Faculty Senate Meeting
April 17, 2012
2:00 p.m. EB 162
Meeting called to order at 2:00 p.m.
Chairman, Secretary, and Quorum were present.
Attendance: 2012 04 Faculty Senate Attendance
March 20, 2012 minutes approved
i. Thanks again for all your hard work.
ii. BOG report: Faculty Workload
o Suzanne Ortega did a fabulous job educating the BOG regarding everything that the faculty actually do: research, teaching, and service.
o More timely reporting of workload
o More specific regarding research and service, re: workloads and reductions
o Report on performance funding
o Move from growth- to performance-based model.
o Appears to be a good model for UNCW
o Senate Bill 575: Give supervision over SPA employees to BOG
o This is something that the community colleges already do.
o Please refer to BOG policy. I don't believe that it hurts staff's rights.
o Reminders about Installation events, and encouragement to participate in Commencement.
President of the Senate Lugo.
i. Faculty Assembly update
o Academics First – Highlights of workgroup discussion on April 26 (Yield to R. Burt).
§ Background initiative that came out of Faculty Assembly
o Changes in two general areas: 1. general minimum admission requirements; 2. academic policies developed by faculty on individual campuses.
o Committee tasked with forming general guidelines that focused on admission requirements and that would then be customized by the individual campuses.
o Next phase focuses on academic policies
o Survey of Provosts conducted shows general agreement regarding point #1, and a wide range on point #2.
o Process will be gradual, and there should be plenty of time for campuses to respond to any possible impositions from above.
o Question from Provost Barlow: Now that the champion, Sandy Gravett, is leaving her post, are there others looking to champion Academics First?
o Response: Yes, many in General Administration.
o Why is this seen as beneficial?
o Public perception is that the UNC system is capricious.
o Attempt to establish baseline for comparative purposes regarding retention rates.
§ Students can repeat a course they passed with D± only once.
§ Both courses count as attempted hours in GPA
§ Students can repeat a course with an F until they pass
§ Faculty should be involved in "intervention contracts"
§ Grade replacement not permitted
§ W's limited to three allowed until the last day of classes
o Performance-based model:
§ Seven items prescribed by GA
§ Three to be negotiated. Provost working with a committee.
§ One critique: the performance-based models don't measure quality of education, but rather focus on quantitative methods.
§ Hope items addressing quality can be included as one or more of the three items to be negotiated.
ii. Ad-Hoc RTP committee formed
o Tasked with providing a report with actionable items by March-April 2013
iii. Special order of the day: SACS update (Lugo yields to Posey)
o Key timeline points: QEP proposal due January 2013. Onsite review 19-21 March 2013.
The University Studies committee offers the following motion
o Recommendations for Explorations Beyond the Classroom and Thematic Transdisciplinary Clusters, and catalogue copy to finalize phase II implementation of US (this motion follows up on Senate motion 2011-09-M05).
Motion from CSB for a waiver from Thematic Transdiscplinary Clusters for
Cameron students who enroll in a second option within the school.
Motion from CSC for a waiver from Thematic Transdisciplinary Clusters for
majors who opt for the Digital Arts or Business Concentration.
Motion from WSE for a waiver from Thematic Transdisciplinary Clusters for
students who major in Early Childhood Education, Elementary Education, or
Middle Grades Education, and for those who pursue licensure in Secondary
[Motion 2012-04-M01 passes]
The Steering Committee offers the following motions:
Committee on Student Matters
To replace the committees on Admissions, Student Affairs, Financial Aid and Bookstore.
[Motion 2012-04-M02 passes without dissent]
That the Faculty Senate endorse the proposed Quality Enhancement Plan titled "eTeal: experiencing Transformative education through applied learning."
[Motion 2012-04-M03 withdrawn]
o New motion introduced: [Motion 2012-04-MO4]:
The Faculty Senate endorses a QEP centered on Applied Learning with an emphasis on instructor-centered development opportunities.
o Kim Cook:
§ Original intent was to gain support for concept of applied learning, not for the wording of the plan itself.
§ Final plan won't be submitted to SACS until January 2013.
o Other discussion:
§ Where is additional money going?
§ For director, for faculty opportunities.
§ Much feedback is tied to how can we streamline process, e.g., student travel.
§ Issue is that UNCW is amazingly innovative in terms of applied learning. Focus needs to be on improving applied learning as a two-way street, so that the people who are doing the best work in applied learning.
§ Wording of document seems top-down. Hope focus is on faculty, not administrative concerns.
§ So much emphasis on training faculty when major issue is that money could be better spent on applied learning already being done.
§ Speaking to motion actually on the floor, we need to remember that SACS mandates that we have a QEP.
[Motion 2012-04-MO4 passed by a vote of 27 in favor, 17 against]
iii. Report from the IT committee (Pemberton)
o Use of online SPOTS
o Next generation library system
o More consistent policy regarding borrowing
o Scholarly communication issues, Copyright issues.
o Please complete survey on Randall Library
o Blackboard is going to change format, but content should be maintained.
iv. Report from the Evaluation Committee (Ashe)
o Pilot of Idea Center instrument has been implemented.
o Data acquisition process for SPOT being reexamined.
v. Report from the Handbook Committee (Lugo)
o Revisions still in process.
o Goal is to have the Handbook as a single pdf document.
vi. Report from the Research Committee (Evers)
o Work done on Cahill and Scholar Award
Old Business. None noted.
New Business. None noted.
Good of the order (Open forum)
§ I hope we don't have a second set of assessment on faculty who are already doing applied learning.
§ Main concern. What does instructor-centered mean with regard to centralized administration vs. individual needs and expertise of departments?
o Two Faculty Senate Forums to be seeded in Faculty Senate Sharepoint site:
o What's status of proficiency profile?
§ Participation was high, thanks to online method of administration of survey.
§ Learning Council invited to communicate with Faculty Senate. Issue drawn to attention of Steering Committee.
o Concern raised regarding ensuring student participation in online evaluation methods.
§ Evaluation Committee is investigating appropriate strategies.
§ Yes, we want to improve numbers, but also make sure process is carried out correctly.
o What are the guiding principles regarding control over class seats?
§ Newly formed Committee on Student Matters could address this.
o Plans for next academic year:
§ Continued work on consolidation and efficacy of university committees on Advancement
Meeting adjourned at 3:20.