September 8, 1988

October 3, 1988

October 10, 1988

October 14, 1988
November 7, 1989

December 12, 1989

January 23, 1989

February 13, 1989

March 6, 9 and 14, 1989
April 6, 1989

April 17, 1989

May 2, 1989

May 18, 1989

June 12, 1989


8 September 1988, 3:15 P.M., University Center 217

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Mike Davidson, Henry Frandsen, William Hammitt, Tom Hood, Lorayne Lester, Barbara Mead, Marian Moffett, John Muldowny, Carl Pierce, Gregory Reed, Theresa Sharp, and Bruce Wheeler.

Alexander Van Hook called the meeting to order at 3:15 P.M.

Chancellor Search

Van Hook discussed the appointment of Advisory Committee on the search for the Chancellor. He asked what the Faculty Senate's role should be in input on criteria (through input to the three Faculty Senate representatives on the Advisory Committee). A general discussion followed, and several suggestions were given to the three Faculty Senate members of the Advisory Committee, both as to criteria and process.

Other Administrative Searches

The discussion then shifted to the searches for the new vice president positions. Van Hook asked whether the committee should take a position on this or concentrate on the Chancellor's search. A general discussion followed. It was decided that there should be some faculty input on administrative appointments, and Van Hook agreed to discuss the situation with President Alexander.

Report of Handbook Subcommittee

The subcommittee concluded that a common faculty handbook for all campuses has numerous flaws and recommended that the idea be abandoned. It was suggested, however, that a common handbook for closely related institutions (UTK, Agriculture, Space Institute) might be useful.

Research Council Report

Van Hook reported that the Research Council has revised the proposals it made to the Senate in July (they were never voted on). The question about salary has been withdrawn, the research support of new faculty has been rephrased, and the motion to be put forward will be more general than the original.

Executive Committee Retreat

A discussion was held concerning topics the Senate Executive Committee should raise with the administration. They were: 1) affirmative action in hiring of faculty and administrators, 2) academic review process, 3) the possibility of resident faculty being considered for chairs of excellence, 4) space problems, 5) committee on race relations.

The meeting adjourned at 4:10 P.M.

Respectively submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler, Secretary
1113 McClung Tower


October 3, 1988

Called to order by Van Hook at 3:15 p.m.

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Frazier, Hammitt, Hood, A. Hopkins, Jeon, Kenney, L. Lester, Mead, Moffett, Reed, Sharp, B. Wheeler and G. Wheeler.

1. Van Hook distributed report by Magid on Chancellor's retreat of September 22, 1988.

2. Van Hook reported thank-you letter from Don Hunt, in response to Faculty Senate resolution honoring him.
Handbook Committee

Davidson said that the essence of the final report of the subcommittee is the same as the material already discussed, with the exception that the recommendation of a common faculty handbook for "similar campuses" was withdrawn. The subcommittee recommended against approval of a university wide faculty handbook. G. Wheeler reported that Vice President John Prados is aware of the UTK faculty feelings, and will not press the issue. Van Hook offered to send a copy of the report to Dr. Prados directly from the Executive Committee. There was general agreement he should do that.

Update on Vice Presidential Appointments

Van Hook reported that he and Frandsen met with President Alexander on September 23, 1988. Alexander told them that he regarded these as staff positions where formal faculty involvement would not be called for and that, in fact, there would be no advisory or search committee. Alexander did say that informal faculty nominations as well as more general recommendations would be welcomed. G. Wheeler noted that Alexander was actively seeking minority candidates for these jobs.

Mead said she thought the President was missing an important point concerning affirmative action, that this was a process as well as a result. There was some discussion of the different affirmative action guidelines for the campus and the system. Mead then added that both vice presidential vacancies would have important academic responsibilities, and formal faculty involvement in the selection would be important. Van Hook offered to appoint a group to draft a position paper for the October 17 meeting. Hood suggested that other Senates in the UT system be sent a copy of this position paper. The subcommittee was instructed to draft such a paper, to be brought to the Executive Committee before the October 17 meeting. Such a paper should consider the following points: a) affirmative action, and b) faculty involvement in the selection process. Van Hook appointed Kenney, Mead, Hood and himself to the subcommittee.

Update on Chancellor's Search

Van Hook reported the Advisory Committee has met once and a portion of the committee has met two additional times. Advertisements have been run. Names have been identified, and telephone inquiries about these people are being made. A list of criteria to be used in screening candidates is being drafted by Prados, and Van Hook said that the draft criteria would be shared with the whole committee then, discussed and refined.


Van Hook reported that a recent meeting discussed advising prior to pre- registration and deadlines. One conclusion is that it will be impossible for the Senate to approve a course in its fall meeting to be included in the schedule book for the following fall. The lead time is now over 12 months. Lester suggested a compromise, i.e., if the course has cleared the Undergraduate Council or Graduate Council, it can be listed in the schedule book, but with the stipulation that the course would be cancelled if the Senate did not approve it. There followed a general discussion of the perennial problem of timing. Van Hook asked if this matter should be brought to the Senate, and there was general agreement that it should be. Before that, however, more information is necessary on timing sequences, etc. Vice Provost Ralph Norman will be invited to the next Executive Committee meeting to offer such a report and the issue will be brought to the Senate in November.


Moffett hoped for a final report to the Senate by February 1989. This would flesh out the skeleton report, which the Senate approved in principle in October 1987. The assessment instrument is being field- tested in four departments this semester. Moffett asked whether a preliminary report should be taken to the Senate and there was general agreement this would be a good idea. G. Wheeler said he appreciated the fact that the evaluation process would make some time demands on faculty. He added that assessment of faculty was an idea sweeping the country, that we should participate, and that it could result in additional funding. G. Wheeler added that a process has been started this year at UTK to assess administrators, starting with the deans and moving "up".


Van Hook reported that some faculty wanted to revive the Coca Cola chats with the Chancellor, in order to open up lines of communication and get more information to the faculty. Hood explained that at one time there had been a Faculty Senate newsletter which did just that, and asked whether it should be revived. It was suggested that a column in "Context" might serve that purpose. This matter will be more fully discussed at the next Executive Committee meeting.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


Special Meeting--October 10, 1988

Called to order by Van Hook at 4:00 p.m. in UC 217.

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Hood, Jeon, Kenney, Mead, Muldowny, Pierce, Reed, Sharp and B. Wheeler.

1. Van Hook announced that he has been invited to speak to the Board of Trustees on October 15, and asked for a list of topics he should bring up. Suggestions included Chancellor's search, health insurance, Vice Presidential searches, visitation program.

Van Hook distributed the draft of a statement prepared by Hood, Kenny, Mead, and Van Hook. The draft's main points were that faculty members should be involved in these searches "beyond mere nomination and comment," since these appointments will affect academic and research policies, and that step one of the Board of Trustees' September 1988 affirmative action procedure, although optional in nature, be implemented. Several corrections and amendments were discussed and made.

There then followed a discussion of what to do with this draft statement. Van Hook believed that, since point #2 could be a "field day" for the press, out of courtesy to the President it should be shown to him prior to the October 17 Senate meeting. This met with general agreement. There followed a discussion of whether the Senate should be asked to endorse the statement or that it should come just from the Executive Committee, with the Senate being informed. Another alternative was that President Alexander be given the opportunity to respond to this document before it was brought to the Senate. The President would then be given a "reasonable time to react" to the statement. It was the feeling that he could be expected to respond before the October 17 Senate meeting. The feeling was that if the President did accede to our position that the statement be replaced with a report to the Senate by Van Hook., At any rate, the Senate should be made aware of what's going on.

Meeting adjourned at 4:57 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


Special Meeting--October 14, 1988

Called to order by Van Hook in UC 217 at 4:00 p.m.

Members present: Frazier, Hammitt, Hood, Jeon, Kenney, Lester, Mead, Muldowny, Reed, B. Wheeler and G. Wheeler.

Van Hook reviewed the situation with regard to the selection process for the UT systems vice presidencies, and distributed a COPY of President Alexander's letter to Van Hook of October 12 which, in essence, refused to accede to the Senate Executive Committee's request for formal faculty involvement in the search procedure but did invite the presidents of all UT senates to meet with all the chancellors and president's staff and meet Alexander's "tentative selections for the positions" at a meeting, to be held after the October 24th deadline. Alexander told Van Hook that he would prefer the Executive Committee's policy statement not be made public. Van Hook asked the Executive Committee to advise him on this matter.

After discussion, the consensus was that the Executive Committee policy statement be given to the Senate and to the press, realizing that this was a necessary position but also that there was no real possibility of changing the President's mind. Also other UT systems senates should receive copies of this policy statement.

Meeting adjourned at 4:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


November 7, 1988, 208 University Center

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Frazier, Hammitt, Hood, Jeon, Kenney, Lester, Mead, Moffett, Muldowny, Pierce, Sharp, B. Wheeler and G. Wheeler.

1. Van Hook reported on a letter from John Prados concerning the unified faculty handbook. He suggested a reduced list of policies for University-wide application.

2. On our letter to other UT Faculty Senates regarding the Vice Presidential searches, UT Martin and UT Chattanooga endorsed our statement and UTSI indicated that it probably would do so.

3. Chancellor Reese replied to the Senate's passing of the Research Council's statement of encouragement of junior faculty. The Chancellor said he sympathized with the statement, but that it was financially unrealistic to implement all of the recommendations at this time.

4. The Association of American Publishers has asked us to deal with the problem of faculty selling back complimentary copies of texts. Hood moved (2nd Moffett) that this be referred to the Faculty Affairs Committee, passed unanimously.

5. Van Hook presented information on changing of enforcement policy on ticketing in faculty parking lots between 5:00 and 10:00 p.m. In recent past, students who parked in faculty lots were not ticketed even though the lots were faculty-reserved until 10:00 p.m. Now they are ticketed and this has led to considerable resentment. After some discussion, it was agreed that our representative on the parking board should explore this matter further.

6. Van Hook reported on the Tennessee Higher Education Faculty Assembly meeting of October 22, which he attended with Auxier, Fribourg, and Silverstein. Two issues which arose were health insurance problems and inordinate use of adjunct faculty, especially in the summers, in place of full-time faculty.

7. Educational Policy Committee will report to the Senate on November 14. One very important matter will have to do with mandatory comprehensive field exams for seniors in their majors. G. Wheeler said this charge comes from THEC and if we comply UTK will receive an additional $500,000 from the state. At the same time, Wheeler said he recognized certain problems with these exams and the precedents the policy might create. Vice Provost Norman spoke on the natures of these tests, which vary from major to major. B. Wheeler raised concerns that tests would force curricular changes on departments, that it could force departments to limit admissions to the majors, and that to have a test which no one can pass or fail seems strange to many faculty members. Norman and G. Wheeler suggested a joint Provost-Senate committee to study this question, and Norman and Kenney suggested cooperation with other senates in the UT and Regents systems. This issue will come to the Senate on November 14.

8. Van Hook reported on his October 31 meeting in Nashville with the two people who were the leading candidates for the UT vice presidential positions. He declined to name those two individuals.

9. Van Hook reported the Chancellor search is proceeding, and that a private consultant has been engaged to help with the pool and screenings.
RESEARCH COUNCIL (report G. Frazier)

Frazier said Research Council has approved a policy statement on merit raises, which urges departments to develop merit criteria and then to make merit raises based on those criteria. Frazier asked what should happen to this statement now. Pierce and Hood said that setting up such criteria would be very difficult and controversial. Both Frazier and Pierce recognized that "merit" in research would have to be combined with teaching and service merit. Hood said the main issue is to insure that criteria are explained clearly to faculty and their performance evaluated by the department head according to the explanation. Suggestion was that the statement come to the Senate for information, to then be circulated for faculty reaction.


Norman explained different deadlines in the new calendar. One result has been the necessity of submitting new course material to CARS much earlier. The Undergraduate Council, in turn, has set up a 1988-1989 schedule for presenting materials from the various units. This means that courses approved by the Undergraduate Council on November 3, 1988, could not be offered until Summer 1989, and could not appear in a timetable until Spring 1990, and could not appear in the catalog until 1990-1991. Norman explained that this might force the Senate to allow tentative listing and scheduling of a course prior to Senate approval, with the understanding that the course would be cancelled and withdrawn if the Senate did not approve. Suggestion was that this was okay, provided course had passed Undergraduate Council or Graduate Council. Pierce so moved (2nd Moffett). Approved unanimously. Norman stated he would explore the possibility of expediting schedule printing.


This committee will report to the Senate on November 14. Both B. Wheeler and G. Wheeler noted that the most controversial aspect of the report would be the role and scope of the Learning Research Center and the powers of the recommended Teaching Council.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


December 12, 1988

Called to order by President Van Hook in University Center 217 at 3:30 p.m.

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Frazier, Hood, Jeon, Kenny, Mead, Muldowny, Pierce, Reed, Sharp, B. Wheeler and G. Wheeler.

1. Report on Searches
a. Van Hook reported on Chancellor's Search. A meeting of the Advisory Committee will be held on December 15 where "the committee will now get down to business."

b. Vice Presidential appointments have been announced and now must go to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees.
2. Medical Reimbursement Account (See memo to faculty November 30)

Kenny said meetings on this will be held on December 13, although meetings are at a bad time and not so well publicized. Kenny said this was very important and suggested that faculty be alerted to this by Benefits Committee. Van Hook said this is being done. Kenny said the plan was optional, but to the faculty's advantage. He said it needed to be advertised; otherwise faculty would miss an opportunity.

3. Van Hook said the Senate by-laws provide for the publication of a newsletter, to be edited by the president-elect. This has not been done for some time. Van Hook reported that he has negotiated for a Senate column in Context. It will be written by different people on various aspects of the Senate's business. Hood suggested revising by-laws so that column in Context might replace the newsletter, to be overseen by the Senate's president-elect.

4. Assessment. Van Hook reminded the committee that the Senate has passed a resolution calling for assessment of undergraduate seniors in major fields for two years and the appointment of a joint Senate-Provost Committee on Assessment. G. Wheeler hoped the committee would include people with expertise in testing and measurement.

Van Hook said he was concerned about how tests would be used and about the effects the tests would have on curriculum. Hood said he hoped committee would be charged with examining just what such tests measured, and what they did not measure. Hood said that a field is composed of both knowledge and skills. G. Wheeler said committee also should find out what information THEC actually desires. Hood added that the committee should also determine what we are trying to measure. Whatever that is, Dr. Trudy Banta had reported to Hood that THEC wanted to know the percentage of UTK students above the national average of those taking any test used for a comp exam. Reed spoke to the concern that national comparisons would eliminate diversity. There followed a general discussion of assessment, THEC, national accrediting agencies, and the joint committee. G. Wheeler spoke to the faculty providing the intellectual leadership on this issue on this campus. Van Hook reported that he would like to have the committee start work this winter.

5. Teaching Committee. Van Hook reviewed Joint Senate-Provost Committee on Teaching Improvement, which included the appointment of a Teaching Council. G. Wheeler reminded the committee that the Provost technically has not approved the joint committee's report, not because he is not interested in the report but that there were parts of the report that needed further study and might not be approved in every detail. The Provost did say, however, that he felt the general tone and provisions of the report would be approved. At this point, therefore, changes in the by-laws and appointment of the Teaching Council (by the Committee on Committees) was premature.

6. Legislative Committee. The committee is discussing a suggestion from its SGA representative asking the Legislature to instruct the Board of Trustees to add a faculty member to the Board. Van Hook reminded the Executive Committee that this had been discussed earlier and the general agreement was the faculty input to the Board could be made in better ways. At present faculty members have (non- voting) members on all Board committees, usually for one- year terms. Kenny suggested longer terms (three years) on these committees. Van Hook said he was willing to call or write to various Board members sounding them out on both longer terms and a voting faculty member on the Board.

7. Combining the Athletics Board and the Athletics Committee (report Frandsen). Frandsen reported that there was some feeling on the part of Athletic Director Dickey to combine these two groups. At present the Athletics Board has 34 members, 8 of whom are faculty. He said the real power is in the Executive Committee of the Athletics Board. Pierce suggested that the members of the Senate Athletics Committee would automatically become the faculty representatives on the Athletics Board. This would put the appointment of these faculty members in the hands of the Senate (Committee on Committees) rather than in the hands of the Chancellor, as is now the case. There were several other arguments made in favor of this. General agreement that Frandsen should investigate the possibility of Senate appointment. Mead raised the point that perquisites Board members receive could act as a conflict on interest, and if this combination took place that faculty members should not receive these perquisites. meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


January 23, 1989

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Frazier, Hammitt, Hood, Jeon, Kenney, Lester, Mead, Moffett, Muldowny, Pierce, Reed, Sharp, Van Hook, Waller and G. Wheeler.

The meeting was called to order at 3:18 p.m. by Van Hook.

1. J. Wayne Waller was appointed as Secretary to the Senate for the remaining term vacated by Bruce Wheeler.

2. Van Hook reported from the Chancellor Search Advisory Committee. Meetings of the final candidates will be set up with various faculty and other UTK groups during campus visits. Wheeler recommended and Moffett agreed that one such meeting should be reserved for the Senate Executive Committee. In addition an open meeting with all faculty should be requested. In response to a question from Hood, Van Hook indicated that interview schedules are not yet available but once they are announced the committee should be ready to meet on short notice with each candidate, and then again to prepare its recommendation for forwarding. Van Hook reported that Alexander will address the Senate at its January 30 meeting and will likely address some of these issues.

3. Elizabeth McKenzie from the Student Government Association Legislative Committee spoke briefly soliciting comment on suggestions concerning faculty involvement on the Board of Trustees or on Board committees. Moffett suggested that if faculty appointments are made the terms should be equal to those of other trustees. There was general support of the idea of proper faculty representation on the Board or Board committees.

4. Van Hook announced that a number of improperly installed advertising billboards around the campus are scheduled to be removed in the next few weeks. He also announced the appointment of the Joint Senate Provost committee on Assessment, Professor K. Kenney, chair. A complete list of committee members and the charge to the committee formed an addenda to the January 30 Senate meeting. The Executive Committee supported a recommendation to submit a resolution honoring Homer Fisher to the entire Senate at the January 30 meeting.

5. Mr. John Parker, Director of the Physical Plant, was invited to comment to the group about the function of his department. He presented a three page summary (copy attached) of its functions and facilities. The question of contracted custodial services was discussed in some detail. The object of the physical plant is to have contracted service of equal or better quality but lower cost than could be supplied by UTK itself. A discussion of various maintenance and related problems followed.

6. Moffett presented a draft report dealing with implementation of the teaching evaluation trial program. The final version is expected to be presented to the Senate in February. Wheeler spoke in support of this effort.

7. A resolution from SGA requesting a Fall Semester break was discussed, then deferred at Hood's suggestion until further information comes available from the UTK Calendar Committee. In the context of this discussion Moffett asked about having at least one day-between the end of examinations and the date when grades are due. Lester commented on the very long period of drop and add.

8. The meeting adjourned at 4:58 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
J. Wayne Waller
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


February 13, 1989

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Frazier, Hood, Kenny, Lester, Mead, Moffett, Sharp and Van Hook.

1. Chairperson Van Hook called the meeting to order at 3:17 p.m.

2. A report from the Search Advisory Committee for Chancellor was given by Van Hook. The announcement of the final short list of applicants (3 to 5 persons) has been delayed, probably until about March 1. The present pool of applicants is representative of minorities and females.

3. Frandsen circulated and discussed a draft letter and set of questions to be used by the Executive Committee to interview the chancellor candidates brought on campus. This consists of a standard set of six or so questions to be asked of all candidates. Two of the questions would be sent to the candidates before their arrival on campus. Executive Committee members are to send H. Frandsen their comments and revisions of questions, ASAP.

4. Executive Committee of Senate went on record as requesting that candidates be brought on campus for a full two days. Van Hook is to take that request to University Search Committee.

5. Van Hook will draft a letter to the Bylaws Committee of the Board of Trustees. That committee is currently considering revisions. The letter will request that the new bylaws include provision for (a) faculty appointments to board committees with multi-year tenure, (b) faculty representation on future presidential search committees and definition of the search process in the bylaws, (c) faculty representation on the board itself.

6. M. Moffett presented, discussed and asked for endorsement of the Teacher Evaluation materials to be presented on the Senate floor at the February meeting. After a good discussion, a motion was passed to endorse the plan.

7. A brief discussion was held concerning the possible name change of the "Campus Chest Campaign" to the "Campus United Way Campaign". Van Hook will pursue the issue and its ramifications.

8. A subcommittee was formed to look into possibilities of improving contacts and ties with faculty governance organizations at sister institutions in the Southeast (Hood, chair, Kenney, Van Hook).

9. The agenda for February Senate meeting was discussed.

Respectfully submitted,
W. E. Hammitt, Acting Secretary for B. Wheeler


March 6, 9 and 14, 1989

The Executive Committee met on the 6th, 9th, and 14th of March to interview candidates for the position of UTK Chancellor. Each meeting lasted about one hour. The candidates interviewed were Albert Niemi (Univ. GA) on March 6, John Quinn (Brown Univ.) on March 9, and Joan Wadlow (Oklahoma Univ.) March 14. The committee met again on March 14 to articulate the separate and collective reactions of the members of the committee to Professors Van Hook and Frandsen who were serving as members of the Search Advisory Committee for Chancellor.

Respectfully submitted,
J. Wayne Waller
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


April 6, 1989

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Alexander, Davidson, Fisher, Fly, Frandsen, Frazier, Hood, Jeon, Johnson, Mead, Moffett, Pierce, Quinn, Reed, Sharp, Van Hook and G. Wheeler.

The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m.

1. The meeting had been called by H. Fisher as head of the Transition Committee for the Chancellorship. Chancellor-elect Quinn, who was visiting the campus in preparation for his appointment gave remarks concerning his perceptions of the present state of UTK. Other remarks in this general area were made by President Alexander. Considerable discussion followed, particularly concerning the future definition of the relationships between campus and system. It is clear that significant changes in administrative structures will occur, but specifics are not yet available. As a part of this program it is hoped that important administrative savings can be obtained. Such savings will be invested in the academic efforts on the campus.

2. In a second item of business the Executive Committee, on behalf of the Senate, endorsed a resolution honoring the Women's Basketball Team as National Champions.

Respectfully submitted
Alexander Van Hook for J. Wayne Waller
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


April 17, 1989

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Davidson, Frandsen, Hammitt, Hood, Jeon, Kenny, Lester, Mead, Moffett, Muldowny, Pierce, Reed, Sharp, Van Hook, Waller, G. Wheeler. Guests: Vice President Johnson, Vice Chancellor Scheurer, Professor Woods.

The meeting was called to order at 3:17 p.m.

Van Hook reported that he had talked with the Cherokee Country Club, Doug Dickey, Jack Reese and others about the recent publicity regarding country club memberships for various employees of the Athletics Department. He suggested that pertinent background information needed to design new policies to prevent future embarrassments includes complete salary information (including "perks") for the various coaches and directors. Further, he thought comparisons of such information with peer institutions would be appropriate, and commented that communication on these matters between the Athletics Department and the Senate Athletics Committee, and with Faculty Representatives on the Athletics Board had been inadequate. Senators on these groups had not been aware that certain coaches had been granted country club memberships as a "perk." Vice President Johnson commented on the present situation at UTK. He offered to make detailed salary information available to the committee (similar information concerning the women's athletics program was furnished by Vice-Chancellor Scheurer). Johnson then sketched the historical development of the membership perks which dated from the time of Neyland and Holt. Johnson also described arrangements concerning TV and Radio shows (the shows themselves are owned by UT). He pointed out that at UTK coaches are not permitted to make advertising endorsements, this is unusual in schools with big athletics programs. He concluded with the observation that generous salary/perk packages are necessary to meet market for administrators at various levels which include benefits such as expense accounts, annuities, and in some cases automobile and/or home. Scheurer distributed a summary of benefits for women's athletics personnel. No memberships are provided in the women's program. In response to a question from Pierce, Johnson indicated that when summer camps are held, the University is paid for the use of facilities. Replying to a question from Van Hook, Johnson indicated that coaches are employees of the University (or state) in the same sense that other employees are. There is no policy about things such as hours per week, consulting leave, etc., but coaches are required to participate in interviews, some speaking, etc. The Athletic Department budget is audited just like other departments. Jeon questioned the "platinum handcuffs" for administrators. Johnson indicated these payments were from a gift specified for that purpose from Signal Corporation. The employee (certain high level administrators are eligible) may elect to defer up to 10% of salary which will be matched from the gift funds, the monies being used to purchase an annuity. A similar plan is available for the athletic director and football coach (the University contribution here is from Athletics Department monies). Wheeler asked whether published salaries reflect only the base salary. Johnson replied this was generally the case. Frandsen expressed concern about organizational structure, specifically reporting structure for the AD, further he asked who has the authority to censure that individual. Johnson replied that his (the AD's) superiors were the president, executive vice president and chancellor (as individual) and the Executive Committee of the Athletics Board. He then reviewed the history and make-up of that board. In response to a question from Hood, Johnson indicated no state funds are spent on men's athletics. That income derives from ticket revenues, TV-radio, concessions, and gifts.

Wheeler brought the discussion back to the country-club membership issue. Pierce expressed distress about the possibility that the governance structure of the athletics department was out of touch with the general thrust of the University on issues of discrimination. Johnson replied that he did not know whether Cherokee had been asked to transfer the DeVoe membership to Houston. Pierce was supportive of recent actions taken by Alexander and Reese (i.e. dropping University purchased country club memberships, stating policy not to hold university functions at places with exclusionary policies). Hood emphasized the need for UTK to lead in making the entire community more sensitive to these issues. After receiving the thanks of the committee Vice-President Johnson and Vice Chancellor Scheurer retired from the meeting.

C. Woods of the Professional Development Committee presented a resolution concerning the country club issue. Several amendments were offered and accepted. The revised version (copy attached) is to be presented at the April 24th meeting. The resolution was endorsed unanimously by the Executive Committee. Van Hook suggested that the committee may need a special meeting to address the problems articulated above.

In other matters the Executive Committee endorsed an SGA request for a Fall break (long weekend). The length of the fall calendar would not be affected, the displaced day would be added to either the beginning or end of the term. Van Hook distributed letters from- Provost Wheeler accepting the reports of the Joint Provost Senate Committees on Implementation of Teaching Evaluation and for the Improvement of Teaching (and Associated Bylaws Changes). Copies are attached.

Van Hook announced an upcoming meeting of the Calendar Committee and requested comments. Waller and Moffett suggested coordination with the public school calendar.

Van Hook reported that he had yet not received a reply to his letter to the Bylaws Committee of the Board of Trustees.

Van Hook read a letter from Alexander which reported that the Systems Administration was investigating possibilities and associated costs of a professional leave/sabbatical program. They will report on this later. Van Hook reported on the agenda for the April 24th meeting. Pierce presented a proposed policy for emeritus professors to be brought to the April 24th meeting. Jeon questioned the wisdom of selling the Chancellor's house (recently reported in the local press). A vigorous discussion concerning possible changes in university administrative structures evolved, and the meeting adjourned (5:24 p.m.), following a decision to devote a special and soon-to-be-called meeting of the executive committee to this important topic.

Respectfully submitted,
J. Wayne Waller
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


Called Meeting, May 2, 1989

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Van Hook, Davidson, Frandsen, Frazier, Hood, Kenney, Mead, Moffett, Muldowny, Reed, Sharp and Waller.

The meeting was called to order at 3:15 p.m. in room 220 of the University Center.

Van Hook introduced Professors Siegfried Dietz and Bernie Silverstein who had been invited to the meeting because of their interest in the agenda for the meeting. He announced the first agenda item would be discussion of whether the Executive Committee wished to establish a special mechanism to look into problems connected with the men's intercollegiate athletics program. This arose from the recent controversy surrounding AA supplied memberships in Cherokee Country Club for certain coaches. Mead opened the discussion by encouraging such a special effort. She thought it was especially important because of the transition in campus administration. Reed questioned this, counseling that the matter would be better delayed until the new administration settles down. Hood wanted to know whether the academic programs gain or lose because of the high visibility of athletics. He saw no reason to conclude that our highly visible athletics program should or does adversely affect academic programs. Davidson remarked that a direct and substantial contribution of monies from athletics to academics is warranted. He noted that some contributions are now made but thought these were too small. Kenney noted that since athletics is very visible, it is therefore important. He suggested that next year's Senate Athletics Committee examine how athletics is handled nationwide, especially in our peer institutions, and report to the Senate with recommendations.

Frandsen pointed out the need to concentrate on administrative processes and problems. Frazier felt that some students are not attracted to UTK due to a perception that it has too large an emphasis on athletics compared with academics. Silverstein questioned whether this was true.

Moffett moved that incoming President ask the Athletics Committee of the Senate next year to study the governance of athletics at peer institutions and certain universities with other large athletic programs. Mead suggested an amendment that Van Hook write a letter to Quinn and Alexander stating that we support a policy where the Athletic Department reports directly to the Chancellor. The amendment failed. The motion passed.

Van Hook reported that after the meeting with Alexander, Quinn, and the Executive Committee on April 6, Fisher asked Van Hook to select a smaller subcommittee (Frandsen, Hood, Kenney and Van Hook) to discuss the transition from Reese to Quinn. This UTK committee met for approximately two hours with Homer Fisher and had an open discussion. Some of the matters discussed in that meeting are now being implemented. There was some questioning of the accuracy of perceptions created by media reports about the events related to the reorganization of the administration.

The resignation of the Provost and the elimination of his office will require retitling of vice-provost positions. Opinions and concerns were expressed that the Chancellor is moving toward taking the previous provost responsibilities and that the President is to some extent assuming what were formerly functions of the Chancellor.

Hood pointed out the need for the Executive Committee to communicate to Quinn our opinions and concerns and that we are not doing this as well as we should. Mead supported this need to make our feelings known. Kenney emphasized a need to wait and see how the administrative changes work out before making specific suggestions. Frandsen supported this view.

Reed moved that Van Hook call and write a letter on behalf of the Senate to Quinn to ask him to share with us more directly and openly what is happening and let us know what we could do to help him and the institution during the transition, and further, that we request a meeting be set up with him for this discussion at his earliest convenience.

Hood pointed out the fact that Quinn is coming from a private to a public institution, and the need for us to assist him in understanding our particular system. Sharp suggested weekly meetings prior to Quinn's assuming the post between Van Hook, Alexander (or Fisher) and Quinn. Kenney suggested that telephone calls would be more effective.

The motion passed in principle with details left to Van Hook.

The meeting adjourned at 5:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
J. Wayne Waller
Secretary to the UTK Faculty Senate Executive Committee


Called Meeting - May 18, 1989 - University Center Room 217

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

The meeting was called to order at 3:15 p.m.

Members present: Hammitt, Hood, Jeon, Kenney, Mead, Moffett, Muldowny, Pierce, Reed, Sharp, van Hook and Waller.

Van Hook announced that the annual Executive Committee dinner will be June 2.

The Board of Trustees Meeting will be June 15. Items which Van Hook should consider in his presentation to the board were solicited.

Bruce Wheeler was re-elected Secretary to the Faculty Senate effective May 22, 1989 replacing Wayne Waller whose resignation is to be effective the same date.

The floor was given to Chancellor-Elect John Quinn who commented on many issues including the various administrative reorganizations now being discussed for the campus. Dr. Quinn reiterated his desire to work closely with deans and other academic officers once he takes office. He indicated that he has definite plans to represent the Knoxville campus to alumni groups, the legislature, etc. and considers this an important part of his job. Following Quinn's remarks there was an extensive and productive question and answer session.

The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
J. Wayne Waller
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


June 12, 1989

Alexander Van Hook, Presiding

Members present: Frandsen, Hammitt, Kenney, Mead, Pierce, Reed, Sharp, Van Hook and B. Wheeler. Robert Woodruff was present to present a subcommittee report.

The meeting was called to order at 3:15 p.m. in room 217 of the University Center.

1. Van Hook reviewed the agenda of Academic Affairs Committee of Board of Trustees for its June 14th meeting.

2. The agenda for the June 15th meeting of the Board of Trustees was also read. Pierce suggested that in his welcoming remarks Van Hook mention to the Board faculty concern with the autonomy of academic programs on the campus. Kenney suggested that he point out present nationwide trends in cutting back fringe benefits and express our concern.

Van Hook also reported that Board will vote to authorize the University to sell the Chancellor's house.

3. Van Hook reported that Calendar Committee rejected the recommendation to drop the Good Friday holiday, and rejected the recommendation to move spring break back (closer to the beginning of semester). The Executive Committee had recommended both changes.

4. On athletics, Van Hook referred to a letter from President Alexander regarding country club memberships for coaches, and a list presented by Vice President Joe Johnson detailing men's athletics coaches' salaries and benefits. Kenney found it "amazing" that 38 automobiles were being provided to coaches by private automobile companies.

Van Hook asked whether Senate should vote a resolution honoring Chancellor Reese. Unanimous assent. Secretary instructed to draft resolution.


Robert Woodruff of the Budget Committee reported that two studies were being done on sabbatical leave. The first report (on costs) has been completed, and the other (on advantages) is underway. In the cost study, a detailed model was developed, the anticipated costs range from a low end of $30,000 to a high of $1.3 million per annum. The committee suggested that funds for this be separated from other cost items in UTK budget. Recommendation was that 10% of faculty might be on sabbatical leave at any one time, but figures in the model vary from 2% to 10%.

Van Hook commended the subcommittee (of the Budget Committee) on a very fine job. Van Hook suggested that the issue wait until the new chancellor is in place. Tom Hood will be reminded that this issue must be carried forward and a full report be drawn up for the chancellor. Van Hook reported that President Alexander has said that he wants a sabbatical program.


The committee will report at the next Senate meeting.


The committee has drafted a proposed policy on student appeals of evaluations. In recent history (Van Hook reported), grade changes have been made at all levels, including deans, provost and chancellor. New policy would regularize the procedure for grade changes. Van Hook recommended waiting until the new chancellor was on board to bring this matter to the Senate floor. Pierce reported that at present in Hilltopics there is no stated policy for appealing grades. There was some confusion about whether the report intended to prohibit administrators above department heads from reversing faculty assignments of grades and what appeal mechanisms the faculty member had should his/her grade assignment be changed. Van Hook said he thought the intent of the report was that only a faculty committee could change evaluations of students, but that department heads, deans, chancellor could order the creation of such a committee of the faculty member's peers. Mead raised issue of anonymity. Van Hook said he will call the committee and raise the Executive Committee's concerns.


This joint senate-provost committee had forwarded an interim report. Van Hook suggested it was premature to move this matter forward until the administrative structure of the campus is resolved. Reed informed the committee that another group (chaired by Ken Heathington) was drafting a policy which, in Reed's view, was very different from this interim report. Van Hook will present this matter to Hood as an agenda item for the fall.


The Research Council has some matters it will report to the Senate on June 26. Reports on other matters, including one on a proposed restructuring of the University administration and its relationship to the council will be delayed.


Barbara Mead questioned the closing events during the search and appointment of the new chancellor. She distributed a list of 10 questions, 3 concerns, and 3 recommendations. An extended discussion followed.


Meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate

Senate Directory
Governing Documents
   Senate Bylaws
   Faculty Handbook
   Tenure Policy



Senate Home

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