Minutes of Faculty Senate meeting

21 April 2006, SC214

Senators present: Knipp, Hicks, Grau, Cartwright, Schwarze, Kidd, Adamitis, Whiting, Breese, Underwood, Doughty (arrived at 4:00), Vachris (arrived at 4:00), Sellars (arrived at 4:05)
Senators absent: Guajardo, Wymer
  1. The meeting was called to order at 3:06.
  2. Introduction of guests
  3. President Schwarze acknowledged the electronic approval of the minutes for the 3/17 meeting of the Senate, and the Senate unanimously approved the minutes of the 3/21/06 meeting of the general faculty.
  4. Professors Pam Pringle and Sally Sledge made a presentation about their proposal for having faculty members sign the students' honor code at the same ceremony in which the incoming freshmen do so. At a recent conference of the Center for Academic Integrity, Pringle and Sledge learned about how we teach and model the characteristics of integrity. Students analyze the honor code and interpret that the code only applies to them. This leads to the suggestion of having the faculty sign the honor code. Doughty pointed out that the Senate recently voted overwhelmingly (See VII.A of the minutes of the 1/20/06 meeting.) to approve the recommendation by the CLAS chairs to include in the CNU Handbook the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) statement on professional ethics (available: www.aaup.org/statements/Redbook/Rbethics.htm), verbiage which is generally regarded as being a higher standard than the honor code for the students. If this verbiage is included in the handbook, then all faculty must agree to it when signing their contracts. If the handbook sets a higher standard than the honor code, then there is no need for the faculty members to sign the students' honor code. For this reason, the sense of the Senate was to recommend against the proposal to have faculty members sign the students' honor code at the convocation ceremony. However, it would make sense for faculty to trumpet the fact that they adhere to the AAUP standards.
  5. President's report
    1. The academic calendar will remain as is for 2006-07 (due to previously scheduled events during "Getting Started" week), but "reading days" and a Sunday graduation will be instituted. Both semesters will be shifted one week later in 2007 - 08 as an experiment, and in early fall 2006 a Senate committee (chaired by Sellars) will make recommendations about permanent shifts in the calendar. This committee will be fully constituted in part VII.D of this meeting.
    2. The Provost was persuaded by arguments made by the Senate Executive Committee (SEC) to adjust his position on whether or not chairs of the Liberal Learning Council (LLC) and the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) should have tenure, and now he has agreed with the Senate's recommendations that those chairs should be tenured (SEC meeting 3/27); in addition, the SEC and Provost co-authored at the same meeting new Handbook language regarding restricted positions:
      "Restricted appointments are one-academic-year appointments. Restricted appointments have no continuing status, but a new appointment may be made by the provost, acting upon the recommendation of the dean and the department chair. These appointments are typically made to replace a faculty member on leave; to fill a position of doubtful permanency; to allow for an extended period of recruitment for a probationary appointment; or to employ visiting faculty and therefore are not normally indefinitely renewed. Any position which has been filled by a restricted appointee or appointees for six consecutive years or more will be reviewed for purposes of appointing a probationary appointee to the position. Restricted appointments provide fringe benefits."
      (Ed. note: see http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/restricted.rtf for a summary of previous discussions about this issue.)
    3. Police will no longer be unlocking car doors.
    4. Budget-revenue is "right on target" per CNU Chief-of-Staff Cindi Perry, but no extra revenues (usually derived from higher-than-expected enrollment projections-we used last year's figure, which was on target). The tightness of spring budgets is something we should plan to expect. The provost is continuing to approve conference travel for faculty who have had papers accepted for presentation; for others, he is requiring that reimbursement be held until the new fiscal year begins. Equipment purchases have been frozen, but normal departmental operating expenses (supply purchase, etc.) may continue.
    5. Faculty may continue to sell unsolicited desk copies of textbooks to used book vendors without violating the new state law.
    6. Schwarze reminded faculty to turn in grades on time; thousands of grades are not filed by the Banner deadline, requiring the registrar's office and the deans' offices to track these faculty and to input manually these grades. This is ineffective and wasteful; please make sure to file grades by the deadline.
    7. Reminder of General Faculty meeting on Tuesday 4/25/06.
    8. Review of Senate achievements (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/yearend.doc)
  6. Committee reports
    1. Grau: results of Senate Elections (each administered by the Senator whose name is in parentheses, below)
      1. School of Business (Grau): Michelle Vachris and Bob Hasbrouck
      2. Science and Technology (Underwood): Gary Whiting and Ming Zhang
      3. Social Science and Professional Studies (Hicks): Eric Duskin and Tim Marshall
      4. Arts and Humanities (Kidd): Steven Breese and Jean Filetti
      Committee elections will be completed in the next week or so. Note that all committee chairs should convene their committees this semester in order to conduct chair elections, if their bodies are fully constituted. Grau will try to fix some rotation problems (eg, committee members from the same academic area ending their terms in the same year).
    2. The SEC recently formed a committee of the following Senators for the purpose of creating a slate of nominees for the 2006 - 07 Senate Executive Committee: Hicks (chair), Doughty, Adamitis, and Kidd.
    3. Hicks presented the slate of nominees for 2006-07 Senate Executive Committee:
      1. president: Schwarze
      2. vice president: Whiting
      3. secretary: Knipp
      4. (two) "at-large" members: Vachris and Duskin
    4. Report from today's meetings of the Board of Visitors' (BoV):
      The meetings of the Academic Affairs and Student Life subcommittees were cancelled. The rates for tuition, fees, room, and board will increase by 9.3% and 6% for in-state and out-of-state students, respectively, for 2006 - 07. (The dollar amount of the increase will be the same, for both populations.) In terms of additional revenues, the increase in the tuition will generate $1.6 million, and that for the comprehensive fee will generate $1.3 million. (For a detailed list of the tuition and fees, see the posting on the CNU Comptroller's webpage.) Presently, it seems that Virginia will legislate a 3.3% increase in faculty salaries, and CNU may increase this to 4.5%. CNU's new student union will open in July 2006. Some stuff from old library will move to the (old) student center.
    5. Whiting: update on activities of Classroom Design Working Group
      The provost wants that CNU's PKAL group constitute a smaller working group for the purpose of providing input to the Provost and to Executive Vice President Bill Brauer. Some upcoming questions which need to be answered are as follows:
      • How should departments be grouped together in the buildings?
      • Should different departments reside on different floors?
      We'll issue a Request for Proposals for architects as soon as the budget is passed. Ground will be broken approximately one year after hiring an architect. PKAL is presently soliciting departments for their mission statements, for communicating to architects. The renovations of Gosnold Hall are still on target, schedule-wise. Eventually, we may anticipate a lawn running continuously from the administration building to the Potomac River residence hall.
    6. Knipp provided an update from the Liberal Learning Council.
      1. There is a possibility that the writing-intensive requirement may be reduced from two courses to one.
        (Ed. note: It has since been learned that this report is substantially premature.)
        The Provost has indicated he will also seek the counsel of the UCC on this matter before making any changes, if he does continue to pursue this issue.
      2. For a fairly complete list of courses in the six different Areas of Inquiry (AoI), see http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/AoI.xls. (This list includes some courses which are still "in the pipeline".) A summary is tabulated below.
        Area of Inquiry100 - 299300 - 499total
        Creative Expressions161632
        Formal and Informal Reasoning91322
        Global and Multicultural Perspectives102333
        Identities, Institutions, and Society113041
        Investigating the Natural World
        (not including ten lab courses)
        Western Traditions171835
    7. Schwarze (for Jay Paul): proposal from Academic Advising Committee (AACo)
      AACo has formulated a proposal (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/aac.doc) for the creation of two levels of "Master Advisors", who will serve as leaders in the effort to provide academic advising in the various majors. Faculty members interested in serving in this capacity will fill out a contract, be approved by their department chairs and by the director of the Academic Advising Center (AAC), advise 30 students each semester, and attend training sessions regularly. This responsibility will not carry any release time or remuneration, but it will be regarded as a level of service to CNU comparable to that of serving as either a member of or as the chair of a major university committee. In subsequent discussions, Senators pointed out a couple of problems with the proposal:
      • It seems illogical to specify a number of advisees per adviser, for the case of a faculty member in a department which has either very many or very few students who are majoring in that department.
      • It is feared that the requirements of the "Master Advisor" designation may be sufficiently onerous to dissuade potential advisors from participating.
      The recommendation passed with a vote of five in favor (Whiting, Grau, Adamitis, Breese, Cartwight), two opposed (Hicks, Kidd), and two abstentions (Knipp, Underwood).
  7. Old business
    1. Second reading on Breese's report reviewing chairs' workload (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/chair.html):
      Despite chairs' summer obligations ("Setting Sail" activities, departmental annual report, miscellaneous meetings, etc.), Breese's committee decided not to recommend that all chair contracts be extended beyond the usual 9-month period. The purpose of this decision is to allow chairs to control over their summer, as professors. The Senate recommended the following changes in the various recommendations:
      • #2: Insert "full time instructional" after "fifteen", and change "assigned" to "granted".
      • #3: Change "10%" to "1/9" (≈ 11.11%), to reflect the expectation that chairs provide to CNU approximately one month of labor during the summer break.
      • #4:
        • 2nd bullet:
          In order to define "leadership", footnote 4 (from later in the document) should be transferred to and appended to this, after the (inserted) word "since".
        • 3rd bullet:
          To this, footnote 5 ("scholarship and service should not not be less than 10%") should be transferred, and changed to "scholarship should not be less than 10%, and service should not be less than 20%".
      The committee's recommendations, as amended, were passed unanimously by the Senate.
      Ed. note: for documentation which reflects these amendments, see http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/chairsummarynew.doc and http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/chairnew.doc.
    2. Second reading on recommendations for inception of CNU teaching awards (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/TeachAward.doc)
      The Senate unanimously voted to approve this and to send this to the provost, who may decide to implement it himself.
    3. Second reading on resolution for shift to 3 - 4 teaching load (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/resolutions/5.doc)
      Adamitis presented her subcommittee's findings on the teaching loads at an extensive number of "aspirant peer" institutions (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/teachingloads.doc). The loads at these institutions are almost all lower than CNU's present 4 - 4 load. The following three minor friendly amendments to the resolution were accepted:
      • remove "and then again in 2010-2012"
      • change "a proposal that will allow the first" to "several models, one of which will all the"
      • change "Provost Summerville's" to "the"
      The resolution, as amended, passed unanimously.
    4. Sellars' committee to draft recommendations on the academic calendar for the 2008 - 09 year and beyond was expanded to include Vachris, Knipp, Filetti, and an SGA representative to be named later. This recommendation will - Senate approval permitting - be put to a vote of the General Faculty at their meeting near the end of the fall 2006.
  8. New business
    1. review of recommendations from UCC
      1. AoI courses (complete year-to-date listing of courses available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/ucc11_4.html)
        1. IIS: Guajardo and Adamitis
          COMM 430, ENGL 314, ENGL 315, PSYC 202, ANTH 203, COMM 211, HIST 317, HIST 344
        2. GMP: Underwood
          MUSC 224, ENGL 330/SOCL 330/ANTH 330
        3. CXP: Breese
          FNAR 128, FNAR 379, MUSC 315
        4. WST: Knipp
        All courses passed unanimously.
      2. program changes
        1. BS in Computer Foundations
          1. Computer Science
          2. Applied Physics
        2. Computer Engineering
        3. Majors in Fine Art and Art History (revised for clarity at request of UCC)
          1. Studio Art
          2. Art History
        4. BS in Chemistry
        All program changes were only minor, and these passed unanimously.
    2. Professor Scott Pollard: ad hoc committee on evaluation and assessment of faculty
      Pollard cochairs this committee, which also consists of Dorothy Doolittle (co-chair), Eric Duskin, Anton Siochi, Lori Underwood, Pete Carlson, Diane Catanzero, Ron Mollick, Brian Bradie, Tanya Sweet, Elaine Miller, and Pam Pringle. Pollard presented some recommendations (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/FacEvalPolicy.doc and http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/FacEvalMatrix.xls), and he asserted that the present system for evaluation and assessment is "broken". No components of it (except for IDEA) are quantitative. This committee has used Raoul Arreola's book Developing a Comprehensive Faculty Evaluation System as a manual for fixing CNU's sytem. This philosophy revolves around "controlled subjectivity", which would lead to a single number for each faculty member, in a manner similar to that in which students receive a single grade for a course at the end of the semester. In order to remove intangibles from the equation, various items (e.g., "publish review of book, article") would receive specific point values, and faculty members would negotiate with chairs and deans about the percentages, within certain limits, attributed to the categories of "instruction", "professional development", and "service". Senator Whiting suggested that the "professional development" component be allowed to reach 50% for those faculty members receiving 50% of their salaries from external agencies, owing to the fact that those agencies want that a corresponding amount of scholarship activity be generated. There will need to be some revisions to CNU's Eval-4 form ("Departmental Standards and Procedures for Faculty Evaluations"), and we will need to determine an easy way to transfer information from an Eval-6 form to the type of matrix suggested by Pollard's committee.
    3. Schwarze presented the plan from the First Year Initiatives Committee for the proposed "Academic Day", on the Thursday of "Getting Started" week (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/gettingstarted2.doc). On this day there will be a need for faculty members to attend the Deans' presentation on "Liberal Learning and Student Success", for some faculty members to lead break-out sessions on "Success in College", and for other faculty members to lead small-group discussions about the common reading, in addition for a need for some faculty members to lead Honor-Code case studies, as has been done in previous years.
    4. It will now become possible for departmental distinction to appear on the transcript. A current issue is whether departmental requirements for "graduation with distinction" be made to satisfy CNU-wide guidelines (e.g., a minimum GPA) and, if so, what those campus-wide guidelines should be. The CLAS chairs has recommended that these issues be studied by the Undergraduate Degrees Committee.
    5. Changes to Faculty Development Grant process:
      This subcommittee (Adamitis, Guajardo, Whiting) has some recommendations which are listed below and which will get finalized at the Senate's 5/13/06 meeting.
      1. Proposal Evaluation Form:
        change to item 1(d) (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/facdevgrant/eval.doc)
      2. information to include in application package (available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/misc/facdevgrant/applic.doc)
        • insertion of "Type of Project", near the beginning
        • amplification of wording in II.A to include "Please list."
        • II.D: insert an instruction to itemize and to justify expenses
        • II.E: change "Faculty Development Grants" to "CNU Grants"
      3. student development grants
        (This is discussed in the next item.)
    6. Coordination of funding for student research
      In a recent meeting with CNU's president and provost, it became clear that there exist multiple sources of CNU money available to fund student research, and the process of procuring this money can be a bit confusing for students. The sense of the Senate is that CNU's Undergraduate and Graduate Research Council should be tasked with identifying these sources and with deciding how to appropriate the funds.
    7. Consideration of deans' recommendations for nominations (to SCHEV) for Outstanding Faculty Award In order to allow for more careful deliberation, the Senate voted unanimously to commit this. A recommendation will be forthcoming from a committee consisting of Kidd (chair), Vachris, Underwood, and Breese. The Senate will vote on this recommendation at its next meeting, scheduled to take place in the Freeman Center at 9 AM on 5/13, ie immediately prior to commencement.
      Ed. note: The meeting location will be the upstairs conference room.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:30.

Ed. note: Immediately afterwards was called a meeting of the 2006 - 07 Senate (minutes available: http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/06_07/minutes/4_21_06.html), for the sole purpose of electing officers.

Submitted by Peter Knipp, secretary of the Faculty Senate

If you are viewing a static version of this document, see http://facultysenate.cnu.edu/05_06/minutes/4_21.html for the online version.