August 28, 1989

October 2, 1989

October 30, 1989
November 27, 1989

December 18, 1989

January 22, 1990
February 19, 1990

March 12, 1990

April 16, 1990

June 11, 1990


August 28, 1989

Tom Hood, Presiding

Members present: Cleland, Everett, Haughton, Jennings, Kenny, Lester, Mayhew, Moffett, Muldowny, Reed, Silverstein, Van Hook, B. Wheeler and Yarbrough.

The meeting was called to order by Hood at 3:18 p.m. in room 202 of the University Center.

1. Implementation of Teaching Evaluation
Hood reported that he circulated the report of the Teaching Evaluation Committee at the recent deans' retreat. He asked where the Senate should go from there (Senate had approved this report in February 1989). There seemed to be general agreement that the Chancellor should order the process started, especially the peer review of 20% of all faculty annually. There also was a discussion of the duties of the new joint Senate-Chancellor supervisory committee, which would examine the general methodologies of evaluation. Where the day-to-day administration of the evaluation process would be lodged, however, is not known at present. Silverstein argued that the Senate should have some role in seeing that the evaluations are done properly. (Note from Hood - Tom Ladd has been employed by the Chancellor to follow through on implementation in consultation with Anne Hopkins.)

On the Senate members of the supervisory committee, there was general consensus that the committee should be small in size. Hood read a list of names that had been suggested to him. After a short discussion, Hood moved that he select 6 people (2nd Kenny) for the committee. Passed unanimously.

2. Educational Policy Committee
Hood reported that on-line registration would not be fully available until 1991 (according to SAMS). As to SAMS, the active issue is compliance with prerequisites (enforced by SAMS, department review, or some other method). Moffett agreed, saying that enforcement of policies was the chief issue. Mayhew spoke for a two-step process, in which SAMS would be used at pre registration to deny students admission to courses for which there were prerequisites which students had not met, and a later departmental review at registration. Moffett and Hood gave somewhat different versions of what SAMS administrators are saying. Hood asked whether Senate should get information on SAMS, through the Educational Policy Committee. No opposition.

3. Research Council
Additional members approved were Jim Darrow (Art), Jimmy Hilliard (Finance), and Michael Stahl (Business). Names will go to Senate for final approval. Also, Ken Walker's name was inadvertently left off of the committee list.

4. Report on Dean's retreat
Hood reported on the retreat. At the retreat, the Chancellor said he would like a University-wide staffing plan, based upon deans' review of all departments (including research strength, undergraduate and graduate enrollments, degrees, awards, etc.). With little numerical growth, the Chancellor said there would be a reallocation of faculty positions -- based on such a staffing plan.

Hood then reported that topics discussed were: communication, faculty staffing plans, faculty evaluation and development, summer school, and affirmative action. Yarbrough added that the reallocation of faculty would come at the "intent to search" level. This reallocation, it was noted by the Chancellor, would not be based solely on enrollment.

On affirmative action, the affirmative action office would continue check-offs as to procedure but, once the "intent to search" had been approved, the overall oversight of affirmative action would be by the respective deans.

Silverstein raised the point that a University-wide staffing plan was a significant departure and represented a significant centralization of authority. Hood agreed. Yarbrough said that when she came here she was promised considerable flexibility, which would be severely limited by this.

Moffett said she had "extreme misgivings" about the decentralization of affirmative action, saying this would be a step backward for the University, minorities and women. Yarbrough said she believed the desegregation suit might well force a reversal of this.

On summer school, it was reported that in 1989 summer school made a $2 million profit. There was general surprise, since it was assumed that summer school was not paying its own way. Hood offered to make copies for the Senate. Reed said this was even more disturbing given the downward revision of the summer school pay scale.

5. Chancellor Representation on Executive Committee
Silverstein argued forcefully that the Chancellor should attend Executive Committee meetings in person and not send a representative. Van Hook disagreed, saying Chancellor should not be involved in a debate at a too-early level. Kenny questioned whether the Chancellor or his representative should regularly attend Executive Committee meetings, saying there were times when they should not attend. Haughton said she believed communications should be open between the Chancellor and the Executive Committee. Moffett agreed with Silverstein, saying she believed George Wheeler profited from attending and listening to discussions. Moffett moved (2nd Reed) that Chancellor be invited and strongly encouraged to attend Executive Committee in person, as an ex-officio member. This would not be a change in the bylaws. Motion passed.

6. Survivors' Benefits
Senate has passed a resolution, but administration has not acted on it. Moffett suggested Hood bring this up with the Chancellor, as with status of emeritus professors and other things the former Chancellor had not acted on when he returned to the teaching faculty.

Meeting adjourned at 4:57 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler


October 2, 1989

Torn Hood, Presiding

Members present: Ballal (administrative intern), Banta (guest), Cleland, Everett, Jennings, Kenny, Lester, Mayhew, Moffett, Muldowny, Norman (guest), Phillips (for Frazier), Quinn, Reed, Silverstein, Trahern, Van Hook, Wheeler and Yarbrough.

The meeting was called to order by Hood at 3:20 p.m. in room 202 of the University Center.

1. Hood commented on his meeting with the Chancellor, especially his giving to the Chancellor a report on faculty leaves prepared by the Budget committee.

2. Hood summarized the Board of Trustees meeting of September 29, especially his formal remarks on recruitment, leaves, teaching evaluations, etc. At the Board meeting, the matter of bylaws arose, especially on the presidential. search process. The Board (lid write an article on this, but made faculty participation optional in the process. Hood said he lobbied to make faculty participation mandatory but to no avail.
On another note from the meeting, the bylaws have been amended to include faculty (non- voting) participation on Board committees, with the exceptions of Executive and Finance committees. The Athletics committee was abolished, the duties to be absorbed by the present Athletics Board on each campus. Silverstein pointed out that the new bylaws said that faculty participation on Board committees was at the option of the President. Hood agreed to write to President Alexander about faculty participation. (Silverstein asked that copies be sent to members of the Board of Trustees.) Moffett raised the point that earlier the sale of the chancellor's house was, at least in part, to go to academic programs, not an addition to the faculty club. Moffett said she thought this was a misappropriation of funds. Silverstein agreed. Hood said nothing was said in the Board of Trustees meeting that indicated action had been taken by the Board that mandated money from this property would go to academic programs. Mayhew broadened the argument to whet-her $350,000 from any University funds should have been allocated to the faculty club. After further discussion, Lester moved (2nd Moffett) that resolution be submitted to Senate directed to the Board that this is an inappropriate use of Funds. Everett, said he hoped resolution be worded so that we could say that at this time such an expenditure was inappropriate. There was some confusion as to whether University funds and gift. money were treated separately. After more discussion, it was agreed that a committee of Lester, Silverstein, and Yarbrough would gather, pertinent information and draft resolutions to be brought to the Senate in two weeks. Motion passed eight-four.


Phillips of Research Council brought forward a fairly lengthy report on faculty research incentives. Van Hook recommended it be brought to the full Senate for endorsement. Agreed to by common consent, as well as endorsement of the report's general principles. Phillips said he would discuss this with the Research Council and report to the November Senate meeting.


This report comes from the Professional Development committee, to go to the Senate. The report contains five recommendations. Phillips said his belief was that racist undercurrents in East Tennessee were extremely strong and he wondered if the report was comprehensive enough. Van Hook moved (2nd Lester) that Executive committee endorse report, then to be taken to Senate. Approved unanimously.


Kenny noted that the campus was preparing to draft another mission statement and wondered about faculty participation. Norman said there were such plans.


Banta reported that UT has participated in the past in national surveys of students done by Alexander Astin of UCLA. Now Astin has invited UT to participate in a faculty survey, one of 450 universities to be so invited. The survey deals with faculty perceptions of work environment, stress, goals and incentives, were part of the student surveys). Van Hook wondered why the Senate should sponsor a survey when it didn't want to know the answers. After some discussion, most of it negative, Van Hook moved (2nd Mayhew) that Executive committee take no action. Van Hook said the intent of this motion was limited to the idea that the Senate not be involved in sponsoring this survey. Approved, with one dissenting vote. Reed then moved that Senate endorse the survey (2nd Cleland ). Motion failed 5-6.

Meeting adjourned at 4:59.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler


October 30, 1989

Tom Hood, presiding

Called to order by Hood at 3:30 p.m.

Present: L. Lester, Silverstein, Yarbrough, Phillips, Mayhew, Leuthold, Kenney, Muldowny, Moffett, Van Hook, Jennings, Haughton, B. Wheeler, Quinn, Trahern, Joe Johnson, Max Robinson, Cleland.

1. Hood reported that information was being collected on how much faculty leaves have cost in the last five years and how faculty were replaced (if at all).

2. Hood said we were not represented at the fall meeting of the Tennessee Higher Education Faculty Assembly, due to short notification. Hood has asked for more notification time in the future in a letter to the current President Arch Griffin, Shelby State Community College.

3. Hood spoke briefly on what the Educational Policy Committee will bring to the Senate at its next meeting, including a report on SAMS. The EPC report to the members of the Senate was distributed.
1. Resolution on sale of Chancellor's house. Silverstein reported on the resolution on this issue drafted by a subcommittee of the Executive Committee (resolution attached).

After Silverstein's presentation, VP Johnson gave a brief history of the faculty club and offered points in support of the use of part of the funds from the sale of the Chancellor's house to improve the faculty club. There followed some questions as to the status of the club legally and as to the extent to which systems people had taken the initiative instead of the campus administration, said that he was consulted by Homer Fisher on the faculty club issue before the matter was brought to the Board of Trustees.

Max Robinson (President, faculty club) and Frank Leuthold (President-elect and on faculty club long-range planning committee) presented data. At present, club capacity is 150 (in 6 dining rooms) with the largest dining room able to accommodate 45-50. Proposed addition would more than double the club's capacity and improve the kitchen. Active university faculty and staff exempt membership equals 577, with 154 emeritus, 434 honorary, and 56 affiliate members. There are, 166 active accounts for Colleges, Administrators, Departments, and Programs. Of a total income from operations of $597,661, these units spent $155,931 at the club. This is 26% of the income.

Operating loss for FY 88-89 was $108,971 (and an after-subsidy* loss of $16,246). A question on dues revealed that all membership categories pay $15 dues/month except emeritus members who pay $8. In addition all members pay a minimum food charge of $10/month which applies to any meals eaten during that month. After the presentations were completed, the discussion turned to the question of whether the club served academic purposes, and whether this was a wise expenditure of the funds expected from the sale. Joe Johnson stated that Alexander's interpretation of the improvement of a building used by the faculty was an academic purpose. The question of whether the decision as to how to allocate funds was made by campus personnel was raised again. John Quinn reiterated that Alexander and Fisher had spoken with him some time before the Board of Trustees meeting to determine how he felt about the proposed use of the funds for the faculty club and for fellowships. He endorsed the proposed use. An additional question regarding the annual subsidy from the UTK budget drew the information that the direct payment in FY 87-88 was $85,324 so that this year has shown a decline of $43,000 in the amount of the subsidy. The proposed addition would hopefully bring additional decline and perhaps elimination of the need for a subsidy. Ken Kenny summarized the discussion by stating the following points: The Faculty Club is useful to the university Community. The problem is priority and needs. A poll of faculty would place an addition to the faculty club building at a lower priority than such other needs as higher student stipends and journal purchases for the library. The Faculty Club is a business enterprise and one which is subsidized by the University. Allocation of the proceeds of the sale for an addition to the club could produce a negative reaction from legislators and state officials in Nashville.

A brief document projecting revenues to be realized by two different renovation and expansion plans for the club was circulated. These projections offered hypothetical budgets showing how an expansion would expand revenues thereby reducing or eliminating annual deficits. Lester questioned the assumption, "Revenue projections reflect having a full liquor license." Johnson replied that state law does not prohibit alcohol on University owned property; alcohol is prohibited by University policy only. Van Hook moved (2nd Cleland) to table the resolution. Motion to table failed 6-7 with two not voting.
*Subsidy includes a direct payment from the UTK budget of $42,346 and $50,379 for utilities. The Club was given the building rent-free along with maintenance of property, furniture and services of UT payroll and auditing without charge.

Moffett moved (2nd Jennings) that resolution be brought to the Senate. Motion passed 9-4 with two not voting.

By common consent, it was agreed that representatives from the faculty club and the administration be invited to the Senate meeting.

Remaining business was postponed until the next Executive Committee meeting.

Adjourned 5:08.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler
Secretary to the Faculty Senate


November 27, 1989

Tom Hood, presiding

Called to order by Hood at 3:30 p.m. Present: Silverstein, Moffett, Mayhew, Haughton, Everett, Reed, Kenny, Jennings, Van Hook, Lester, Quinn, Trahern, Ballal (observer), B. Wheeler.; Tom Davies (representing Research Council)

1. President's Report (Hood). Hood distributed a list of proposed committees for the SACS self-study and described the proposed responsibilities of each committee. Hood asked the committee to recommend names of faculty for these committees. The committees will complete their work by May-June 1991, and the SACS group will visit the campus during the 1991-1992 academic year. Hood said he had no doubt that the University would be re-accredited, but hoped that the process could be used to help the University make significant strides forward.

On the matter of the faculty club resolution, Hood reported that he had received copies of several letters to John Quinn from on and off-campus in support of expansion of the faculty club. Hood then distributed a draft of a cover letter which would accompany the resolution on the approved by the Senate. There were some comments that the letter was a bit combative, and Hood said he would take those comments under consideration, and said he would supply the committee with a final draft of the letter.

2. Proposed Document on Scientific Misconduct. Hood introduced Tom Davies of the Research Council, who explained the Council's position on the draft of a "Statement of Policy on Misconduct in Research and Service" (November 1, 1989), done by systems administration. The Council's basic concerns were that there was little faculty input, that the document was "seriously flawed with regard to faculty rights," and that the document was much broader than procedures required by the NSF and NIH. The Council has recommended that a small delegation of faculty be appointed to discuss this with systems administration. The federal government requires universities to develop a policy by January 1, 1990 (at least with regard to NIH-sponsored research).

After some discussion, Moffett moved (2nd Silverstein) that members of the Research Council be appointed to discuss this matter, develop a short-range interim policy (to meet NIH deadline) and then work on a long-range policy. Passed unanimously.

3. Consultantship Policy. Last May, a joint Provost-Senate Consultantship Policy Committee recommended revisions in the Faculty Handbook with regard to consultantships. Reed reported that systems administration also was working on such a policy, although Van Hook reported that this effort had been put on the back burner. Van Hook said that most of the changes are clarifications of the original policy. Trahern added that this made the existing policy considerably clearer. Hood added that the "reporting mechanism" was an important addition.

Ballal said the policy as written was fair, but that there were widespread abuses of that policy. He said this problem would persist until the department heads closely monitored the policy. Mayhew said that, as a department head, the proposed revisions made her job easier when dealing with this issue.

After a bit more discussion, the Executive Committee unanimously voted to send the report forward to the Senate.

4. Campus Chest Campaign Funds Distribution. Hood said that undesignated Campus Chest funds were allocated to United Way. Other organizations (such as Community Shares) believed they were not well-represented on the Campus Chest committee, and that United Way had an unfair advantage. Trahern said he was not opposed to having the Executive Committee ask the Chancellor to appoint a committee member to the Campus Chest committee, at least to observe how the committee worked. Agreed by common consent. Hood asked Jennings if she would serve if appointed by the Chancellor, to which she replied in the affirmative. The Chancellor then appointed Jennings.

5. Information Item on Statistics on Administrative Growth, 1984-1988. Hood said statistics seemed to show that we now spend as much (or more) money on administrative and professional services as we do for instructional faculty. He also noted the decline in tenured faculty from 1984-1988 (of 4.97) while at the same time the administrative-professional-technical numbers were increasing (administrators by 14.0%, professionals by 46 . 2%, and technical-paraprofessional by 25.2%). These statistics were provided by the Office of Institutional Research. Trahern said this problem was a national one, with much of the increase (according to the Chronicle of Higher Education) being "compliance people." Mayhew said we should request additional information on these matters. Haughton also wanted to see average administrative salaries in the same way that we see average faculty salaries. Reed added that he had a suspicion that "performance funding" actually had cost us money in the form of administrators and staff. Everett asked if the statistics included the Athletic Department. Reed said these statistics would be particularly disturbing to the faculty when at the same time (1984-1988) they were asked to do more and more without additional faculty.

6. Hood announced there would be no December Senate meeting.

Adjourned 4:47 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted
William Bruce Wheeler


December 18, 1989

Tom Hood, Presiding

Members present: Everett, Jennings, Kenny, Lester, Mayhew, Phillips, Reed, Scheurer, Trahern, Van Hook and Yarbrough.

The meeting was called to order by Hood at 3:30 p.m. in room 217 of the University Center.

1. Statement of Policy on Misconduct in Research and Service (report Phillips). This report had been returned to the Research Council by the Senate. Phillips gave a brief history of the report, and concluded by saying that most of the Senate's concerns have been addressed, but there are 3 principal issues still to be resolved: 1) the individual is not informed until the process reaches the investigation stage; 2) the constitution of the investigation committee (section V. B of the report); 3) the question of legal representation (at present there is no statement in the report). Chancellor Quinn would like to have suggested revisions by January 8, 1990 (to present to the Board of Trustees on January 19). The Research Council will meet on this on January 3, and Phillips invited input by the Executive Committee.

Lester spoke to the protection of the investigative panel, feeling that they may not be immune from prosecution. In response to a question, Phillips said no other university's report has been examined, especially with regard to the grievance procedures. Everett though it unfortunate that there is not time for full faculty review of the report. Hood said he planned to circulate the draft report to other UT senates in the system.

2. State Impoundment of Funds (report Hood). Hood read Chancellor Quinn's December 7 memorandum on impoundment. This had to do with hiring, travel, entertainment, equipment and non-essential purchases, restricted accounts, auxiliary accounts, etc. Hood said several meetings have taken place in the College of Liberal Arts on this issue, the most important point having to do with the hiring and/or retaining of part-time faculty and GTA's, which in turn might affect full-time faculty workloads.

In response to a question, Trahern said the University still did not know what percentage would be impounded, although he said he had heard 3% in many circles. Scheurer reported that the President and Trustees were working very hard with the Governor and his people to point out what retrenchment would mean to higher education in Tennessee. He called a 3% impoundment distasteful but manageable, but that 5% would be beyond financial exigency. Trahern said the administration was working very hard to minimize the impact on students. CARS has held off running hard-copy spring schedules to buy time on cutting or not cutting sections.

Yarbrough asked about the role of the Senate in this, and questioned whether the Senate was the proper place (since colleges and programs are being asked to make cuts in the best ways possible for each unit). Reed reported that all "cushions" gradually had been eroded, the result of which has been a very lean and inflexible budget now means reductions seriously hurt, whereas an earlier impoundment did not hurt so much.

Van Hook said a political question requires a political answer, and was willing to put on the table (although not advocate) that cuts be made to hit the largest constituency possible, so that large numbers would complain to state government. He added that if we did turn back the required money, the state government would think (erroneously) that there was fat in the budget. Mayhew said she thought it was too early to do anything else until we know more. Phillips agreed, saying he felt there wasn't much we could do now. He did, however feel that students, in the end, would be hurt ... and that a permanent reduction would make personnel reductions inevitable. Kenny said he favored reporting as broadly as we could the impacts of the impoundment, so as to put pressure on the legislature. Reed suggested we should decide what we're going to do as a university, get that behind us, and go forward. Hood then brought up the subject of the governor's special equipment fund, about which there was some discussion. Trahern said there was some question as to whether it would be wise to count that toward our impounded money, since these funds might not be appropriated again.

Hood then brought up the question of asking full-time faculty to teach more and thereby saving money by cutting part-time faculty. Mayhew said this would hurt people with an active research agenda, and that it would hurt recruiting of faculty. Scheurer agreed, saying it would be foolish to change the university's mission just for a 3% impoundment. Phillips also agreed, saying that would hurt us in retaining good junior faculty.

The consensus was that no statement be made by the committee at this point. The fact is that these decisions will be made by the time faculty and students return in January. Hood reported that he and Lester had had an appointment with Doug Dickey, who proposed contributing between $200,00 and $500,000 for library acquisitions from Cotton and Sugar Bowl proceeds, as well as the proceeds from the spring football game (Orange and White). Hood said he found Dickey very receptive to helping support the University's academic program needs, as he has funds available.

Meeting adjourned 5:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
William Bruce Wheeler


January 22, 1990

Tom Hood, Presiding

Members present: Cleland, Everett, Frazier, Haughton, Jennings, Kenney, Lester, Mayhew, Moffett, Muldowny, Quinn, Reed, Silverstein, Wheeler and Yarbrough.

Guests: Graber, Norman, Phillips, Scheurer

The meeting was called to order by Hood at 3:28 p.m. in room 202 of the University Center. The agenda was approved without modification.

1. Misconduct in research and service activities- Paul Phillips. Phillips briefly reviewed the history of the development of the misconduct policy statement. It was noted that the Faculty Senate through Chancellor Quinn had requested postponement of consideration of the misconduct policy by the Board of Trustees. However, since no other campuses requested postponement the policy statement will be considered at the Board's February 7th meeting.

Several aspects of the misconduct policy statement were considered at length. It was noted that the prosecutorial tone of the document has been softened substantially, that the University doesn't have a code of professional ethics, that there may be retaliation-type problems, that each campus will need to develop its own set of implementation procedures, and that future changes in the policy could be proposed by the Senate to the Board of Trustees. Mayhew moved (2nd Moffett) that the Statement of Policy on Misconduct in Research and Service (1/17/90 draft) be approved by the Executive Committee on behalf of the Faculty Senate with the proviso that the word allegations be substituted for the word cases on line nine of the Introduction and the addition of the words "or service" after research in the 3rd line of the second paragraph on page three. Passed unanimously with one abstention. The substantial efforts of Paul Phillips, Glenn Graber and others which resulted in substantial improvements in the misconduct policy were commended.

2. Bylaws changes - Anne Mayhew. Mayhew reported that the proposed bylaws changes were recommended by last year's Senate Nominating Committee because of lateness of some colleges in electing senators. The Senate Bylaws Committee recommends the following changes in the Senate Bylaws:
Article II.1.B., sentence beginning on line 8: Change "The faculty of each college or division ... shall elect its representatives to the Senate in February of each year ..." to "The faculty of each college or division ... shall elect its representatives to the Senate by February 15 ..."

Article II.1.B.(1), first sentence: Change "Elective seats shall be apportioned in January of each year ..." to "Elective seats shall be apportioned in October of each year ..."
The proposed bylaws changes were approved unanimously.

3. Educational Policy Committee Report - Tom Hood. This discussion was for informational purposes only, with no action to be taken. Each of the items listed in the 1/19/90 memorandum to the Faculty Senate from Fred Grimm was discussed briefly. It was noted that there had been substantial discussion in the Undergraduate Council regarding extending the drop deadline to 22 calendar days and we should anticipate substantial discussion in the Senate. Increased faculty responsibility and improved assistance to students with writing problems associated with the proposed RV grade (incomplete due to writing) also received attention.

4. Grade Appeals Policy Committee - Tom Hood. Hood reported on a recent letter from Bill Poppen concerning the advisability of appointing a new committee to continue the work of the previous committee in order to promote some consistency as individual departments develop grade appeals procedures. There was support for the appointment of a new Senate/ Chancellor Committee on Grade Appeals by Hood in consultation with the Chancellor's office.

5. Senate/Provost Committee on Assessment Charge - Hood. Hood read parts of a letter asking the Committee to gather information from our peer institutions on performance funding tied to student outcomes assessment and to survey departmental reaction to the COMP exam and majors assessments.

6. Proposed Committee to gather information on department administration - Hood. Hood reported that UTC now has a committee looking at the advisability of converting from a headship to a chairmanship system and suggested that it might be useful to investigate the matter at UTK. Questions were raised concerning terminology, how a new system might actually work, etc. Hood said he would take the comments under consideration and perhaps make a more detailed study proposal at a later date.

7. Report of SACS Planning Committee progress - Hood. It was reported that central staff for the SACS institutional self study had been selected and that there will be four subcommittees (Central Resource Staff, Lee Humphreys, coordinator; Betsy Creekmore, Mike Nettles, John Hemmeter. Committees are: Administrative Structure and Processes; Academic Quality; Institutional Effectiveness; Support Services.) Six subject areas to receive special attention have been identified, such as relative size of the undergraduate and graduate student bodies, system/campus governmental structure, relationships with outside constituencies and organizations, reward structure, and information structure.

8. Other items - Hood. information on professional leave awards during the past six years was circulated. During the six years expenditures have ranged from $50,000 to $85,600.

Hood will speak on the use of proceeds from the sale of the Chancellor's residence at the February 7 Board of Trustees meeting. A breakdown of the increase in professional hiring at UTK between 1984 and 1988 is not yet available but should be available soon.

Phil Scheurer reported briefly on the recent student drop-add fraud. There are 226 potential cases-, there are five categories of involvement and punishment; the fraud was perpetrated for 1 1/2 years; no other systems were compromised.

It was reported that the Athletics Department hopes to make a substantial contribution to the library this semester from bowls proceeds.

Meeting adjourned at 5:12 p.m.


February 19, 1990

Tom Hood, Presiding

Members present: Cleland, Everett, Frazier, Hamilton, Haughton, Hood, Kenney, Lester, Mayhew, Moffett, Muldowny, Phillips, Chancellor Quinn, Reed, Scheurer, Silverstein, Trahern, and Van Hook.

The meeting was called to order by Hood at 3:30 p.m. in Room 202 of the University Center.

Hood began meeting with question of Daily Beacon reporter who wished to be present at meeting to discuss AAUP proposal on Administrative evaluations. Members objected to presence but it was agreed to move this item to the top of the agenda so that it could be discussed. Hood asked whether or not recommendation should be sent to Senate directly or sent to a committee for consideration. Deans are now evaluated and Chancellor said that he is responsible for evaluating performance of administrators on Chancellor's staff. Quinn said that faculty members are not necessarily the best evaluators of all administrative personnel and that in some cases faculty perhaps should not have full voice in evaluating administrators. Mayhew suggested that AAUP letter and evaluation proposal be sent to committee to consider the questions raised by Executive Committee. Hood said that perhaps Faculty Affairs should look at it but Mayhew felt it was not the appropriate one. Hood inclined to appoint a special committee to deal with questions. Suggested that joint Senate-Chancellor committee be appointed to examine process with regard to existing from administrative evaluations and to make further suggestions for implementation -- approved by common consent.

President's Report - Board of Trustees Meeting Resolution on Sale of Chancellor's Home -- Reviewed steps that had been taken by Executive Committee and Senate on this issue. Board agreed to look at allocation of funds when house was sold but did not vote to reverse previous vote but would consider Faculty Senate vote. Quinn indicated that he spoke about the various pros and cons about the Faculty Club addition to the Board and indicated University would do nothing about the house and the Faculty Club until the next meeting.

Presentation of Mission Statements for Various Campuses - President Alexander made presentation to the Board concerning the mission of university and emphasized three major goals:
1. affordable education
2. build a major research institution
3. design a 21st century Land Grant institution

Presentation outlined strengths of each of the University's campuses. Hood will send a copy of mission statement and proposed implementation strategies of UTK to all heads of appropriate Senate committees.

Computer Policy - Recommended that University go to single platform computer system and to search for Vice-Chancellor to supervise all computer and telecommunication services. An outside study agency recommended IBM and DOS as the computer platform but other companies are competing so committees will listen to other competitors.

Grade Appeals - Hood is working with Vice-Chancellor Norman on appointing a new committee to consider this question.

Chairs of Excellence - Chancellor Quinn asked for a summary of The Report prepared by the Faculty Committee at UTC and Hood said he would report some at later meeting.

Campus Planning Committee - Anne Mayhew - Reported on reaccreditation review and noted that first visit to take place in two months. This committee would serve as steering committee for campus reaccreditation visits. The names and composition of the major committees were distributed.

UT Employment Distribution and Salaries - Salary mean has been distorted by higher salaries at the top, perhaps by Chairs of Excellence. Professional staffs have increased in five year period between 1984-89. Increase in 145 positions, 45 in computer services, 100 in various areas of the university, some in research areas, affirmative action hirings.

Athletics - suggestion made that administration of Athletic program be considered by committee on Administrative Processes during SACS review.

Consultantship Policy - The Committee Report on UTK policy should be submitted to Senate for consideration and should move ahead even though the Systems report has not yet been completely formulated. Report will go out as part of agenda for next Senate meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m.

Submitted by John Muldowny acting for Bruce Wheeler.


12 March 1990, 3:30 p.m., University Center Room 202

Thomas Hood, Presiding

Members present: Charles Cleland, George Everett, Betsy Haughton, Thomas Hood, Jeanette Jennings, Ken Kenny, Lorayne Lester, Anne Mayhew, Marian Moffett, John Muldowny, John Quinn, Greg Reed, Bernie Silverstein, Joseph Trahern, and Marilyn Yarbrough.

Thomas Hood called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. Fred Grimm was introduced as an invited guest.

Hood raised several questions and concerns he had heard from faculty regarding the impoundment of state funds. Quinn noted that we still do not know what the impoundment will be. Not wishing to wait until the end of the year, when it might well be impossible to recover funds, the Chancellor has assigned each department an impoundment amount, generally between 4 1/2 and 5%, to be returned on this year's budget. Committee members felt that faculty were generally understanding about the situation, although some concern was expressed about the fact that state revenue shortfalls may continue in future years. The budget for next year will include a contingency fund equal to this year's impoundment.

Hood reported that a committee will be appointed to examine the possibility of instituting a chair system at UTK. He distributed a position paper and solicited comments from the committee.

Speaking on behalf of the College of Human Ecology, Haughton raised concerns about the decline in cleanliness and marked increase in thievery since the university has changed to contract maintenance workers. Her observations were echoed around the table: other units have faced similar problems and have resolved them only by assigning a person to follow the maintenance people and call supervisors repeatedly to get expected service. Problems identified included inadequate cleaning of toilet rooms and classrooms, theft of equipment from secure offices, doors left unlocked, constant personnel turnover, and personnel with whom one cannot communicate in English. While the contract workers may be saving the university system money, the expense of following up on maintenance problems and replacing stolen items places a new and unwelcome burden on departmental operating funds. Trahern expressed a desire to understand the magnitude of the problem; he promised to look further into the matter and report back to Hood.

The Mission Statement distributed at the last Senate meeting was brought up for discussion. Hood noted that material relating to the Institute for Agriculture was absent and stated that he felt the relationship between UTK and the Institute of Agriculture ought to be examined during the SACS visit. Mayhew commented that the mission-related strategies had not yet been considered by the Long-Range Planning Committee. Discussion ranged briefly over enrollment targets, the relevancy of the statement and strategies to the professional programs, and the specificity of the documents. Hood asked that further comments be directed to him or one of the other planning committee members (Mayhew, Van Hook).

Grimm presented a motion from the Educational Policy Committee regarding proposals for changing calendar dates for academic functions such as advising and registration. Cleland suggested that the word should be changed to shall; the change was accepted. Mayhew moved that the resolution be forwarded to the Senate; Yarbrough seconded. The motion passed on voice vote.

As required in the By-Laws, Mayhew brought the matter of nominations to the Committee on Committees to the Executive Committee. All nominations were approved, with specific authorization given to Mayhew to adjust names as necessary to achieve a full slate to be presented to the Senate for election at the next meeting.

Kenny reported that the Assessment Committee will be meeting very soon to address a document of "Goals 2000" prepared by THEC which contains assessment issues that need study by faculty. This Goals document was requested by the Legislature and will be presented back to them. Little time remains before the deadline for campus comment, but Kenny was concerned that serious consideration should be given to a document which potentially could affect assessment activities on campus.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:57 p.m.

Minutes submitted by Marian Moffett in the absence of the Secretary


April 16, 1990

Members present: Cleland, Everett, Haughton, Hood, Jennings, Lester, Mayhew, Moffett, Muldowny, Silverstein, B. Wheeler and Yarbrough. Also invited: J. Trahern, H. Fisher, M. McInnis.

Called to order by Hood in the University Center Room 202 at 3:30 p.m.

1. President's Report - Hood reported going (with Van Hook and Auxier) to the Tennessee Higher Education Faculty Assembly at MTSU. One point that came up was other SE states that have passed legislation enabling options in their pension funds, but Hood said he did not detect much of a movement in this direction in Tennessee. Van Hook added that a growing problem (mostly at community colleges) was courses taught by adjunct faculty members (40% of courses at Shelby State CC). This subject will come up at the Assembly's fall meeting. Lester said we do some of this too, and use them "in a shameless way". Van Hook indicated he would be recruiting people to help organize the conference sessions.

2. Selection of Associate Executive Director for Academic Affairs of THEC. Fisher distributed the job description (attached). He reported that THEC has agreed to have 4 faculty members (2 from UT system, 2 from Regents system) involved in the interview process. He said he would hope that the successful candidate would have experience as a faculty member, a scholar, and an administrator. From our point of view, Fisher said, appreciation of research would be very important. Hood said this person would be a key figure in establishing performance funding criteria. Fisher noted that he hoped the person would be open to examining the performance funding issue.

3. Mission Statement and Strategies. Fisher reported on progress of revised mission statement. He said the new statement would set out more clearly the differences in UTK's mission from those of other Tennessee institutions. He said that prior to approval, Alexander and Quinn would come before the Executive Committee on the statement. Fisher said that, to date, the most sensitive part of the document has to do with projected enrollment figures (undergraduate and graduate mix).

4. Joint Chancellor-Senate Committee on Grade Appeal Policy (report Cleland). Cleland said committee was within one meeting of having a final report. The report will deal with both undergraduate and graduate student appeals. The committee may be ready by the next meeting. This would be the only appeal procedure a student will be able to take. It was agreed that policy document would come through Undergraduate and Graduate Councils, then to the Educational Policy Committee before coming to the Senate.

5. Athletic Board Chair and Faculty Representative to NCAA, (report McInnis). McInnis explained how functions of Athletic Board have changed, especially with regard to compliance with academic policies, compliance with new policies (drug testing, for example), and recent NCAA amendments to its policies. Next year NCAA will begin no- warning testing for steroids possibly used by football players. There was some discussion of a faculty-appointed faculty member or members to serve on the executive committee of the Athletics Board. Yarbrough raised the issue of faculty control of athletics; reading from the NCAA rules, she quoted passages which state clearly that faculty and/or administrators should be in control of the athletics program. What the Executive Committee actually does was discussed. Further discussion was deferred until a later meeting of the Executive Committee, when other persons (Chancellor) might be present. Trahern proposed that Chancellor might be receptive to suggestion that a faculty representative be added to the Executive Committee of the Athletics Board.

6. Athletics Committee (report Lester). Ticket sales for Orange/White Game are ahead of same period last year. Relay race teams have not yet materialized, although the prize is still there.

7. SACS Visit (report Mayhew). Dr. Jack Sites came to meet with Campus Planning Committee. One additional committee on research will be created. Mayhew intends to have regular reports on SACS reaccreditation progress made to the Senate next year.

8. Consulting Policy (Hood). Hood requested authority to appoint a small study group. Moved by Cleland; seconded by Jennings. Approved unanimously.

9. Other. Concern for Student Evaluation for Spring, which are unacceptably late. Option of not distributing forms this semester was raised. Part-time student help is inadequate to sustain the program. Mayhew moved that forms not be distributed this spring; seconded Lester. Motion and second were withdrawn after it was pointed out that the Senate is not administering the evaluations, the Chancellor is. Trahern pointed out that the administration has financed all it was requested to do. Alternative administrative approaches will be explored.

other concerns: Scheduling of campus events on major religious holidays. Prayers at academic functions will be taken up by the Chancellor.

Meeting adjourned 5:12 p.m.

Respectfully submitted.

William Bruce Wheeler
assisted by
Marian Moffett


June 11, 1990

Tom Hood, Presiding

Members present: Cleland, Frazier, Grimm, Haughton, Hood, Lester, Mayhew, Muldowny, Quinn, Reed, Silverstein and Wheeler.

The meeting was called to order by Hood at 3:30 p.m. in Room 202 of the University Center.

President's Report:
1. Hood reported that the joint committee on departmental administration has met and is working.

2. Hood reported that proceeds from the Orange and White football game ($35,000) have been donated to the library, and Coach Ma ors j said that around $200,000 would be donated later.

3. Board of Trustees will meet on June 21. At that meeting a change in the faculty handbook deleting faculty appeals beyond the Chancellor and President to the Board of Trustees will be voted on and probably approved.
Grade Appeals Committee (report Cleland):

The final draft of the joint Senate-Chancellor Committee on Grade Appeals was presented, which set up a revised University-wide process for grade appeals. After some discussion and editorial changes, the Executive Committee voted unanimously to bring the report to the Senate.

Faculty Representation on Athletics Board (report Yarbrough, in absentia):

Yarbrough drafted a resolution urging additional faculty representation on the Athletics Board Executive Committee, so as to comply with NCAA constitution stipulating that "at least a majority" of a school's Athletics Board or Executive Committee must be full-time faculty and administrators (administrators in this case defined by the NCAA in part as a "full-time administrative staff member who holds an academic appointment"). Silverstein recommended that we get an opinion on certain points from the NCAA before we act. Quinn agreed that it should be put off.

Mayhew suggested postponement until Yarbrough can be present and further clarification can be made.

Consulting Policy Response:

Reed's response to consulting question raised in Senate was passed out to committee members. Mayhew believes there should be general policy defined and agreed with original proposal to the Senate. Helpful to department heads and deans if such a policy were outlined defining what are proper policies for recommendation outside the university. What amount of outside activity constitutes interference with university activities? Quinn reiterated need to have some limit on outside consulting and need to that have set down. Need to have this set down so as to deal with abuses in violation of one day per week of consultation. Cleland feels need for general statement of intent but seems uneasy about attempting to define outside activities so specifically. Should be left vague because one can never write out a perfect statement. Mayhew suggested something about remuneration be incorporated into general statement. Hood said reject statement on remuneration to the effect that receiving fair compensation for services rendered. Motion made that committee endorse statement as was first proposed with definition of remuneration as follows:
Receiving compensation equivalent to the services rendered and not to exceed an average of 10 hours per calendar week.
Should be returned to the Senate as amended. Motion carried unanimously.

Fred Grimm - ABC/No Credit by Romance Languages - Major change in grading policy by UT and thus disapproved by the Educational Policy Committee. Goes against Senate policy of several years ago to have a student body that are not just "hangers on". Romeiser is to reconsider and see if other ways could be found to accomplish same thing.

SAMS cannot program until computer platform decided. Have worked and made progress on registration, advising, financial aid. Quinn outlined steps that have been taken with SAMS and the idea of a single platform for the campus.

Mayhew recommends approval of Bruce Wheeler and Jeffrey Kovac for Secretary and Parliamentarian respectively.

Silverstein noted that legislature did affirm longevity pay for 25 years service going up 1 year at a time.

Meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.

Submitted by Bruce Wheeler and John Muldowny

Senate Directory
Governing Documents
   Senate Bylaws
   Faculty Handbook
   Tenure Policy



Senate Home

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