The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA
FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES
February 1, 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, Dawn Ford, Phil Giffin, Ron Goulet, Jim Hiestand, Michael Jones, Charles Knight, Irene Loomis, Claire McCullough, Gail Meyer, John Mies, Sarla Murgai, Burch Oglesby, Oralia Preble-Niemi, Verbie Prevost, Ed Rozema, Mike Russell, Ken Smith, Chris Stuart, John Trimpey, Steve Underwood, Judith Wakim
Elected Members Absent: Roland Carter, Zibin Guo, Lee Harris, Mike Long, Valerie Rutledge, Marsha Scheidt
Ex-Officio Members Present: Bill Berry, Richard Brown
Among the Guests Present: Neslihan Alp, Ron Cox, Jim Cunningham, Bob Desmond, Helen Eigenberg, Marvin Ernst, Ed Foster, Bruce Hutchinson, Frank Jones, Richard Keyser, Stephen Kuhn, Karen McGuffee, Ed McMahon, Joseph Owino, Farhad Raiszadeh, Stephanie Smullen, Gene Van Horn, Dorothy Williams, Sandy Zitkus
Call to Order:
President John Trimpey called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m.
Approval of the Minutes of January 18, 2001
Professor Ken Smith moved with glee and giddiness that the minutes be approved. Professor Mike Russell absolutely seconded the motion. Minutes were approved as distributed.
Report from the Handbook Committee
Professor Tom Bibler gave the following report:
There are 2 items to be presented in making changes to the Faculty Handbook. The first has to do with the Curriculum Committee in charging the chair with the responsibility for final disposition of approved curriculum proposals, Chapter 2 p. 10. The second item has to do with the Faculty Development Committee in describing the purpose of the committee and membership, Chapter 2 p. 11. These changes necessitated making further changes in Chapter 7 and the Appendix. All changes passed the committee unanimously.
Motion carried to accept the changes: 24 – 0 – 0
Report from the Curriculum Committee
Professor Bruce Hutchinson gave the following report:
He first prefaced his remarks with optimistic comments on "getting away quickly" with the large volume of curriculum proposals intact. To prevent this "stockpiling" of proposals from occurring next year, Professor Hutchinson stated that if he is still chair of the committee, he proposes that the cutoff date for proposals to make the next year catalog, be December first. He also stated that he would be proclaimed dictator of the committee if need be, to make this necessary change. He also expressed concerns about the quality of writing of faculty submitted proposals. And finally, the committee has decided to meet later this month to discuss a couple of special issues in the Math department, relating to scarce faculty resources for first level statistics courses and computer lab issues.
Professor Hutchinson moved approval of all proposals submitted. He did state that there were some details in the proposal from Human Services Management that Professor Marvin Ernst has agreed to work out and clean up before final submission.
The details include the issue of hours required for certificate programs. The UT system looks favorably on certificate programs if requirements are met.
Provost Berry was present to "clarify" the system's stand on certificate programs. One distinction that needs to be made is between undergraduate certificate programs and graduate certificate programs. National norms have downsized to fewer hours than the 24 hours that Knoxville approved a year ago. UT changed the number of hours from 24 to a minimum of 9 hours for graduate certificate programs. There are some concerns about how we advertise undergraduate programs of fewer hours.
Professor Hutchinson moved for approval of the proposals as submitted.
Professor Joe Dumas moved that the Engineering proposal be considered separately. Professor Ron Goulet moved to second.
An additional motion was then made and seconded to discuss the Engineering proposal first. The motion carried 24-0-0.
The motion to consider the Engineering proposal separately was then voted on and carried 24-0-0.
A lengthy discussion then followed concerning the Engineering proposal, with the number of participants, being too numerous to count. Due to the number of questions raised about the proposal, it was moved to delay the vote until the next Faculty Council meeting in 2 weeks. Sandy Zitkus acknowledged that even with a 2-week delay the proposal changes could meet the deadline for the new academic catalog. The motion carried by voice vote.
President Trimpey then called for discussion on the remainder of the curriculum proposals, which will be voted on as a group.
Professor Mike Russell stated he had no objection to any of the proposals but was curious about the Math, Biology, and Health & Human Services proposals.
Professor Ed Rozema responded to the concerns of duplication of math courses, overlapping of courses, scarce resources in the Math department, with other schools having stats courses and how will this affect growth in the Math department, etc
Professor Bruce Hutchinson stated that these were some of the issues that would be addressed by the Curriculum Committee. Departments want to have their own stat courses to give clarification to stats in their specific discipline. Several of these stat courses have been approved over the last several years. The issue of resources is a separate issue.
Professor Judy Wakim with the approval of these stats courses, there will then be 7 different stats courses.
Professor Bruce Hutchinson the other 4 have already been approved and are in the catalog. The issue before you today is these other 3.
Professor Oralia Preble-Niemi asked if Math 210 is the only course affected?
Professor Irene Loomis stated that a bigger issue is that when gen ed decided every student should have a stats course it was intended for a broader perspective, not discipline specific.
Professor Bruce Hutchinson stated that this is not brought to you as a gen ed course; gen ed courses have to be approved by gen ed comm.; the issue is when gen ed was passed, a broader scope was envisioned for stats, oral communication, and computer science across the campus.
Professor Gene Van Horn (Biology) stated ours is a 4-hour course with a lab, not 3 hour. It involves a lot of computer work. We are not competing for gen ed students; we just want to help our own students get jobs when they get out.
Provost Berry there is a resource issue. There is no problem with enrollment in our stat courses. We are not adding a problem by adding these courses. For example, if oral communication had to be taught by speech faculty, which we do not have, it would create enormous problems.
Professor Helen Eigenberg stated a point of clarification that we are not competing for gen ed; we are looking to better serve our students.
Professor Stephen Kuhn stated to me these are separate issues; it is not just a duplicate of 210; are we going to duplicate stats course for each department?
Professor Mike Russell stated I agree with Professor Hutchinson, a course in gen ed can be taught outside the discipline; makes sense to have stats courses in specific disciplines; history won’t be instituting one; who certifies if they are ready for gen ed?
Professor Helen Eigenberg stated we have duplication of research methods across campus? Why should these courses be treated differently?
Professor Oralia Preble-Niemi asked, What serves our students better? Stats in math or stats in there own discipline?
President Trimpey called for the vote for the group of curriculum proposals.
Voice vote ayes carry it 25 – 0 – 0.
Professor Bruce Hutchinson stated that he would have the signed cover sheets by 10 tomorrow morning in Dr. Jane Harbaugh's office.
Administrative Report
Provost
Dr. Berry stated he had been reading the SACS approximately 900 page report. It has been mailed to the visitors. Many thanks to all involved with preparing this document.
Questions?
Professor Mike Russell asked when the self-study would be available.
Dr. Berry replied that it should be available on the web hopefully by early next week; faculty should be familiar with their dept. responses and outcomes as well as results.
Old Business
President Trimpey commented on the issues raised by Professor Bruce Wallace at the last Faculty Council meeting. The matter had been referred to the Executive Committee and the committee's decision is that the issues raised are departmental and that no Faculty Council action was needed.
Administrative Report
Vice Chancellor
Vice Chancellor Richard Brown commented on the upcoming budget process and encouraged everyone to be involved in the meetings.
More Old Business
Professor Ken Smith again mentioned the relative safety of the crosswalks on campus. People pay attention when police are present but that only lasts a few days. What else can be done to slow down the cars?
Vice Chancellor Brown commented that there was more traffic due to the Vine St. closure; we’ll work on the safety issues.
New Busyness
None
Announcements
Provost Berry offered an official round of applause for President Trimpey's return. President Trimpey thanked everyone for their patience in awaiting his return and particularly Professor Carter for taking charge during his absence. Someone from the back mentioned that Professor Carter bought drinks for everyone on the Council so what was President Trimpey going to buy us? President Trimpey deflected that question skillfully and called for adjournment.
Adjournment
Professor Mike Russell reminded President Trimpey that we had a new custom for adjournment other than to simply call for the motion. Professor Russell moved for adjournment "in hopes of a brighter day". Professor Joe Dumas gave the second.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Submitted with a sigh of relief,
Susan Davidson
Secretary
1