people   committees   meetings   resources    home
    officers       standing       senate       archives  
    members       special       executive       bylaws  
          proclamations       sites  


Faculty Senate Executive Committee
January 13, 2003

Members present: F. Michael Combs, Kathy Greenberg, Sam Jordan, Otis Stephens, Glenn Graber, Misty Anderson, Jon Coddington, Paul Phillips, Olga Welch, Loren Crabtree, Sylvia Davis, Douglas Birdwell, Barbara Dewey, Salvatore DiMaria, Jim Gehlhar, Louis Gross, Carolyn Hodges, Laura Jolly, Wesley Morgan, Bonnie Ownley, David Patterson, Peggy Pierce, Richard Strange, Fred Weber, Candace White, Sara Williams

Combs called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

President’s Report (M. Combs)
Combs reported that President Shumaker is out of town. Combs would like to schedule special sessions to discuss issues that require significant discussion. He has scheduled lunch meetings for the Executive Committee with the Provost on February 21 and March 25. Combs then read a statement from the president concerning the position of chancellor. The president plans to appoint a transition committee which is to consult with faculty. Combs then made a plea that end-of-the-year committee reports be made in writing with only very special matters discussed in the Faculty Senate meetings.

Combs next reported that President Shumaker has agreed to an open conversation with faculty on the topic of the proposed Research Foundation. The meeting will be 3:30 p.m., February 4, in the Shiloh Room. Combs reported that Shumaker signed off on the Faculty Affiliates program, but that departments have the authority to approve those appointments. He then passed around a report on student applications for admission, a report on student retention and graduation and a sample of the new admissions acceptance packet.

Combs noted that he is in regular contact with the office of Human Resources. A. Chesney has agreed to provide a report regarding UT employees. He then reported that a new position of Executive Vice President is being created. The senate presidents of the four campuses form a President’s Advisory Council at the system level. Combs hopes that council can be involved in the search process for system administrators and also with the issue of library resources for the system. General Council Mizell reviewed with Combs the legal and official details of the search process.

Combs then yielded to K. Greenberg who asked committee members to mark their preliminary Committee on Committee ballots and submit them during the meeting.

Committee on Senate Structure and Effectiveness (P. Phillips)
Phillips noted that the latest version of the committee’s recommendations had been distributed at the meeting. The committee is concerned first and foremost with effectiveness. It recommends that there be fewer senators and that they be elected at the college (or division) level. In response to a question from B. Dewey, Phillips said that there is no deans representative because it is a faculty senate, not a university senate. K. Greenberg noted that a recommendation from the retreat was that deans be ad hoc members. G. Graber responded that the committee’s idea was that deans would always be welcomed and a dean would receive a special invitation to attend whenever an agenda item concerns that dean’s college. M. Anderson, C. Hodges and L. Gross questioned the fairness of the voting rules and noted that large departments still may be able to swing elections by voting as a block.

K. Greenberg asked whether there is a process for involving the entire faculty in the restructuring process. Phillips said he would like to have a special meeting of the Faculty Senate to discuss only this matter. Gross spoke in favor of a meeting of all faculty and Greenberg spoke in favor of a vote on the matter by the entire faculty. Provost Crabtree cautioned (1) that excluding administrators as voting members is not in the interest of shared governance, (2) reducing the size of the senate politicizes it, (3) departments should have to discuss the proposals, and (4) there should not be a rush to complete the process. Phillips responded that going directly to the departments now would leave the Faculty Senate out of the process. J. Coddington suggested that explanations and contexts should be provided to the faculty for each proposed change. Combs suggested asking departments to discuss the matter and also holding special sessions of the Faculty Senate. M. Anderson proposed that restructuring not be discussed at the February meeting of the Faculty Senate. Greenberg suggested discussing the process at a Faculty Senate meeting and then taking all the time needed to discuss the actual proposed changes. Gross then said that he does not think the committee’s work is done and mentioned some concerns he has.

C. White suggested that the Executive Committee needs to have a thorough discussion of the matter in a special session. After a lengthy discussion White moved that there be a special session of the Executive Committee to discuss the proposal and to decide how to proceed. There were several seconds. The motion passed.

Department Chairs vs. Heads (O. Stephens)
Stephens reported that the task force wants to gather information from other institutions about a number of matters, study it and then make recommendations to the Faculty Senate. He asked for comments.
Summer School/Mini-Term Policy (M. Combs)
Combs reported for Saudargas that data is being collected and will be studied. Greenberg reported that a set of questions has been formulated.


Faculty Affairs Committee (D. Patterson)
Patterson reported that the policy for cumulative review is being revised. Proposals include keeping the annual reviews, but having cumulative reviews only under certain circumstances. The committee would like to have a special session to discuss the matter. B. Dewey noted that faculty who choose to apply for promotion do not have a cumulative review and miss out on an opportunity for a salary adjustment. D. Birdwell noted that annual reviews need to be more consistent across campus and urged that the process for triggering cumulative reviews be reconsidered.

Executive Vice President Search (S. Davis)
Davis responded to a question from L. Gross by saying that there were no faculty on the search committee, but that Shumaker spoke with Combs and others. She also said that the search files are in her office.

Provost’s Report (L. Crabtree)
Crabtree said there are worthy candidates for the positions of Dean of Arts and Sciences and Dean of Engineering. He also noted that departments will determine how faculty affiliates interact with the departments. Faculty affiliates currently are affiliated with the Provost’s Office, not individual departments. Crabtree next said that there are two substantive documents for budget planning: the president’s scorecard and a planning document created last year. Budget hearings will be open. There will be some open forums, too. In response to a question from Birdwell, Crabtree said the ten-page summaries from the colleges will be posted on the web. Gross urged that auxiliaries and athletics be included. Crabtree said he supports having a presentation from every unit whose budget impacts the Knoxville campus, but there is system-level opposition to that idea. Crabtree was unable to say what would happen to faculty affiliates with terminal bachelors degrees who are rejected at the department level. No one knew with certainty what last year’s temporary policy on titles says about adjuncts and whether they must be paid. Phillips reported that he never has seen science and engineering faculty as upset as they are now with the use of “faculty” in the term “faculty affiliate.” Crabtree responded that these people have not been given faculty rights, so faculty are tilting at windmills in this matter. Many questions should be answered in a meeting this week with science and engineering department heads.


D. Birdwell called attention to a resolution from Memphis that he distributed at the meeting.

W. Morgan distributed copies of the Tempe principles and asked that they be discussed next time.

The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.

back to top


If you have any questions concerning the UT Faculty Senate, or would like more information, send an email to

To offer suggestions or comments about this web site, please email the webmaster.