approval is pending upon legal decision having to do with an administrative issue.

Provost Berry responded that we need to look at this as a purely curriculum vote – we cannot advertise or promote the program before the legal issue has been decided.

President Trimpey asked the Council how do they want to approach this? The options are: Is it a good proposal? Do we want to reject the proposal? We can accept without the legal issue and go on the assumption that nothing illegal will be done. 

Professor Joe Dumas – Where are the notes in the proposals where it says, "see notes"?

President Trimpey noted that his copies also do not have any notes attached.

Professor Deborah Arfken – The notes are referring to editorial comments as the proposals are being reviewed and revised before the approval process. To prevent confusion in the future, she will not put "see notes" on the cover sheet anymore.

Professor Sheila Delacroix – My comments are related to resources; documentation to show that from the beginning I stated that there were no resources or limited resources for this curriculum proposal – I will add a sheet outlining my concerns to future proposals. Just because a proposal is approved, the resources do not magically appear in the library.

President Trimpey – If we don’t have the resources on the front end and it doesn't appear we will have the resources, we should reconsider before approving.

A comment was made that perhaps departments should allocate funds in their budget to getting the resources when they want to implement new programs or courses.

Professor Gail Meyer – I noticed that on the athletic training proposal Randy Walker has signed off on it.

Professor Randy Walker – This has to do with the legal issue.

Professor Mike Russell - Why did the Provost not approve the EdS proposal? He was instructed to read "the notes".

The motion carried to approve the proposals 26-0-0.


Administrative Report


Dr. Berry began his report with news from SACS! (surprise) We have received the written recommendations from SACS as of the end of last week. This draft is for factual correction only. The report has been farmed out to the appropriate persons to respond to the correction of factual error only. We are also responding to the areas of concern we heard in the exit -  documentation again is a big issue we must address – themes of the report are documentation; outcomes assessment; budget must be tied to the mission statement; budget hearings are addressing this; we are doing what we can to respond but we are not out of the woods yet; must get it right; we are pressed for time due to this being the end of the semester.


Summer school budgets have been a big concern for many years. Dr. Gross, Dr. Gruetzemacher, Vice Chancellor Richard Brown, Assistant Vice Chancellor  Debbie Parker, have been working on this to try and find ways for us to expand this program. They will have a report momentarily.


Metro College – Dr. Gilley has approved planning monies for this; President Trimpey chairs the committee and we have a consultant to assist us in this endeavor from Youngstown State University, Youngstown, Ohio, Dr. Les Cochran.

Dr. Les Cochran – We have met with 50-60 individuals from the campus and the community and will try to pull the ideas together by June 15 in a report to President Gilley. This will initially be a revenue neutral endeavor. A draft of the mission statement has been developed. A vision statement is also being developed to show how the program will function and what programs it will provide. Goals are being developed with specific objectives to be met and a timetable on how this will be done. Emphasis will be on degree completion programs; have met with people who are having difficulty completing their degrees due to work requirements; may send faculty to the site; faculty may teach in teams when delivering the courses on site; this is a delivery process.

President Trimpey – This will not lose money, it might even make money. No department's budget is getting raided; it is with gift money specified for this purpose. No separate faculty will be hired and all courses that are new or changed will go thru the curriculum process; this is about delivery, doing what we already do but getting to a different population and with more visibility.

Professor Russell – We have tried this before and enrollment fizzled. Will there be web site delivery? How will this affect our technology services and support?

Dr. Les Cochran – It is in the proposal but has not been addressed yet.

Provost Berry – 3 colleges have already submitted proposals to do online courses; it is possible that some of this money will be used for this, but not sure at this time.

President Trimpey – In the past, if enrollments dropped, the classes were dropped; classes were closed. If we do this Metro College, there is money to support this; faculty performance will be evaluated differently; all is being discussed.

Dr. Les Cochran – I will recommend a review on an average of every 2 years, 5 years, etc so that when the money runs out, we know how it has been spent; review of continuing education so we will know who needs to be retained, etc.

Professor Russell – I like the idea due to we need to reach our goal of 10,000 students; hope this will be spread around and not be dumped only on the non-tenured people.

Dr. Les Cochran – Teaching on Saturdays is not necessarily going to be part of the delivery; we need to determine the needs of adult learners in the community.

Provost Berry – This money allows us to do some things at a loss for a limited period of time to determine if there is a constituency or not; are we going to be around for people to finish their degrees in this manner?

Dr. Les Cochran – This is a critical process; one Human Resource person of a local company knew of at least 100 people that had 60-100 credit hours but none were pursuing degrees, company time would be allocated for these people to attend, would include other companies if needed to make up the numbers for a course to meet. Blue Cross Blue Shield also expressed interest due to their people at the associate degree level who need to progress, also need help with technology; they feel they need university expertise to develop people skills, technology, degree completion; may require partnering with Chattanooga State. A lot of opportunity is falling through the cracks because the 2 institutions don’t communicate or cooperate; don’t need to duplicate services but would be helpful to work together.

Provost Berry – This is about access, applied research in the community; technology incubator; coordinating of technology; experiential learning; this is a work in progress; hopefully we will have an update before the summer break.

President Trimpey – We'd like to keep the faculty updated over the summer.


The following is an abbreviated version of the report given by Dr. Francis Gross & Dr. Richard Gruetzemacher on the summer school budget. 

Dr. Gruetzemacher - Expenses usually exceed budget – shortfall is made up in salary savings at the end of the fiscal year; not wise but it works; this year there are not salary savings to take care of the shortfall and this will impact summer school. This resulted in deans and department heads being reluctant to offer summer courses. Student fees is the main funding source for summer school; THEC funding formula plays a small role; there needs to be an incentive approach to summer school, an entrepreneurial approach to attract new students to the university. If we increase revenue generated by fees, a higher proportion of this revenue could be returned to the academic programs and colleges so they can offer additional summer school programs.

Dr. Gross – We needed to have a plan that was tied to revenue; a plan that would tie into credit hour production. We started with summer school budgets from last year. We are proposing that this summer, 2001, that anytime a college exceeds this existing base, which is last summer, they will get an increase. The increase will come in 2 steps: the first step will be in July based on enrollment and credit hour production. The increase will be equal to the increase in the credit hour production over last summer at the average rate per credit hour calculated by last summer’s credit hour base budget. Likewise, colleges will receive budget reductions if credit hour production falls below base. In September, there will be another increase. The bonus will be calculated upon what additional fees this extra credit hour production in July, brought in. This will change the base budget from year to year for summer school. As fees collected increases, the budget will increase. Colleges have to be careful that summer school enrollment increases do not affect fall enrollments. Advantages are that the colleges will have an incentive to grow and increase their budget base from year to year.


(Needless to say, numerous comments and questions followed. The following is a feeble attempt to capture some of those missives. The secretary apologizes for any omissions.)


Professor Ed Rozema - We were told to cut course offerings during the first summer session so how will this affect our budget?

Dr. Francis Gross – We should know by July 1 what the initial summer enrollment will be. And based on that you will get an additional summer school budget adjustment.

Professor Herb Burhenn – What will be done with the surplus? Summer school will already be budgeted?

Dr. Gross – It will be spent! The first year will be in a sense a guessing game.

Professor Burhenn – It looks good on paper; but I see problems due to cuts in recent summer school course offerings.

Professor Jim Hiestand – Is the money that will be accrued only for summer school use?

Dr. Gross – That is up to the college.

Professor Russell – If you don’t have courses available to students during the summer, they may drop out.

Professor Meyer – It's unfair to compare last summer to this summer; we can only teach 4 out of 5 courses in our college; some have had their budgets slashed due to courses not being offered. It's too late to add courses for this summer. Therefore we will not show an increase this year. That means we will be penalized for the next year.

Provost Berry – We will see if we can get a better basis and perhaps go back further to formulate a basis for this plan.

Professor Russell – This point goes without saying that if the system is changed, morale will be affected because salaries are already low; many depend on summer school for salary supplement. I think we need to be really careful in making such a change.

Professor Burhenn – Do not feel that this budget is representative; we are taking a step backwards before we make any progress.

Dr. Gross - This plan is not carved in stone. There needs to be additional discussion and planning. This is just the concept we wanted to share with you at this time.

Provost Berry – If we do grow; it will increase opportunities for those that want to teach.

Professor Rozema – If we don’t offer the courses, there's another school in town that will. So when you are checking enrollment for here in the summer, you should check enrollments at Chattanooga State and other schools as well.

Professor Russell – What have summer school enrollments been over the last 5 years?

Professor Burhenn – Summer school enrollment has been flat over the last 5 years.

President Trimpey – We need more time to discuss this. Have deans seen the summer school budget? Was budget and economic status committee involved in any of these discussions?

Provost Berry – The deans have been told there was the same amount of money this year for summer school as last year.

Vice Chancellor Brown – We saw this as an opportunity; budgets have vacillated over the last several years; this was an attempt to expand the course offerings; regret that we brought it so late to the council. We have not had an opportunity to discuss this with the Council of Deans or the Budget and Economic Status committee. This requires more discussion.

Professor Efaw – How is this entrepreneurial?

Richard Brown - This encourages colleges to offer more courses, to invite more students to participate in the summer school program.

Professor Efaw – I don’t see how this is going to do what you say it will do.

President Trimpey – It is a function on how well you schedule. You get more students, you get more money.


Vice Chancellor Richard Brown

No report.


Old Business

(Since the tape ran out at this point, the following is based on unintelligible typing with errors and weary recollection.)


Professor Hiestand apparently had no chalk in his classroom one day and stole from Professor Mike Russell, the chalk connoisseur.

Professor Russell replied that the chalk had indeed been exchanged in some buildings and was of better quality. He had also received 4 samples of chalk and was willing to share his supply with anyone.

Vice Chancellor Brown replied that we now had the best chalk around.

Professor Ken Smith – Reported that a philosophy student named Michael was almost killed in the crosswalk today. What more can be done to prevent a tragedy from happening? Similar incidents occur on a daily basis.

Vice Chancellor Brown – We will get radar in the crosswalk and write tickets.


New Business

Professor Russell asked what will happen when 870 parking spaces are eliminated with the new math building going up?

Vice Chancellor Brown commented that the parking would be handled in phases. There will be a shuttle service running from Engle Stadium that will run every 6 minutes. This will connect to the downtown shuttle. Engle Stadium has 2,000 parking spaces available. Carta is partnering with us in this.

Professor Mac Smotherman – What about parking availability for the fine art series? Where will these people park? Will there be a covered walkway between the library and the fine arts center?

Vice Chancellor Brown – Parking will be shifted to another area that will be adjacent to the fine arts center; evening shuttles may be instituted for evening events at the fine arts center. We are in the process of acquiring property along McCallie for parking.

Professor Hiestand – When will the shuttle start?

Vice Chancellor Brown – Early August hopefully; waiting on funding and an agreement; will put the information on the web.






Professor Russell - With a growing sense of dread as final exams approach I move that we adjourn.

The meeting adjourned at 4:48 p.m.


Wearily submitted,



Susan Davidson

Faculty Council Secretary