September 17, 1979

September 19, 1979

October 15, 1979

November 19, 1979
January 7, 1980

February 4, 1980

February 11, 1980

February 22, 1980
March 3, 1980

March 24, 1980

April 8, 1980

April 11, 1980

June 23, 1980


17 September 1979; 3 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Pauline Bayne, Presiding.

Members present: Bayne, Carruth, Keller, Lacey, Patton, Pfleeger, Silverstein, Swagler, Walker; Sam Hung (Academic Council), Bob Crowder (Student Government).

Guest: L. McGehee

1. GTA Seminar
Russ French reported on the seminar for graduate teaching assistants. There are 45 GTA's, representing 8 departments, enrolled in the course. They have already had two sessions, and will be having 6 more throughout the term. Each department has a faculty coordinator who will participate in the activities, and will provide another 9 hours of instruction throughout the term. One of the activities of the seminar is a coordinated effort with the Council on Teaching and Learning to hold a joint session open to all GTA's on campus.
2. Special Assistant to the President
Dr. Lawrence McGehee has been named a Special Assistant to the President for Advancement of the Humanities. He attended the meeting at the request of the president of the Faculty Senate, in order to inform the committee what his duties are. The bulk of his efforts, he reported, are in fund raising. He reports that the bulk of fund raising efforts, although productive for the University, have not been supportive to the humanities. He will be working to develop sources of funding that relate especially to humanities activities for all campuses. He mentioned a 11,000,000 challenge grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities that has been received by UTK. It will require $3. to be matched for every $1. received.

Additional areas of concern to him are to build the academic reputation of the UT system, to coordinate and relate humanities activities on the various UT campuses, and to perform public relations activities for the humanities.
3. Search for Vice-President for Agriculture
Luther Keller reported on the progress of the search for a new Vice President for the institute for agriculture.

The advisory committee for Dr. Boling identified seven candidates for the position, and it recommended that they be brought in for interviews. (Of the seven candidates, three are on campus, and four are off.) All were interviewed, and the interview team members were invited to submit anonymous reactions on the candidates to Dr. Boling. Dr. Boling reported that there was no consensus among the comments, and he felt he could not comfortably name any of the seven candidates. He then went to Dean Willis Armistead, presently Dean of the 'College of Veterinary Medicine, who had previously asked that his name be removed from consideration for the post. Dean Armistead was asked if he would reconsider being nominated, to which he agreed. He is now being interviewed. Dr. Boling expects to have a decision by the Board of Trustees meeting on October 27.
4. Faculty Senate Committee Meetings
Pauline Bayne announced a meeting of the Committee on Committees, for Tuesday, September 18, in the Law School Faculty Lounge, and a meeting of the Executive Committee, the Budget Committee, and the Library Committee for Wednesday, September 19 in the Board Room, Andy Holt Tower. She also invited senators to suggest charges for the various committees.
5. Newsletters
Pauline Bayne announced that there are two Faculty Senate newsletters that will be written and distributed to the faculty this quarter. These have as topics (1) What is the Faculty Senate? A review of past activities (Russ French) and a forecast of next year's activities (Carl Pierce). Additionally there will be some information on the officers and the committees of the Senate. (2) The Faculty Handbook--its features and its importance.
6. Deans' Retreat
Russ French reported on the Deans' Retreat that he attended. The first speaker at the retreat was Louis Donaldson, Finance Commissioner for the State of Tennessee. Mr. Donaldson stated that the current administration had absolutely no plans for any kind of new tax over the next three years. In a later session. led by Dr. Boling and Joe Johnson, four issues of state concern relating to UTK were discussed. Russ recommended that the Faculty Senate develop a position on all of these areas, and be prepared to push the legislature for outcomes that will be desirable for UTK. The areas are:
a. Salaries. There is presently a debate over whether SREB average or longevity should be used as the basis for increases. This item is likely to be included in the THEC formula, which is to be revised this year.

b. Study of Faculty Workloads. A study will be done, by mandate of the legislature, to go to the legislature either late in this legislative term or early in the next.

c. Library. The current library crisis in not directly caused by expanded student load; it is rather the result of severe underfunding for a number of years. It is much easier to sell an issue based on increase in the student population.

d. Performance Funding. THEC is expected to have a major interest in performance funding (funding based on observable measures of quality), especially in the new THEC formula.
Russ urged the Senate to develop positions and to work to convince the legislature to follow those positions. Bob Crowder (President of SGA) noted that SGA has a continuing lobby activity with the legislature, and this year they will attempt to make their points with the governor and the finance commissioner before the budget is sent to the legislature. He invited the Senate's participation and cooperation in this lobbying.
7. THEC Formula
Harvey Carruth reported that he had received a 40 page document purported to be "The Formula" by which THEC allocates funds. However, the document was not the real formula that would enable one to determine University funding given the appropriate student credit hours, work loads, etc. as input to the formula. Ken Walker indicated that after much searching, he had finally found someone in the Treasurer's office who could give him the number of dollars generated per student credit hour, for three years previous. Russ French suggested that Homer Fisher or Mary Richards might have a concise, indicative version of the THEC formula.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate


19 September 1979--Communications Auditorium, 3:00 pm

Carl Pierce, presiding

Guests: J. Reese, H. Fisher, R. Norman, D. Hunt, K. Marks, G. Shipman, R. Pollard

The meeting was called at the request of Chancellor Reese to discuss issues relating to University funding and the University library situation.

Revision to THEC Formula. Chancellor Reese asked Vice Chancellor Fisher to comment on the proposed revision to the THEC funding formula. These changes have been proposed by THEC for adoption by the General Assembly. Vice Chancellor Fisher noted the following major changes:
1. Enrollment Count. Enrollment will be counted by a marginal cost mechanism, whereby the University is not penalized for minor fluctuations in enrollment. There will be a range of student enrollment, and the University will receive the same appropriation per student as long as the number of students falls within that range. This change will permit enrollment limitations where appropriate, and it will prevent a severe appropriations decline due to a minor shortfall in enrollment.

2. Library Inflation. A specific increase of 15% has been budgeted for library materials, to recognize the excessive rate at which these costs have gone up.

3. Performance Funding. A component of the formula will be "performance funding," which is designed to base program funding, in part, on objective measures of program quality. UTK is expected to benefit more from this item than the other THEC units.

4. Research Funding. Research funding will be divided 50% for nonformula funded 'units and the remaining 50% for general state research activities. Furthermore, indirect cost recovery will no longer be deducted at 75% from state appropriations; rather, the entire amount of indirect cost recovery from grants will now be retained by the University.

5. Maintenance. A clause will be added to recognize the extra cost in maintaining a building with heavy use or an older building. Presently maintenance is figured on a per-square foot basis.

6. Equipment Replacement. A regular allocation for replacement of equipment will be included.

7. Inflation Excesses. There will be a means to cover excessive increases in certain costs--such as libraries and utilities--without cutting into the remainder of the operating budget.
Chancellor Reese then offered some remarks on his perceptions about funding for UTK in the near future. In general he is not optimistic about large increases in the level of funding for UTK. Finance Commissioner Donaldson has told him that the present state administration has absolutely no plans for any new form of tax. The recession that is projected will imply a low level of collections from current Tennessee taxes.

The Chancellor did remind the committee members that, although UTK is not fully formula funded (and has not been so since 1973), the formula does determine the proportional distribution of funds among state educational institutions. He, furthermore, expects many of the formula changes to increase the share that UTK receives of funds allocated for education.

Library Building. The Chancellor announced that the construction of a new main library building is the next capital outlay project for which UTK will push. The Finance Commissioner is attempting to form a list of projects for the state, and to order this list. UTK will attempt to convince the commissioner of the extremely high priority of a new library building.

The building is expected, at today's costs, to cost $25 million, and construction costs are increasing rapidly annually. It will be extremely difficult to convince the legislature to allocate funds for such a large project. Various means of spreading the cost over two or more years--without jeopardizing the funding of the entire project--will be explored.

Current Library Situation. The current library needs are twofold: (a) space for new acquisitions, and (b) resources to counter the severe effects of inflation. On the first of these, space, Chancellor Reese reported that construction will begin soon on a warehouse in which certain library holdings can be housed temporarily. The building will be designed so that it can be reused when a new main library is completed. The building should be ready for use in about one year.

Regarding the budget problem, Reese reported that the administration has requested 6% of the total operating budget for library needs, but that the annual amount since 1973 has ranged from 5.0% to 5.27%. The library has had to impound a portion of its current budget in order to guarantee enough funds to cover the dramatic increases in continuing costs, such as journals. Reese stated that additional funds are going to have to be acquired from private fund-raising to support the library. He pointed to a recent National Endowment for the Humanities grant that will provide some amount of matching funds for library support. Reese noted that in fund-raising efforts, such as the Tennessee Tomorrow campaign, it will be necessary to convince potential donors of the ultimate value of library support.

Enrollment Reduction. As a final item, Chancellor Reese posed an open question for considerable -additional debate. One option that has been presented to UTK is a significant, phased, planned reduction in enrollment, without a reduction in funding. He noted there are obvious dangers in such a reduction, and said that he is simply now raising the issue with his staff and with the faculty, for consideration. One option stated by Reese was having a student admitted to The University of Tennessee, without being admitted to a particular college or program. Then programs could place a limit on the number of students who later enter the programs. Reese said all of these issues will require much serious thought and discussion.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
(8 Ayres Hall--5067)


15 October 1979--3:00 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge,

Carl Pierce, presiding

Members present: Pierce, French, Pfleeger, Carruth, Swagler, Posey, Silverstein, Herndon, Lacey, Crowder

Some discussion was made of the special salary adjustment funds provided by the legislature, and how the Senate could best help the central administration to continue to receive these funds. Walter Herndon stated that there had been wide variation among the colleges and departments in how these funds were distributed. Some units used merit as a factor in determining how to distribute them. It was decided to wait for the faculty to react to the raises before deciding whether or not to have the Budget Committee study how the funds were used.

It was reported that Chancellor Reese feels funds will likely not be available for reducing inequities as compared against other SREB schools; more likely the choice will be between longevity pay or nothing. Lacey moved that the Budget Committee be charged with studying forms of supplemental appropriations that can be used to improve faculty salaries. The motion was passed unanimously.
The recommendations (attached) of the Summer School Committee were received. Since there are a wide variety of recommendations, it was decided to ask the committees to study the proposals, and to use the Senate structure to respond to, support, and suggest alternatives to the items in the report. The committees should seek information from the summer school committee, and then bring specific resolutions to the Senate based on their findings. In particular, the Faculty Affairs Committee should examine those recommendations involving faculty appointments and the scheduling of faculty to teach in summer. The Budget Committee should evaluate the recommendations relating to budget and fiscal policies. The Undergraduate Council should evaluate the programmatic suggestions, and the Committee on Advising should examine the recommendations related to advising during the summer.

Russell French and Warren Gaston will prepare a summary of the current findings of the committee on Retention and Attrition, and will provide continuing information to the Senate from that group.
Various items from the Chancellor's Annual Report were discussed, resulting in a number of charges to specific committees of the Senate. The following resolutions were approved to be presented to the Senate.
Resolved that the Executive Committee endorses the Chancellor's charge to the Undergraduate Council for a two year study and evaluation of general education at UTK, as presented in the Chancellor's annual report.

Resolved that the Executive Committee charge the Budget committee to undertake a study of the limitation or enrollment, as outlined in the Chancellor's annual report.

Resolved that the Executive Committee endorses the Chancellor's charge to the Undergraduate Council, as set forth in his annual report to the faculty, to study the need for improved advising of first year students, and to report its findings to the Senate.

Resolved that the Executive Committee endorses the Chancellor's charge to the Undergraduate Council, as set forth in his annual report to the to faculty, to undertake a study of the possibility of admitting students to the University at-large, rather than to the separate colleges, and to report any findings and recommendations to the Senate.

Resolved that the Executive Committee endorses the Chancellor's charge to the Undergraduate Council, as set forth in his annual report to the faculty, to study the treatment of undeclared majors on the UTK campus, and to report any findings and recommendations to the Senate.

Resolved that the Executive Committee charges the Educational Policy Committee, in conjunction and consultation with deans and department heads, to evaluate the mix of lower division, upper division, and graduate level courses offered at UTK, and to inquire whether UTK may be utilizing a disproportionate amount of resources and faculty time on the latter two categories of instruction at the expense of lower-division work, and to report any findings and recommendations to the Senate.
The issues of the financial and academic impact of Energy Expo '82 on UTK were raised. The following resolution was passed.
Resolved that the Executive Committee charge the Budget Committee to undertake a study of the financial impact of Energy Expo '82 on the University, and that the Budget Committee report any findings and recommendations to the Senate.
Carl Pierce noted that discussion of the pros and cons of Expo or a call for a referendum would be ruled out of order.
Harvey Carruth reported on progress from the Fringe Benefits committee toward a position urging the state to assume a greater proportion of the cost of fringe benefits. Bernard Silverstein raised his concern that the Senate has never adopted a position and lobbied with the General Assembly for salary improvements. The following resolution was approved.
Resolved that the Executive Committee charges the Budget Committee, in close consultation with the Fringe Benefits Committee, to formulate a proposal for a faculty position on salary increases and budgetary means by which these increases can be achieved.
It was also noted that these issues would be appropriate for consideration by the Presidents of the Faculty Senates of the various UT campuses.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate.


19 November 1979: 3:00 pm; Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl Pierce, presiding.

Present: Pierce, Bayne, French, Pfleeger, Carruth, Swagler, Jolley, Hood, Patton, Wheeler, Kenney, Lacey, Hung.

1. Announcements:
The second issue of the Newsletter will be delivered to the printer soon, and will be distributed shortly.
2. Athletics Committee, report on Affirmative Action.
Sharon Patton reported for the Athletics committee on the issue of Affirmative Action in the Athletics Department. She reported her group's having met with representatives of the Athletics Department, and having been informed that the Athletics Department does not follow UTK guidelines for Affirmative Action in hiring, because that department is responsible not to the Chancellor of UTK, but to the Athletics Board, an arm of the UT system. It was also pointed out that President Boling has reported that Affirmative Action procedures used in academics are not appropriate in the hiring of coaches.

The Executive Committee expressed two items of concern. First is the question of the Athletics Department having an effective affirmative action program, since the University in general has made a commitment to affirmative action. Second, there is question as to why the Athletics Department should be responsible to UT Systems level people for its affirmative action commitments, since in the event of an affirmative action "audit," it would likely be UTK that would be penalized for any deficiency in the affirmative action activities of the Athletics Department.

The Athletics Committee was charged to do three things. First, Andrew Kozar, Executive Assistant to President Boling has been assigned the task of creating an affirmative action policy for the Athletics Department. The Athletics Committee will work with Dr. Kozar in developing this policy. The Commission for Blacks of UTK is also in the process of drafting an affirmative action policy for athletics. The Athletics Committee will work with the Commission for Blacks and any other interested groups at UTK (e.g., the Commission for Women) in an attempt to present one unified statement on this aspect of affirmative action. Finally, the Athletics Committee will consider the feasibility of an affirmative action policy for athletics that could become a model for NCAA.
3. Minority Representation in the Faculty Senate.
At its last meeting, the Senate charged the Executive Committee to investigate the representation of minorities in the Senate and to see if the senatorial election process may discriminate against minorities. Carl Pierce reported that he has sent a letter to Vice Chancellor Ebersole requesting the number of white male, black, female, and foreign-born faculty members, broken down by Senate electoral unit. He will also send letters to the heads of the units asking for the proportions of white males, women, and blacks, broken down by rank, seeking nomination, nominated but not elected, and elected. Mr. Pierce pointed out that he is doing this in order to gather information in order to define the problem if one exists.

He suggested making the chairs of the Commission for Blacks and the Commission for Women voting ex-officio members of the Senate. The Executive Committee deferred action on this proposal.
4. President's Remarks.
Pierce reported that a committee will be formed to study the evaluation of teaching. This committee will be a subcommittee of the Faculty Affairs Committee, the Student Affairs Committee, and the ad hoc Committee on Instructional Improvement. The subcommittee will study what has been done in the area of evaluation of teaching, both here and at other schools; they will consider what can be done, and they will present specific proposals to the Senate for action. Because student evaluation is an important element of the evaluation of teaching, students will be especially important members of this committee.

Pierce reported that the ad hoc committee on advising, currently a subcommittee of the Undergraduate Council, may be moved to the Student Affairs Committee, now that the mandatory advising program is instituted and running.

On the issue of communication among the faculty senates of the entire UT system, Pierce reported that he has agreed to exchange committee membership lists and minutes of committees across the system in order to coordinate the efforts of many people at different UT campuses. One area of special concern that was raised was establishing more direct contact between the various committees responsible for fringe benefits within the system. It is important to deal with the systems level administration in a unified manner since any policy would affect all UT personnel. The use of the University Councilor as a faculty line of communication to the systems administration was suggested.
5. New Business.
Ken Kenney raised the issue of THEC/legislative interest in seeing tuition raised faster in the professional schools than in the rest of the University. Because of the urgency of time, this issue was immediately directed to the Student Affairs Committee, and they were charged to begin work as soon as possible, in order to have some information ready before the legislature begins to consider the budget.

Mr. Kenney also raised the question of the calendar change to accommodate Expo. Mr. Pierce reported that the entire impact of Expo on the campus will be considered by the Budget Committee. This issue will be one especially directed to the Budget Committee's attention, however.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate.


4 February 1980--Law School Faculty Lounge, 3:15 pm.

Present: Pierce, Pfleeger, Bayne, Posey, Patton, Swagler, Lacey, Carruth, Kenney, Walker, Wheeler, Snyder, Hood, Keller, Silverstein, Crowder, Herndon.

1. Program Review.
Carl Pierce commented on discussions he had had with Clarence Minkel and Ralph Norman on the subject of program reviews. They intend to prepare a document outlining the scope and manner of program review. They expect to present the document to the Senate for review and endorsement by the middle of the 1980-81 academic year.

Ken Walker suggested that they should also present their interim plan to the Senate for approval now. Carl Pierce will speak to them to ask them to present an interim plan at the next Senate meeting.
2. Faculty Handbook, Applicability to the Institute for Agriculture.
Carl Pierce announced that Vice-President Armistead has named a faculty committee from the Institute for Agriculture to draft a separate faculty handbook for people in the Institute. Several members of the Executive Committee expressed concern that a separate handbook could act to separate those faculty members from the rest of the Knoxville campus and could negate a number of carefully achieved gains for those faculty members. The committee directed President Pierce to write a letter to the chair of that handbook committee, offering the involvement of someone from UTK outside the Institute; he will make himself available as one such liaison person. The feeling is that one handbook, perhaps with additional sections applicable only to the people from the Institute for Agriculture, is preferable to two handbooks. Mr. Pierce will try to communicate these feelings.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall -974-5067


11 February 1980; 3:30 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl Pierce, presiding

Present: Pierce, Pfleeger, Bayne, Swagler, Kenney, Jolley, Lacey, Carruth, Patton, Silverstein, Keller, Hood, Posey, Herndon

1. Black Cultural Center
Two draft resolutions concerning the recent events at the Black Cultural Center were proposed and seconded at the meeting of 4 February 1980. Carl Pierce moved to substitute the attached resolution for the previous two resolutions. The motion to substitute was seconded and passed. Pauline Bayne moved that the resolution be accepted and transmitted to the Chancellor and to the Daily Beacon. The motion was seconded and passed.
2. UT-Expo Coordinating Committee
Ken Kenney reported that although a proposed calendar revision was published in the Daily Beacon and elsewhere, no decision has yet been reached on calendar adjustments for Expo. The Chancellor is reported to be disinclined to see the calendar changed.
3. Fringe Benefits
Harvey Carruth reported that there was some possibility that the General Assembly would consider tax sheltering retirement contributions. Carl Pierce moved that the Fringe Benefits committee be charged to move immediately to make all efforts necessary to secure the tax sheltering of our retirement contributions. The motion was seconded and passed.
4. Faculty Affairs
Carl Pierce stated that he had just sent a memo to Clint Allison asking the Faculty Affairs committee to work on four issues: (a) evaluation/promotion/ tenure criteria, (b) summer school: compensation, teaching load, (c) retirement and faculty demographics (d) collective bargaining.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:17 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall--974-5067.


22 February 1980, 1:30 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl Pierce, presiding

Present: Pierce, Bayne, Pfleeger, French, Patton, Silverstein, Jolley, Walker, Keller, Lacey, Swagler, Kenney, Posey, Herndon

Guests: Leuthold, Crowder

The purpose of the special meeting was to consider various pieces of legislation before the General Assembly.

The first piece of legislation was Senate Bill 2258, a bill to give THEC the power to eliminate any programs it found to be unnecessarily duplicative. Jolley moved that this be declared a piece of legislation on which the Faculty Senate as an institution should take a position. The motion was seconded and passed. Because of the timely nature of the issue, the Executive committee concluded the bill could not be taken to the full Senate.

The Executive Committee determined the following shortcomings of the bill: (a) it is more powerful than necessary to address the problem for which it is intended, (b) it is inappropriate to UTK, because it is designed to solve a problem among certain Board of Regents institutions, (c) it substantially increases the level of influence of THEC, giving THEC blanket authority to terminate programs, (d) the bill is vague; it is not clear what "unnecessarily duplicative" means, and (e) the bill does not address issues of program quality. The Executive Committee charged Carl Pierce and Frank Leuthold as representatives of the Faculty Senate and its Executive Committee to express the concerns over this bill to the Knox County Legislative Delegation and to communicate as clearly as possible the nature of those concerns.

The second piece of legislation was House Bill 1460, the so-called "Truth in Testing" bill. Passage of this bill would have the effect of virtually eliminating the ability of Educational Testing Service and similar bodies to function in Tennessee. Keller moved that the Executive Committee, acting for the Faculty Senate, go on record as opposed to this legislation. The motion was seconded and passed.

Frank Leuthold briefly presented several other bills; the Executive Committee decided to take no action on any of these bills.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall -974-5067


3 March 1980, 3:15 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl Pierce, presiding

Present--Pierce, Pfleeger, Bayne, Carruth, Jolley, Patton, Walker, Lacey, Kenney, Swagler, Snider, Hood, Silverstein, Posey; Keller, Leuthold

1. Long Range Planning Reports
Carl Pierce presented a timetable and a plan for Senate review and advice on the University long range planning reports. This plan involves each report's being studied and debated by a Senate committee. The committee will prepare a set of remarks--additions, deletions, and revisions--to the report and will communicate these remarks to the full Senate. The Senate will vote on each remark, thereby indicating approval or disapproval of each to the University administration. In any event, the remarks will become a permanent appendix to the planning report.

In order to allow ample time for study of and reaction to these reports, there will be additional meetings of the Senate during spring quarter. The additional meetings and the reports to be considered at each will be
21 April -- Student Housing
Space and Facilities
28 April -- Public Service
Financial Aid/Student Support
5 May -- Faculty Development
12 May -- Academic Program
19 May -- other reports if available

Other Senate business can also be considered at these meetings as needed.
2. Comprehensive Program Review
John Snider raised the subject of comprehensive program reviews. He reported that the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils apparently have an extensive timetable and detailed evaluation strategy.
The Senate approved the evaluation only as an interim program review, with the understanding that the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils will report back to the Senate in the middle of the 1980-81 academic year. At that time the Councils will have experience with a few trial reviews and will present a formal plan for Senate discussion and approval.

The Executive Committee charged the President and the President-Elect to communicate with the Deans, Directors, and Department Heads, to indicate that the program reviews are occurring only on an interim, trial basis, and that any insights gained in the first reviews should be used to refine the review process that will eventually be considered by the Senate.
3. By-Laws Committee
Hood moved that the President appoint a subcommittee to make a recommendation to the By-Laws committee regarding the role of the Executive Committee and the President acting on behalf of the Senate in an emergency situation. The motion passed. The By-Laws committee will meet in joint session with the Executive Committee.
4. Fringe Benefits Committee
Carruth presented a resolution and commentary (attached) for the Fringe Benefits committee. The resolution was supportive of a piece of legislation presently before the General Assembly, calling for the state to develop a noncontributory retirement plan. It was suggested that the comments be changed to proposed amendments to the bills for the ease of the legislative delegation. After considerable discussion, Keller moved that the Executive Committee endorse this resolution; the motion was passed.
5. UT/Oak Ridge Land Transfer
The Executive Committee agreed to charge the Research Council to examine the situation of a pending land transfer to the city of Oak Ridge for use as an airport. The land is presently being used as a continuing research project, and this conversion would destroy the future use of the land for research. The Research Council is to return to the Executive Committee with a recommendation for Senate action.
6. Snow Days
The University policy on inclement weather was distributed and will be discussed at the next Executive Committee meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate,
8 Ayres Hall--974-5067


24 March 1980; 3:00 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl Pierce, presiding

Present: Pierce, Bayne, Pfleeger, Lacey, Posey, Silverstein, Hood, Keller, Jolley, Herndon

Guest: C. Minkel

Dean Minkel was present to explain the comprehensive program reviews being undertaken by the Graduate and Undergraduate Councils together. He distributed a document that outlines the form and rationale for the reviews presently scheduled. Minkel indicated that the form of the review would change as the reviews proceed.

There was concern expressed about the consequences of the reviews. Hood suggested that recommendations arising from the reviews be presented in such as way that they could have an effect on the budget process. Pierce stressed the importance of keeping the consequences of the reviews consistent with those of the PhD program reviews. This is true because the comprehensive reviews have only temporary approval from the Senate. The review program will be formally submitted to the Senate for advice and approval in Spring 1981.
Pierce explained the process of review of the Long Range plans. Four separate mailings have occurred on these reports:
a. The next issue of the Faculty Senate Newsletter will focus on the review of these reports. This newsletter is sent to all faculty members.

b. The office of the Vice-Chancellor for Planning and Administration has sent copies of the eight completed reports to all Senators. Additional reports will be distributed as completed.

c. A letter from Carl Pierce has been sent to all Senators and to Deans, Program Directors, and Department Heads. This letter explains the process by which the long range reports will be reviewed and the timetable for the review.

d. Each committee chair will receive copies of the report for that committee. to study. These copies, and accompanying review guidelines, are intended for all committee members.
The Executive Committee will review the report on Space and Facilities. To that end, Pierce announced a special Executive Committee meeting on Monday, 31 March 1980 at 3 pm in the Law School Faculty Lounge to discuss the report. The committee will hold a public meeting on 3 April at 3 pm in room 118 of the Law College. At a meeting on 11 April, the committee will attempt to finalize its comments on the report.
Carl Pierce reported that George Eckerd of the UT Arboretum had spoken with him regarding the proposed land sale of part of the arboretum to the City of Oak Ridge for use for an airport. Mr. Eckerd stated that the arboretum employs a number of students in various capacities, as well as the fact that the arboretum offers a number of educational opportunities for students. The arboretum would be eliminated if the land sale goes through. The Executive Committee amended its previous charge to the Research Council on the sale of this land to Oak Ridge. The charge was expanded to include a study of the impact upon students as well as upon research activities; the impact on research had been the previous charge.
Bernard Silverstein expressed concern over the recent state hiring freeze and a possible cutback in state salary appropriations. The Executive Committee charged Carl Pierce to communicate to the Governor, to the General Assembly, and to the University administration that it is very important to make every effort to fund 6% salary increases as a minimum. Pierce is also to address the very negative effects of inflation on the University.
Pauline Bayne presented a recommended slate of nominees for election to the Committee on Committees. After discussion, and elimination of some names where more than two candidates were proposed, these nominations were accepted by the Executive Committee.
Carl Pierce presented calendars for the 1981-2 and 1982-3 academic years. These were passed by the University Calendar committee. They will be presented to the Senate for information and for comment.
The Vice-President of the Institute for Agriculture, Willis Armistead, and Carl Pierce have had discussions recently regarding the filling of a vacancy in the Senate for the Agricultural Extension Service. Vice-President Armistead and Dean Downen were reportedly interested in separating the Agricultural Extension Service from representation in the Senate. The Executive Committee expressed the feeling that it was important to maintain representation for the Agricultural Extension specialists' staff headquartered in Knoxville. The Executive Committee went on record as favoring elimination of Senate representation only if a majority of the extension personnel affected approve this severance.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall--974-5067


Special meeting, 8 April 1980: Chancellor's Board of Deans meeting
10:00 am, Board of Trustees Room, Andy Holt Tower

The purpose of the meeting was to learn about a general assessment project being tested on this campus, as a response to the performance funding program of THEC and also in connection with the General Education study now in process.

The exam will be one devised by ACT; it is called the COMP test, with COMP standing for College Outcomes Measurement Program. The goal of the test is to measure outcomes of general education at the end of four years. This exam is reported to be the only standardized test measuring learning in general education.

The exam poses questions in which the student is asked to
understand technology
collect assorted forms of data
communicate effectively
receive information from written materials
use the arts
generate hypotheses
identify major influences on values

ACT reports that there is an almost insignificant correlation between student GPA and test results. The test is also claimed to be bias-free with respect to culture, age, sex. The tentative conclusion from ACT is that the test does measure general education competencies. However, the sample to which the test has now been given is rather small, and so firm conclusions are premature.

The COMP test will be administered at UT-K to a selected number of seniors during the spring quarter. A number of students, carefully selected for age, background, GPA, and other factors, will be asked to take the exam; these students will be selected from the colleges of Business, Education, Engineering and Liberal Arts. Approximately 400 students will hopefully take the exam. Letters inviting the students will be sent out by the Chancellor during the week of April 16. Deans and department heads will be informed of students who have been selected so that they can write or phone follow-up invitations during the following week.

The test will be given the week of May 12, at a number of different times so as to be convenient to the students taking it. May 12 in 221 University Center any faculty and administrators will be able to take the test, so as to learn firsthand what the test is. Students will be tested on 13-16 May.

When results are collected, they can be tabulated in almost any way. For example, it will be possible to determine what percentage of female majors in business administration answered question 31 by answer "A". ACT seems willing to work with the institutions to provide any data the institution can profitably use.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 am.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall--974-5067


11 April 1980, 1:30 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl Pierce, presiding

Present: Pierce, Bayne, Pfleeger, Walker, Jolley, Posey, Patton, Hung

1. University Budget
Pauline Bayne moved that the president be charged to communicate with the administration and the Knox County Legislative Delegation on the serious effect that a budget cutback could have on higher education. The motion was seconded and passed.
2. Judicial Proceedings for Students Arrested at Black Cultural Center
In response to an action of the Senate, Sharon Patton moved that Maureen Groer, as chair of the Student Affairs Committee, be asked to represent the Faculty Senate at the University judicial hearing for the students removed from the Black Cultural Center in January 1980. Maureen Groer is also authorized to select an alternate member of the Student Affairs Committee to serve when she is unable to attend. The motion was seconded and passed.

Carl Pierce recommended to the Executive Committee that it be made clear to the students involved, to the administration, and to the rest of the Senate that in providing a representative, the Senate in no way reflects a lack of confidence in the student judicial process. The purpose of agreeing to the invitation of the students is to help others to feel more comfortable in the judicial process. The role of the observer will be to attend the hearing(s), sit passively and, if asked by the Senate, to respond factually as to what occurred at the hearings. The observer is not intended to judge the review process, but only to reaffirm the faith and confidence in the fairness and impartiality of the process. The Executive Committee agreed.
3. Space and Facilities Long Range Report
A draft set of recommendations on the Long Range Plan for Space and Facilities was distributed. After discussion, these were accepted by the Executive Committee. The full text of the recommendations will be distributed to the Senate prior to the meeting of 21 April.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall--974-5067


23 June 1980--3:00 pm, Law School Faculty Lounge

Carl A. Pierce, presiding

Members present: Bayne, Pfleeger, Lacey, Silverstein, Kenney, Jolley, Patton, Hood, Posey, Herndon. Guest: Don Eastman

Eastman distributed a list of proposed members of numerous UTK committees and commission. He asked if the Faculty Senate felt that it should have a special representative to any of these committees. The Executive Committee felt that Senate representation was important for the Commission for Blacks, the Commission for Women, the Student Affairs Council and the University Calendar Committee. W. Lee Humphreys, a member of the Commission for Women, was also designated as a representative for the Faculty Senate. Pauline Bayne will transmit to Don Eastman the names of other people to serve as designated members of the other committees. Subject to the addition of these people, the Executive Committee approved the committee membership.
Pierce introduced the topic of poor attendance at Senate meetings. He proposed a two-part plan: first, to send a letter of commendation to those Senators who have a high attendance record; a copy of this letter should go to the Senator's Dean or Director or Department Head. Second, Pierce suggested letters to Senators who have poor attendance records, suggesting that they reevaluate their Senate membership, and that they step aside if they feel they cannot devote the time that the Senate should have. The Executive Committee recommended that this second letter as for the senator to reply, indicating a reason for the poor attendance and further indicate an intention to remain on the Senate or to resign. It was decided that the second letter would contain documentation of the attendance pattern (dates of meetings missed), and that it call for an explanation from the Senator, as well as a statement of further intentions from the Senator. The letters will be sent to those Senators who have missed 7 or more meetings this year. (To date, attendance has been taken at 9 meetings.) Pierce will handle both of these items of correspondence as outgoing president.

Pierce and Bayne proposed a Senate calendar having three meetings per quarter (one during the summer), with the third meeting time being reserved for the president to call a special meeting, if one is needed. The Executive Committee approved of this plan.
Pierce nominated Charles Pfleeger to serve as Secretary for 1980-81. Pfleeger accepted the nomination, and the Executive Committee confirmed this nomination. It will be sent to the Senate for election on 14 July 1980.
Pierce opened discussion on the Long Range Plan for Affirmative Action, Hood proposed that statements on pages 15 and 17, which deal with sexual or racial harassment, should apply both to students and to faculty and staff. Hood also suggested that the faculty should be made more aware of racial or sexual harassment by students. Pierce questioned the inclusion of over-25 students under minority classification. Because of the number of items on the agenda for the 14 July 1980 meeting, this plan will not be considered until the fall. The Executive Committee decided to defer further consideration of this plan until later in the summer.

Pierce reminded the Executive committee of a two-part charge with regard to the long range plans: First, the Executive Committee is to review the entire plan process--i.e., the means by which the plans were created, reviewed, and revised. Second, the committee will look at the synthesis of the various plans. Since some of the plans have not yet been produced, the university master plan cannot be constructed until later this fall. At that time the Executive Committee will be able to examine the relationship between elements of different plans. In the meantime, Pierce will contact Homer Fisher to obtain a cost estimate for the recommendations contained in the plans. The Executive Committee will also want to consider specific people charged in the plans to perform some task, and a specific date by which that task is to be performed.
Bayne reported that the Committee on Committees had finished its work for the year, and that specific committee membership lists would be distributed to the Senate for the 14 July meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 pm.

Respectfully submitted, Charles Pfleeger, Secretary to the Faculty Senate
8 Ayres Hall--974-5067

Senate Directory
Governing Documents
   Senate Bylaws
   Faculty Handbook
   Tenure Policy



Senate Home

To offer suggestions or comments about this web site, please click here.