Site Index

Miller announced that he intends to convene meetings at 3:30 and today only that J. Kovac is the parliamentarian in place of D. Dobbs who could not be present. Miller next moved to the presentation of awards. The first award was presented to Betsy Brewer for her service as Faculty Senate staff. K. Bohstedt then reported on the standing committee to oversee the Senate/Chancellor Review of Administrators program. She read the list of members and briefly described how the reviews are supposed to operate. She reported that the manual for the process has been rewritten. She noted that some administrator's question the ability of faculty to evaluate their work, but that the Chancellor has indicated that his office will assist anytime a review bogs down. Bohstedt then presented an award to Lonnie McIntyre for his work from 1992 to 1998 as founding chair of the Senate/Chancellor Review of Administrators Committee. Finally, Miller presented a resolution recognizing the work of B. Blass as the 1997-1998 Faculty Senate President. Miller moved the resolution by acclamation; it was approved and then Miller presented the resolution to Blass. Blass thanked the senators and all others who worked hard on behalf of the faculty during 1997-1998. He particularly noted the assistance of Betsy Brewer.

The minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of May 4, 1998, were approved after the change of "1995" to "1993" in the paragraph on CTEP Extension under the Leading Old Business. The minutes of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting of August 31, 1998, were approved without change.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller reported that he believes the Senate is in good shape and then noted that a letter concerning the presidential search has been sent to the Trustees' Search Committee. The letter included suggestions for the search announcement; examples include the need to emphasize that 1. the position is that of system (not only UTK) president, 2. the system is diverse and 3. Candidates should have a record of scholarship and leadership at a major university or system. Miller next read the list of UTK members on the search advisory committee: M. Miller, B. Richards, K. Washington, H. Black, H. McSween, A. Mayhew, and C. Woods. K. High, Associate Vice-President for Academic Affairs, who is based in Knoxville, also is on the advisory panel.
Miller next turned to the new tenure policy. He noted that J. Peters has established a task force on implementation of the policy. The committee includes the following faculty: R. Benson (Materials Science), N. Cook (Arts & Sciences), and C. Maland (English). There also is a Faculty Senate Tenure Policy Coordinating Committee charged with facilitating and coordinating Senate response to implementation of the new tenure policy. He noted that the expression "post-tenure review" does not appear in the tenure policy, but that regular review of all faculty is part of the policy. This committee consists of B. Glenn (chair), B. Dunne, K. Jensen, and T. Boulet, each of whom is co-chair or chair of one of the Senate's major committees or councils. Miller also noted that new members of the Senate/Chancellor Review of Administrators Committee are K. Hahn and K. Misra; K. Bohstedt is the committee chair. He also spoke briefly about the Teaching Council's activities for the year; these include reviewing CTEP. He concluded by noting that M. Papke is sitting at the table in the front of the Faculty Senate Meeting room this year, so that she can take over meetings when he wishes to enter discussions.

Chancellor's Report (B. Snyder)
Snyder reported that he was supposed to have gone to Washington, D.C. today for an important announcement concerning Internet II, which involves UTK. Poor weather prevented his trip. He next talked about the distinction between UTK and the system. He provided advanced copies of any short article he has written for the October 1998 issue of Context; the article is titled "Planning for a UTK Institutional Identity for the Millenium and Beyond."

Vice Chancellor's Report (J. Peters)
Peters gave some highlights of fall, 1998, enrollment. The "fourteenth day corrected" headcount was 25,605, the highest in many years, Undergraduate enrollment is up, but graduate enrollment is down slightly. However, graduate FTE enrollment is up. Peters next noted that the findings of the Deans' Report (relative to APEC) are being implemented. Budget requests now are made in the context of the report. Merit salary increases proposed by the deans also were made in that context. Peters also quickly noted the status of several other recommendations of the Deans' Report. In many cases final recommendations for APEC have not been made. Peters next reported that at faculty advisory group has been selected for each "focus area" and charged with making recommendations on how to improve those areas. Work on how to decide which programs move onto (or off of) the "outstanding departments" list is proceeding. Finally, Peters spoke briefly about the implementation of the new Tenure Policy.

Miller noted that reports from the Teaching Council and the Athletics Committee were distributed at the meeting. Their chairs could not bee present to report.

Tenure Policy Coordinating Committee (R. Glenn)
Glenn read the list of committee members and noted the committee's charge, which includes considering "tenure ideas" in general, as well as responding to the new tenure policy. An electronic copy of the policy, an analysis of the policy and a link to a forum for discussing it may be found at the URL http://web.utk.edu/~glenn/UTTenurePolicy.html.

Miller noted that M. Combs could not be present to report for the Legislative Committee.

B. Blass moved that a copy of the letter sent to the Trustee's search committee be made available to the Faculty Senate. The motion was seconded and approved. Miller said he would try to e-mail it tonight and would attach a copy to the next agenda. B. Blass next suggested that copies of the new manual for reviews of administrators be distributed to the senators. Miller found the suggestion appropriate and said he would have copies distributed.

In response to a question Miller said he expects the Faculty Senate Tenure Policy Coordinating Committee to report frequently to the Faculty Senate. J. Kovac said the use of the non-tenure track faculty should be considered as part of the review of the new tenure policy. O. Schwarz asked whether the major difference between the old and new tenure policies concerns enforcement of policy. Miller responded, in part, that more consistency in procedures was a major goal in the revision. Blass commented that there are more mandates about what will happen if faculty receive negative reviews. Glenn noted that standards for dismissal for adequate course are more plentiful and less rigorous in the new policy than in the current Faculty Handbook, but the burden of proof continues to rest with the institution and there is a "ringing" endorsement of academic freedom and tenure. The new policy also provides expedited procedures for removal of faculty in extreme cases, such as being charged with a felony.

Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of September 21, 1998, and of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting of September 28, 1998, were approved without discussion.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller noted that copies of the new 80-page manual for Review of Administrators are available by email or phone from M. Woodside in the Chancellor's Office. Also, Miller has met with a Board of Trustees' ad hoc committee on honorary degrees; he will inform the Senate as discussions progress. Miller next noted that a number of Senate committees are active and many will be reporting to the Senate. The Tenure Policy Coordinating Committee is ready to work as soon as documents are available. The Tenure Policy Working Group already is meeting. Miller, B. Blass and other UTK faculty met with the President's Counselors and, with representatives of other UT units, made a strong case for increased funding. They also asked that the Advisory Panel to the Presidential Search Committee of the Board of Trustees be convened. The Advisory Committee will meet this week. The UTK members of the advisory panel have met to discuss their role in the search. Miller also said that he will report this week to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees on faculty views on the new tenure policy. In addition, he will welcome the Board of Trustees to UTK on Friday and take the opportunity to tell the Board what the Senate is doing. He asked for suggestions of how best to use this opportunity.

Chancellor's Report (B. Snyder)
Snyder is out of town, but will report on promotion issues in November.

Vice Chancellor's Report (J. Peters)
Peters had no report, but was available to answer questions. P. Crilly reminded Peters that Crilly had asked last spring for the numbers of administrators before and after the large change in enrollment. Peters responded that he has collected much data and will be glad to provide whatever data Crilly would like to have. Peters also noted that the recently announced bridge to connect the main and agricultural campuses probably will require 18 months of planning and at least as long a period of construction. He further reported that the administration believes that an authorization bill for the Howard Baker School of Government is in the large agreement now being dealt with in Washington, D.C. Finally, Peters said that the administration will announce soon whether the university will seek to become the new contractor for Oak Ridge National Laboratory. A. Burstein then asked what steps would be taken to monitor unit progress on implementing the new tenure policy. Peters responded that departments with good bylaws are finding they have little work to do, but other units have much to do. Peters expects his committee to provide more information and guidance about November 1, 1998. His office will review what each unit produces.

Educational Policy Committee (L. Bensel-Meyers)
There will be a report from this committee at the next meeting.

Legislative Committee (M. Combs)
Combs thanked his committee members for their willingness to serve. Combs and some of the committee members have had a productive meeting with W. Lambert. A subcommittee also will meet with State Representative B. Gilbert. The full committee will meet soon to set its agenda for the year. Combs concluded by announcing that State Senator T. Burks had been found murdered today; he was a strong supporter of the university.

International Education Committee (K. Greenberg)
Greenberg reported that Chancellor Snyder has asked the committee to develop a statement on goals for international education to be included in the five-year plan.

Budget Committee (T. Boulet)
Boulet reported the committee has begun to discuss a number of matters: (1) progress of APEC and NAPEC, (2) funds allocated for increasing graduate student enrollment, (3) distance education at UTK, (4) financial/budgetary implications of the new tenure policy, and (5) the role that the State of Tennessee would like for UTK and the resources required to support that role.

Faculty and Staff Benefits Committee (C. Thompson)
Thompson recalled that last year the committee emphasized salary compression and noted that some salary adjustments were made recently. This year the committee is looking at control of retirement funds. There were several comments, including the fact that faculty seek positions in other states with less restrictive rules concerning retirement accounts.. Miller noted that this issue is of interest to the entire system.

Library Committee (B. Bates)
Bates reported that the committee has met with representatives from the library who informed the committee that the library is looking at a budget shortfall of about $650,000 this year. With respect to its peer institutions, UTK's library situation ranks in the lowest quartile on many aspects. Miller will invite Dean Kaufman to report to the Senate.

Alumni Affairs Committee (T. Heffernan)
Heffernan reported that a database of faculty willing to travel to speak to groups on behalf of the university is being created. He invited faculty to volunteer. Their expenses on speaking trips will be paid, but there will be no honorarium.

There was no old business.

Discussion of Draft Statement of Presidential Search from Executive Committee A. Burstein reviewed the draft document (distributed with agenda). He feels it is a very strong document. B. Blass noted that the statement that the "advisory committee should identify a pool of two or more of the final applicants who have faculty support, with the board committee making the final choice from that pool" is likely to offend the board and cause its members to react negatively to faculty comment. Blass moved that the statement's last phrase (after the comma) be replaced with the phrase "and to strongly encourage and actively lobby for the final selection to be made from that pool." After much discussion, Blass moved to amend his amendment by replacing the original statement's last phrase with "and the board committee should make the final choice from that pool." This amendment was seconded and approved. The amended document then was approved and will be sent to the Search Committee, Board of Trustees.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller noted that S. Winston, the Senate's support staff person, has been trained on home page maintenance. He plans to increase his use of the Senate's web page for communications. Miller next reported that he met with a group discussing issues pertaining to intellectual property and courseware; policies on such matters are being developed at the system and campus levels. He also noted that there is a committee working with Keith Moore and Associates to develop an integrated marketing plan for UTK. These efforts dovetail with work of the Senate's Legislative Committee and Development and Alumni Relations Committee. Miller next expressed his concern that the presidential search is not moving. He also noted that the task force on the new tenure policy is widely representative and is doing a good job, but expressed concern about its progress. He will propose a special meeting of the Senate on January 18, 1999, to discuss the topic. He will speak about the committee's work at an AAUP meeting, November 19 in Room 221, University Center.

Chancellor's Report (B. Snyder)
Snyder called attention to his Context article (distributed with the agenda) on the marketing of UTK. He next called attention to his comments (distributed with the agenda) made at a meeting of the Tennessee Council on Excellence in Higher Education. Snyder next reported that there have been many comments about the four-lane highway to connect the agriculture campus and the main campus; he reminded everyone that he and many others support a connector, but that the Tennessee Department of Transportation is responsible for the proposed connector. He next informed the Senate that THEC is meeting soon to consider budget matters and that the governor will have until the end of February (not January) to present his budget. Snyder concluded by noting that he has asked for a section on international education to be included in the university's five-year plan document.

Dean of Libraries Report (P. Kaufman)
Kaufman began by reporting that the library budget did go up this year and that there will not be a reduction in operating hours next term. She noted that the material budget is fairly constant, but the personnel budget was cut and the operating budget is under great pressure. Initial estimates showed a $645,000 shortfall, but various cuts (in personnel, for example) have reduced the gap to $200,000. Work on the problem continues. Kaufman also reported that the UTK library ranks third from the bottom among the university's peer group. Virginia Tech and Oklahoma are ranked lower. P. Hoeyng asked how the Senate might help; Kaufman responded that comments on priorities would be welcomed. In response to a question from T.-W. Wang, Kaufman said that the student technology fee has helped the libraries obtain equipment.

Senate-Chancellor's Evaluation of Administrators (K. Bohstedt)
Bohstedt reported that some reviews are being completed this term and fourteen more will be in full progress next term. She noted that communication between her committee and chairs of the review teams is being improved. As the chairperson, she is making the first contacts with review-committee chairs. Another difficulty is a small number of administrators who have not cooperated; the chancellor is getting these individuals to cooperate. The third problem is getting faculty to serve on review teams. She wants such service to be reasonably painless. Committee members now have only two meetings to attend. Bohstedt asked the Senate to consider a motion "that the Senate endorses SCOEA, and that all Senators, as part of their service, will be willing, if asked, to serve on a review team for the administrative review process." L. Sammataro moved the suggested motion; there was a second. B. Gould asked whether the motion commits each Senator to serve every time asked. Bohstedt responded that extenuating circumstances will be considered. D. Dobbs asked that some Senator amend the motion to read "would strongly consider" rather than "will be willing." The amendment was moved and passed. Then the amended motion was passed.

B. Bates asked to correct his Library Committee report of the last meeting to reflect a $650,000 (rather than $750,000) shortfall and to replace "ranks last or close to last" with "ranks in the lowest quartile." With these changes the minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of October 19, 1998 were approved. The minutes of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting of November 2, 1998, also were approved.

Faculty Staff Development Committee (J. Paul)
Miller noted that this committee's report was distributed with the agenda. There were no comments or questions and the report was accepted.

Educational Policy Committee (L. Bensel-Meyers)
D. Aarons asked where the plagiarism policy approved by the Board of Trustees can be found. Bensel-Meyers gave him the location. The written report, distributed with the agenda, included approval of the Graduate Council Minutes of June 25, 1998, and of September 10, 1998, and the Undergraduate Council Minutes of September 24, 1998. The report was accepted.

Legislative Committee (M. Combs)
Combs reported that this committee is very active. There was a good meting with Senator B. Gilbert. Several committee members have been invited to a legislative luncheon before the next football game.

There was no old business.

Discussion of Senate Role in the Presidential Search
A. Burstein expressed his view that it is very important that the faculty voice be heard in the search. He expressed his hope that the Senate would establish a procedure for faculty to meet with and comment on the final candidates. Burstein moved that the Executive Committee establish such procedures. His motion was seconded and approved. B. Bates moved that the Senate president draft and send a letter expressing the Senate's concern with the slow speed of the presidential search. The motion was seconded. At Burstein's suggestion, the motion was amended to have the letter express concern about beginning the search in a timely manner.
The amended motion was approved.

Discussion of Senate Role in Implementation of New Tenure Policy
Miller reported on the work of the task force. The report of the task force is expected later this week or early next week. Miller reminded the Senate that B. Glenn chairs the Senate's Tenure Policy Coordinating Committee. Miller proposed that there be a special Senate meeting on January 18, 1999, to discuss the new tenure policy. B. Postow noted that January 18, 1999, is Martin Luther King, Jr. day, so the date was changed to January 25, 1999. M. Smith moved that there be a meeting on January 25, 1999, for the sole purpose of discussing the new tenure policy. The motion was seconded and approved.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller called Senate's attention to the UT president's search, noting the process for making nominations to the consulting firm hired by the Board of Trustees. A copy of the job description was distributed.

Chancellor's Report (B. Snyder)
The Chancellor dealt briefly with three issues (handout issued at meeting):

1. The current success of the UTK athletic programs with the Lady Vols basketball team being ranked number one and the football team being the 1999 national champion affords an opportunity to reflect on the larger issue of the role of intercollegiate athletics in higher education. In particular, how can we use the success of the athletic programs to draw attention to the academic mission of UTK? One small step recently taken in this direction was to publicize the UTK academic programs at the Fiesta Bowl. Publicizing UTK academics at a bowl game has never been done before to my knowledge. We did this by setting a large display in the lobby of the hotel where the alumni were staying, by distributing a postal card listing several UTK points of pride on the back, and by distributing a four page tabloid consisting of reprints of articles about UTK academics that have appeared in national publications. A concept which I would like to promote can be phrased: UTK athletics provides you excitement and entertainment, and UTK academics prepares you for life. I would welcome ideas from the Senate for broadening the spotlight on athletics to include academics.

2. I have written Mr. Bill Sansom, Chair of the UT Presidential Search Committee, with a proposed two day schedule for candidates to be interviewed on the Knoxville campus. The proposed schedule includes meetings with the chancellor, the Chancellor's staff, the Board of Deans, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, athletic representatives (athletic director, faculty representative to the NCAA, the Executive Committee of the Athletics Board), the Executive Committee of the Student Government Association, the chairs of all UTK standing committees, representatives from the Employee Relations groups and the Staff Exempt Council, representatives from the Chancellor's Associates and the Chancellor's Advisory Board, and an open session for the candidates to make a presentation and receive questions.

I have also proposed sending the candidates a packet of material about UTK as well as the major UTK issues. I would welcome input from the Senate as to the major UTK issues that should be presented to the candidates.

3. I believe that the tenure review process which we will be debating today and voting on soon requires a tangible financial commitment to assure successful implementation with the ultimate goal of strengthening and safeguarding tenure on this campus. I believe it will be a very persuasive argument to Trustees and others who may think that we are not sufficiently diligent about post tenure review if we make an annual budgetary commitment to this process. For the FY 1999-2000 budget which will be developed over the next few months, I am committing $320,000 for faculty salary improvement in support of a post tenure faculty evaluation system that will encourage and reward faculty development and faculty excellence. I plan to commit additional funds in subsequent budget years.

The tenure review process we will discuss today will be an important element in safeguarding tenure for the future in these times of attack on tenure in higher education.

Miller reviewed the history of the tenure and post-tenure review processes. He congratulated both the Coordinating Committee on tenure policy, as well as the several committees (Faculty Affairs, Budget, Teaching Council).

Miller made it clear that this meeting was an information and discussion session, but no motions would be in order until the regular Senate meeting on February 1. He reminded the Senate that it was working on the implementation policies already approved by the Board of Trustees

1. Faculty Affairs Committee (B. Glenn)
Attention called to recommendation (pg. 2 of Coordinating Committee report) that existing due process procedures established in the Faculty Handbook should be retained. Glenn noted especially that faculty members not retained must know the reasons for non-retention. Trustees are silent on this, as well as hearings by faculty's peers and the granting of tenure as recognition of competence. The committee also thinks it is important that objective standards exist to aid an action committee in recommending dismissed or a strategy /or improvement.

2. Budget Committee (T. Boulet)
Boulet called the Senate's attention to the recommendation of a merit raise policy and that these funds would be annual and significant and additional. They should not be available just at the year of review. Boulet reminded the Senate of the Chancellor's announced commitment of $320,000 for FY 1999-2000. But Boulet reminded the Senate that serious commitment would require that increase in every year.

Responding to a question whether the budget passed by the state legislature has any limitations (across the board, merit, etc.), the Chancellor said that this year the legislature mandated a 2% across-the-board increase and usually merit raise money has to be found by the University. Peters reminded the Senate that the Governor usually thinks in terms of state employees as a whole and not just University employees or faculty.

Since it was full professors who were subjects of these reviews and merit raise money, the question was raised about merit raises for assistant and associate professors. K. Bohstedt and Kathy Greenberg explained that women often spent longer times in rank and hence sometimes were lured away to higher-paying jobs.

Miller asked whether the Senate wanted to consider recommending a pool of money for merit raises after reviews. There was the suggestion of a straw poll, but none was taken.

3. Faculty Affairs; on Evaluation Categories (B. Glenn)
Glenn explained that Trustees mandated an "objective" rating system" but were unclear as to what particular rating categories would be used (the Board's recommendation or the task force's recommendation). Should there be 3 categories (outstanding, satisfactory, unsatisfactory) as suggested by the Trustees or 5 categories as suggested by the task force? He then called the Senate's attention to the categories used at UT Tullahoma (acceptable, needs improvement, unacceptable). The UTK English Department, on the other hand, presumes excellence when tenure is awarded and thus uses only two categories (satisfactory and unsatisfactory). So the issue is whether to recommend to the Trustees a 2-category system, a 3-category system, or a 5-category system.

A question arose regarding the 2-category or 3-category system: would everyone listed "satisfactory" or "outstanding" deserve a merit raise?

Caruthers reminded the Senate that a narrative report was necessary, for various categories (like grades awarded students) didn't mean much without a full explanation of what the categories meant and why a faculty member was rated in a particular category.

There was a discussion (T. Wang, D. Dobbs) on the weaknesses and strengths of a 5-category system. Levy explained that Trustees never considered a 2-category system, but spoke about both 3- and 5-category systems. Caruthers said that another alternative was no categories and only a narrative report. A straw poll favored a 3-category system. There seemed to be strong sentiment for the no-category system for the cumulative review.

4. Teaching Council (B. Dunne)
Dunne offered a set of 6 resolutions (on pg. 2 of report), designed to establish faculty "ownership" of the process, that documentation procedures should be uniform, that standards and evaluation documents should be publicly available, that evaluative measures should vary with the mission of each unit and the rank/assignment of the faculty member, that service should be highly regarded, and that assessment procedures as outlined in reports of the Teaching Council and Research Council should be implemented.

Miller then opened the meeting to questions, concerns, issues, etc. of Senate. Next meeting will be one in which motions on this will be offered.

Caruthers was concerned that each area of faculty performance (teaching, research, service) was not in itself evaluated, but only a general rating. Should they be evaluated separately? Miller said another study group dealt with this issue and recommended a combined evaluation, but that various departments needed to deal with this in their respective by-laws.

Dobbs raised the potentially divisive issue regarding the Board policies approved June 18, 1998 which said (in part D) that if "a faculty member's teaching is not acceptable, the research record is of no consequence." The Research Council has recommended striking out of this sentence. Dobbs predicted much discussion of this.

There was some concern (K. Bohstedt) with phrase "the faculty member's inability to interact with colleagues and students." B. Glenn said there was work going on to more clearly define this as professional behavior.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller noted that the meeting would be devoted mostly to resolutions on implementation of tenure policy changes. He reminded everyone of the need for nominations for the UT President and urged committee chairs to let him know about items to be brought before the Senate at its remaining meetings. He urged faculty to support the Student Government Association's statewide efforts to lobby the legislature for more funding for higher education. He concluded with a reminder that the Nominations Committee is seeking candidates for Senate President-Elect.

Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of November 16, 1998, and the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting of January 11, 1999, were approved as distributed with the agenda. Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of January 25, 1999, (distributed at the meeting) were approved with the following corrections: (1) in the last two line of item 2 of "Tenure Policy" change "search" to "serious" and "wold" to "would", (2) in the first line of item 3 of "Tenure Policy" change "unclean" to "unclear".

Miller reported on the work of the Senate Tenure Policy Coordinating Committee to develop resolutions for consideration today. He noted that the resolutions are ordered from the least controversial to the most controversial. He then briefly described the procedures to be followed and called upon T. Boulet who moved adoption of the first resolution titled "Merit Pay." Discussion of its item 2 was requested. In response to a question from D. Dobbs, Boulet noted that the term "merit raises" refers to the anticipated "special" raises which are expected to be in the $3,000 to $5,000 range and to be in addition to the "usual" smaller raises faculty have received on occasion for many years. B. Blass noted that merit raises needed to be available on an annual basis, not only every five years. Parts 1 and 3 of this resolution were approved almost without objection. J. Caruthers expressed concern that Part 2 might preclude additional funds for merit raises. Boulet noted such was not the intent and that it was not likely to be the outcome. Part 2 was then approved.

Next B. Glenn moved adoption of the second resolution titled "Due Process." D. Aarons asked that its Part 10 be discussed separately. Tsei-Wei Wang asked whether there exist rules for hearings as described in Part 9; B. Glenn gave an affirmative response with details. Parts 1-9 and 11 were then approved. D. Aarons made the friendly amendment that Part 10 be changed from "a preponderance of evidence" to "clear and convincing evidence." The amended Part 10 was approved.

Next B. Glenn moved adoption of the third resolution titled "Service." D. Dobbs noted that the statement of the AAUP quoted in the resolution begins with institutional service and asked whether that term should not be replaced with a broader term. Glenn pointed out that other types of service are included later in the quote and Dobbs withdrew his objection. T. Plank expressed some unease with having a resolution on service but none on teaching or research. Miller explained that those topics are addressed extensively throughout the policy and other documents and the resolution on service was included in the interest of balance. The resolution was approved.

Next Glenn moved adoption of the resolution titled "Performance Standards and Evaluation Instruments." After a very brief discussion, the resolution was approved.

Next Glenn moved adoption of the resolution titled "Timing of Performance Evaluations." Wang asked whether the intent is for each department's bylaws to include the details of this resolution and the others. A. Burstein noted that bylaws for his department will only reference college and university requirements. In response to a question, Miller noted that the lengthy lag-time allows faculty and administrators to prepare and distribute their documents. The resolution was approved.

Next Glenn moved adoption of the resolution titled "Procedures for Performance Evaluations." A friendly amendment from Burstein to change "an" to "each" in part 4 was accepted. In response to a question from Wang, Glenn noted that the new tenure policy includes the right of a faculty member to appeal an evaluation. In response to a question from Blass, J. Peters said that the intent is that a faculty member have an opportunity to see and to comment on every evaluation before it is sent to the next level of administration. By friendly amendment, in the fourth "Whereas" clause the wording "two purposes to improve faculty performance" was replaced with "the following purposes: to promote faculty development, to ensure professional vitality." M. Papke expressed concern about the reference to "a specific rating" in part 7. By friendly amendments "assigns a specific rating of" in part 7 was replaced with "rates" and "improvement" was changed to "development." The amended resolution was approved.

Next Glenn moved adoption of the resolution titled "Accountability of Administrators." Poore noted that the process of administrator review is not mature and not settled and that the review of department heads already is handled by deans. He expressed the view that this resolution does not fit with the others. After some further discussion of the resolution, it was approved.

Next Glenn moved adoption of the resolution titled "Categories for Reporting Performance Evaluations." He explained that the alternative versions of the first resolving clause were included to start the discussion. Burstein moved that the third alternative be substituted for the original resolving clause; the motion was seconded. Blass moved that the meeting move to a committee of the whole for ten minutes. His motion was approved. After comments in support of the original resolving clause and the second and third alternatives and comments on the possible categories, the Senate moved from committee of the whole. Blass then suggested adding a statement to the second alternative to limit the number of years one could be in the category "needs improvement." Peters then noted that the administration needs rankings, not just narratives, to report to the Board of Trustees. It was then decided to vote on the original clause and each of the alternatives as acceptable or unacceptable. The original clause was found acceptable; the first alternative unacceptable; the second alternative acceptable; and the last one unacceptable. A two-category system was voted unacceptable. The second alternative then was voted more favorable than the original clause. Finally, the original resolution was amended by replacing the first resolving clause with the second (middle) alternative. The amended resolution was then approved.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller reported that the task force on tenure has prepared a draft document which has been reviewed by the legal office and is now being revised. Last week Miller spoke to a student rally on the Capital Mall in Nashville. The students were rallying to support better funding for higher education. Miller said that contributions to pay for the students' transportation may be routed through him. Miller noted that the Executive Committee authorized him to establish a Technology Policy Committee and he intends to do so. Miller attended a meeting of the Board of Trustees in Tullahoma. The search for a new president is in the "cultivation stage." Miller reminded everyone that there will be a reception for President Joe Johnson after next month's Faculty Senate meeting.

Chancellor's Report (B. Snyder)
Snyder distributed an article titled "Cautious Optimism" and read a statement from the faculty to the Board of Trustees in 1884; the statement concerned the need for better support for the University and is still appropriate. Snyder then read the first two paragraphs of his article which is to appear in Context. He complimented the governor for bringing the matter of tax reform to the table. He noted that for the second consecutive year UTK is not to receive an increase in its basic state funding. Because UTK is receiving a greater percentage of its formula-funding figure than are other state schools, funding increases are going elsewhere. He encouraged individuals to contact their state representatives concerning the need for tax reform. In response to a question from O. Schwarz, Snyder said that he has been told that UTK will not have a third consecutive year of no funding increase; he also said that only a year or so should be required to bring other school up to UTK's percentage level of funding.

Title IV Compliance (M. Moffett)
Moffett distributed a handout and then described monitoring of financial aid. It will be necessary to monitor enrollment. Moffett described a proposed system for the necessary monitoring; details appear in her handout. Some system will be instituted next fall semester.

Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of February 1, 1999, were approved as distributed. With the correction that paragraph 1, line 2 should read "suggested adding the Freedom of ..." the minutes of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting of February 15, 1999, also were approved.

Nominating Committee (A. Burstein)
Burstein reported the committee hopes to have a slate ready by the next meeting.

Bylaws Committee (M. Papke)
Papke noted that the proposed bylaws for the Teaching Council (distributed with agenda) will replace the current Faculty Senate Bylaws statement concerning the Council. She also pointed out that the penultimate line of the second paragraph of the proposed bylaws should have the word "Excellence" in place of "Education."

Faculty & Staff Benefits Committee (C. Thompson)
Thompson presented a revised resolution (distributed at meeting) concerning long term care coverage for faculty and staff. After a brief discussion the resolution was approved without dissent.

Research Council Report on Freedom of Information Legislation (B. Blass)
Blass distributed a resolution and then described a bill passed by Congress in late 1998; a one-sentence amendment to the bill requires certain researchers with support from federal funds to make their data available to anyone who asks without any safeguards concerning, for example, patient confidentiality, business confidentiality, proprietary data, etc. Attempts to repeal or, at least, to modify the legislation are underway. B. Glenn moved that the resolution paragraph be amended to read as follows: Be it resolved that the Faculty Senate urges the Tennessee House delegation to support HR88 which would repeal the regulation and urges the Tennessee Senate delegation to support a similar measure; and be it resolved that the Faculty Senate directs the Senate President to communicate these sentiments in entirety to Tennessee Congressmen and Senators. J. Poore seconded the motion. Blass noted that the original version encourages the State of Tennessee Legislative delegation to use its abilities to rewrite the legislation in a more rational way. B. Glenn noted through example how the current legislation can be abused. Blass then responded that a resolution to repeal is politically unwise. The amendment was approved overwhelmingly. The amended resolution then was approved unanimously.

Budget Committee (T. Boulet)
Boulet noted that his report was distributed at the meeting. He then briefly reviewed the report which addresses the perceived impact of removal of the sales tax on food and of establishing a comprehensive business tax. In response to a question from Poore, Boulet said that the proposed tax changes would provide tax income that was lost with the creation of limited liability corporations.

Motion on Intercampus Connector (B. Postow)
C. Faver moved that the resolution be approved; T. Heffernan seconded the motion. J. Nolt then described the history of the proposed bridge, why the issue should be of concern to the campus and the Faculty Senate, a long list of individuals and organizations that oppose the current proposed connector, and the resolution. After a brief discussion the question was called and seconded. D. Dobbs noted that a yes vote would stop discussion. Discussion was stopped and then the resolution was approved.

Miller then asked that Faculty Senators cast their votes for the Committee on Committees.

Finally, Miller asked for comments or suggestions on what the Faculty Senate might do to influence the tax reform discussion. Heffernan suggested distributing a list of the names, addresses, etc. of state legislators.

President's Report (M. Miller) Miller reported that B. Sansom, Chair of the Board of Trustees Presidential Search Committee, may attend to report to the faculty. He then reminded everyone that the next Executive Committee meeting will be held April 26, 1999.

Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of March 1, 1999, and of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meetings of March 22 and March 29, 1999 were accepted as distributed. The last meeting was a special meeting.

Nominating Committee (J. Poore and B. Glenn) (Al Burstein)
Burstein noted that information on and from each candidate president-elect was distributed at the meeting. He then asked Poore and Glenn to respond to any questions that might be posed. D. Dobbs asked about specific ideas each candidate might have in mind for reorganizing the Faculty Senate and getting faculty participation in the process. Poore responded that he did not have specific suggestions, but knew things are not working as well as they should. Glenn noted that much can be learned about Faculty Senate structure from other institutions. B. Postow asked each candidate to comment on what distinguishes himself from the other. Glenn responded that Poore and he have served together on the Executive Committee this year and he has agreed with essentially everything Poore has said. Poore noted that Glenn knows more about Faculty Senate structure than he does, but that he is anxious to learn. T. Heffernan asked about the relation between academics and athletics. Poore responded that the faculty should not blame its situation on the success of athletics. Glenn noted that there is an imbalance between the two. R. Pursley asked about the candidates' opinions on collective bargaining. Glenn said he would not be bothered by being represented collectively; Poore indicated he would prefer not to go the collective bargaining route.

Educational Policy Committee (L. Bensel-Meyers)
Bensel-Meyers noted that the committee's report was distributed with the agenda and also noted that in it attention was called to the renewed policy to include a Financial Impact Statement with all undergraduate curricular changes. The specific minutes approved by the committee are those of the Graduate Council meetings of October 22, 1998, and December 10, 1998, and January 28, 1999, and of the Undergraduate Council meetings of November 12, 1998, and January 21, 1999. The report was accepted.

Faculty & Staff Benefits Committee (C. Thompson)
Thompson described the resolution which was distributed at the meeting and which calls for faculty to have the option of a lump sum payment upon retirement. There is legislation in committee which would allow such a payment. Several faculty spoke in favor of the resolution. J. Caruthers cautioned that there may be negative legal repercussions from taking a lump sum distribution.

Presidential Search Committee (B. Sansom)
Sansom noted that there is a court agreement to be honored and there are sunshine laws to be obeyed in the search. He then briefly reviewed the history of the search. He reported that the search has been in the cultivation stage, which he hopes is about to end. He expressed his belief that the requirements for the position have been raised. He hopes to narrow the list of candidates to six or so in the next couple of weeks. He would like to have three to five candidates visit the system campuses. In response to a question from B. Snyder, Sansom said that the biggest negative in the process is the level of state funding.

Bylaws Committee (M. Papke)
Papke noted that Bylaws for the Teaching Council were distributed with the agenda. The Bylaws were distributed initially for the March 1, 1999, meeting. They were approved without objection. Papke then encouraged Faculty Senators to let her know about their interests and ideas concerning committee assignments for next year.

Legislative Committee (M. Combs)
Combs praised the committee. He noted that information on how to contact state legislators was distributed today by email to Faculty Senators. He then reviewed some of the activity of the committee. In particular, he noted that legislators and others with whom the committee has met have wanted to hear more about the faculty than they usually hear. The committee has gotten much good information on how to make its voice heard.

Tenure Policy (M. Miller)
Miller briefly reviewed the history of the tenure policy. He then introduced B. Glenn who described a resolution (distributed at the meeting) on the new tenure section for the Faculty Handbook. The resolution comes from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and endorses the new policy. Glenn described several representative modifications to the policy which address concerns of the faculty. He also described some changes that were not made. Miller asked for discussion. J. Caruthers complimented those faculty who worked on revising the policy and asked about additional changes that were not made. Glenn noted the imposition of the same four evaluation categories for cumulative reviews as are to be used in annual reviews. The resolution then was approved without objection.

President's Report (M. Miller)
Miller said the meeting would be expedited because an open session with one of the candidates for the presidency of the UT Systems begins at 4:00 p.m. Miller then turned over the meeting to M. Papke.

Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting of April 5, 1999, and of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting of April 26, 1999, were approved without change.

Nominating Committee (A. Burstein)
Burstein announced that Bob Glenn has been elected President-Elect and Sam Jordan has been re-elected Secretary.

Educational Policy Committee (L. Bensel-Meyers)
Bensel-Meyers reported that the committee has approved the minutes of or actions taken at the Graduate Council meetings of March 11, 1999, and April 22, 1999, and of the Undergraduate Council meetings of March 25, 1999, and April 29, 1999, with the following "Item for Attention" (ref. UG minutes of 29 April 1999):

The Educational Policy Committee would like to draw special attention to the New Admissions Standards recommended by John Peters as revised at the Undergraduate Council meeting on 29 April 1999. The EPC unanimously supports the proposed admissions standards, particularly as a way to address the problems arising from inflationary enrollment figures. We also suggest that, before and after these new standards take effect, the University continues to address the problems of inadequate numbers of sections of required courses while also avoiding the option of raising individual class capacities. We believe strongly that excessively large classes, particularly for students in their first year at UTK, may resolve the problem of inflationary enrollments but at the expense of the quality of education and, ultimately, UTK's academic reputation.

The report was approved.

Athletics Committee (S. Dimmick)
Dimmick talked about the update of the 1994 academic assessment of student-athletes and recommended that such updates be done on a regular basis. Student-athlete performance is similar to that of the general student population. Graduation rates (over six-year periods) also are similar.

International Education Committee (M. Papke for K. Greenberg)
Papke noted that the bylaws changes recommended by the committee must be properly processed before consideration by the full Faculty Senate.

Digital Millenium Copyright Act Committee (S. Goldston for F. Muly)
Goldston briefly reported on the activities of the committee.

Papke briefly noted that reports have been provided by the Faculty Affairs Committee and by the Budget Committee. The latter's report contains a proposed resolution on funding. There was no discussion of it. It was approved.

Committee on Committees (M. Papke) Papke noted that a corrected list of committee memberships was available at the meeting. The committees were approved.

M. Combs encouraged everyone to complete the survey on CTEP and to encourage colleagues to do so. He would appreciate assistance processing forms during the summer.

A. Burstein proposed that a letter of concern be sent to the chairman of the Board Search Committee to protest the lack of information on the candidates for the presidency of the UT System. The proposal was seconded. The proposal was approved.

B. Lyons moved that the Executive Committee create a list of no more than five questions to be presented to the presidential candidates for written responses to be posted on the web for the benefit of faculty and others. The motion was seconded. B. Ralston saw no reason to ask the Executive Committee to do something that probably cannot be done before the fast-moving decision process concludes. B. Gould asked whether the previous proposal by Burstein should be amended to include the current proposal. Lyons accepted the suggestion as a friendly amendment to his resolution. The amended resolution was approved.

D. Dobbs then thanked the senators for their work and wished them the best for the future. This meeting is his last as parliamentarian.