Members present: F. Michael Combs, Beauvais Lyons, Kathy Greenberg,
Sam Jordan, Otis Stephens, Glenn Graber, Misty Anderson, Jon Coddington,
Paul Phillips, Olga Welch, Loren Crabtree, John Shumaker, Douglas
Birdwell, Barbara Dewey, Salvatore DiMaria, Ann Fairhurst, Jim Gehlhar,
Louis Gross, Carolyn Hodges, Laura Jolly, Wesley Morgan, Bonnie
Ownley, David Patterson, Richard Strange, Fred Weber, Candace White,
Combs called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.
President's Report (M. Combs)
Combs thanked K. Sowers, C. White, T. Miller and others who assisted
with the Fall 20002, issue of the Faculty Senate Newsletter, which
is in the mail. He then noted that a storage cabinet has been ordered
for the Faculty Senate meeting room in the UC; keys will be available
from him. He noted next that the past presidents of the Faculty
Senate will meet with him tomorrow; he hopes to get useful advice
from them. Combs then asked how people feel about how Faculty Senate
meetings are going. M. Anderson said she feels a little strange
being waited on by the student helpers. Others seemed satisfied
with the current arrangements.
Combs then announced that D. Noblet, President of the UT National
Alumni Association, will attend and speak at the November 18, 2003,
meeting of the Faculty Senate. Combs also wants to schedule an open
meeting of the Development and Alumni Committee at 3:00 that day
for an open conversation with Noblet. Combs also announced that
G. Reed will speak at the Faculty Senate meeting on future plans
for parking on campus (and maybe provide an update on the University
Club). B. Boyd, Marketing Director for Knox Area Transit, will be
available to answer questions about the new campus bus system that
will begin in January, 2003.
Combs expressed concern about the number of Faculty Senators who
did not attend either the
September or October meeting. After some discussion there was a
consensus to suggest to Faculty Senators that anyone who cannot
attend the next meeting should send a non-voting substitute who
will report back to the Faculty Senator's constituency. K. Greenberg
suggested that allowing a written vote from the absent senator should
be considered. It finally was decided to have a discussion of the
matter at a Faculty Senate meeting.
Finally, Combs announced that Provost Crabtree and he have almost
finalized the membership of three task forces, which are to consider
the concept of the department chairs versus heads, the creation
of an acceptable policy for instructional technology, and guidelines
for summer and mini terms. Crabtree has assured Combs that the Faculty
Senate will be directly involved with the review of the curriculum
review process. The Faculty Affairs Committee has agreed to do the
preliminary work on the evaluation of administrators as well as
to review the current cumulative review process. Combs then asked
for volunteers to attend meetings with the Educational Marketing
Group, Inc. and to bring three faculty with them. He also invited
committee members to volunteer to attend a meeting November 11 of
the Enrollment Management Committee with T.-W. Wang and himself.
Proposed New Research Foundation (T. D. McCay)
McCay said that this effort began during the summer to improve the
entrepreneurial effort of the university and its faculty. Similar
operations at other institutions were reviewed and information was
obtained on what should have been done differently. Having a foundation
should increase business flexibility, allow capitalizing on intellectual
property, decrease bureaucracy, and stimulate research growth. Draft
versions of a charter, bylaws and a business plan have been created
with the help of outside consultants. Launching of the foundation
is expected to occur spring term.
Shumaker thanked McCay for doing so much in so little time and
cautioned that plans are still in the draft stage. He also noted
that a foundation would be the fiscal agent for all research both
for protection and flexibility. He added that the upper administration
is aware of concerns that a foundation will impede research and
is working hard to see that the foundation helps. L. Gross commented
that faculty will need to see details soon if faculty approval is
to be obtained by April 1, 2003. McCay responded that the first
drafts for review should be available in about two weeks, but he
understands that faculty might not be able to consider the drafts
until January. He reiterated that everything will be subject to
change. Shumaker added that it is better to do things correctly,
rather than quickly, so target dates are not really fixed.
In response to a question from J. Coddington, McCay said that the
foundation would help the ORNL connection in the area of creative
partnerships. Also, in response to a question from D. Patterson,
McCay said that it is realized that colleges depend on indirect
cost funds. Shumaker agreed and expressed a desire to see that dependence
decreased over time. He also said he would expect researchers on
the Knoxville campus to be responsible to the top administrators
on the Knoxville campus, rather than to a bureaucrat in the foundation.
D. Birdwell said that he sees three concerns in establishing a
foundation: accountability (at several levels), sources of funding
(to implement ideas), and F & A reallocation (a foundation is
another feeder at the trough"). He also spoke strongly in support
of opportunities for faculty to review the documents. Shumaker said
again that the deadlines will be pushed back if necessary to allow
full discussion. P. Phillips then warned that there maybe considerable
resistance from researchers who have lost funds through earlier
efforts to improve the research situation.
President's Report (J. Shumaker)
Shumaker said he asked a small group to look into UT Fiscal Policy
135 on information technology resources (copies distributed at the
meeting). Educating the university community will be a primary focus
of this effort. He then turned to "UT 2010," a booklet
(distributed at the meeting) describing performance goals and presenting
a scorecard completed for 2001). Retention and graduation rates
rather than simple growth will be emphasized. Goals in many categories
for 2010 are being developed. It is understood that the university
does many things that cannot be quantified. In response to a question
from Gross, Shumaker said that some of the categories are Lombardy
measures, others come from other sources, and some were created
locally. Gross suggested including the fraction of applicants with
ACT scores above some number who enroll here. Crabtree noted that
the "Salary Deficiency-Faculty" entry reflects salaries
at all campuses and uses the THEC peer group.
Shumaker concluded by noting that a position paper on shared governance
had been distributed at the meeting as a matter of information.
He said he would welcome a similar statement to take to the Board
Provost's Report (L. Crabtree)
Crabtree said that the recent blackface incident has had an enormous
nasty impact on the community. It is seen as one of a series of
incidents. The News-Sentinel has received many letters and an inaccurate
Fox News report has led to hundreds of emails from around the world.
Many emails accuse the university of violating the students' first
amendment rights; some express wonderment that African Americans
are objecting to what happened. Crabtree hopes to awaken among students
a long-term perspective on our history.
In response to a question from Gross about an organizational chart
(distributed with agenda) for the UTK Office of the Vice President
and Provost, Crabtree said he sees budget, research, and equity
and diversity as missing areas.
Educational Policy Committee (F. Weber)
Weber said the committee approved Undergraduate Council minutes
from the meeting of September 17, 2002. The committee also approved
a policy requiring instructor approval of undergraduate students
taking graduate courses for graduate credit. He also noted that
faculty will receive a list of constraints on the academic calendar.
Faculty Senate Information Technology Advisory Committee Proposal
Dewey noted the proposal (distributed with the agenda) calls for
and describes a new standing committee on IT. Her motion was seconded.
A friendly amendment to make the committee a task force for this
academic year and to include it in the restructuring of the Faculty
Senate was accepted, as was the new name Faculty Senate Information
Technology Task Force. The amended motion was approved.
Committee on Senate Structure and Effectiveness (P. Phillips)
Phillips noted that the report (distributed with the agenda) needs
extensive study and discussion at another time. Combs agreed. Phillips
then briefly summarized the report. Coddington suggested that the
committee should consider a budget for the Faculty Senate.
The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
back to top
If you have any questions concerning the UT Faculty Senate, or would
like more information, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To offer suggestions or comments about this web site,
please email the webmaster.