Site Index

---

August 30, 1993 October 4, 1993 November 1, 1993

November 29, 1993 January 10, 1994 February 21, 1994

February 28, 1994 March 14, 1994 April 18, 1994

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
August 30, 1993

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Glenn Graber, Sam Jordan, Bill Blass, Betty Ruth Carruth, Dhyana Ziegler, Marla Peterson, John Peters, Tom Davies, Anne Bridges, Paul Phillips, Tom Hill, Peter Groer, Scott Kinzy, Albert Dorn, John Haas, David Fox, Fred Grimm and George Harris.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1. Graber introduced John Peters, the new vice chancellor for academic affairs.

2. Graber reminded those present of a proposed revision of the bylaws from the Educational Policy Committee. B. R. Carruth then summarized the proposal concerning the approval of curricular matters and the need for it. Graber noted that the curriculum is a responsibility of the Faculty Senate. Those present agreed that proposal should be considered for the second time at the next Senate meeting.

3. Graber next distributed the draft of a resolution concerning an art censorship incident which happened on campus during the summer. T. Davies proposed an additional paragraph directed toward the establishment of a policy on censorship for the University Center. Others suggested minor, but important, wording changes. There was general agreement that the resolution should be split into several resolutions, each addressing a separate aspect of the original draft. Graber will generate the new resolutions and they will be brought to the next senate meeting.

4. P. Phillips reported that the recommendation of the Departmental Leadership Study that department administrators have 5-year terms is in conflict with Board of Trustees policy. There also are some less critical changes which will have to be made. It was agreed that revisions should be made and approval of the changes should be sought from the original study committee. If the revisions are approved, the Executive Committee will consider the new document and decide how to proceed.

5. The final form of the Compensated Outside Services Policy was discussed next. The administration has asked for topics for the workshops and suggestions for a new reporting form. S. Kinzy noted that an appeals process has been deleted from the document. P. Groer noted that it was unclear what groups might be exempted from the policy through Professional Allowance Activity Agreements. Committee members noted that several items in the draft voted on by the Senate no longer are included and that some additions have been made. Graber reiterated that the policy was not sent to the Executive Committee for approval, but for the committee to suggest workshop topics and ideas for a new reporting form. He will ask H. Fisher to come to the next Executive Committee meeting to discuss the final version of the document.

6. Graber noted that a Committee on Issues Relating to Religion is still being established. He asked whether trading a Memorial Day holiday for "Spring Recess Day" holiday (formerly, Good Friday holiday) would be a possibility. It was reported that staff members have objected to that idea, but then it was noted that having a holiday on Good Friday each year is unconstitutional. Graber will report back to the chancellor on the matter.

7. Graber reported that for the September 12, 1994, bicentennial convocation the athletic banners in the arena probably will be replaced with academic banners. He announced the formation of an Arena Banners Design Concept Committee consisting of Bill Kennedy, Milton Klein, George Schweitzer and Linda Weaver, with Tim Reese as a consultant to the committee.

8. Graber noted that changes in the THEC funding formula are being considered. He remarked that in the short term the university could see an increase in funding if the revised formula were fully funded, but that there are long-term concerns, such as an increase in the student/faculty ratio and an increase in the fee ratio for Tennessee residents.

9. D. Fox reported that he is running a pilot workshop based on the book, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Chancellor Snyder has offered to provide the books for the workshop. The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted by Sam Jordan



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
October 4, 1993

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Tom Davies, Ham Bozdogan, Marla Peterson, David Fox, Anne Bridges, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, Peter Groer, Wayne Andrews (guest of John Peters), John Haas, John Peters, Scott Kinzy Paul Phillips, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1. Graber reported that the University wanted all faculty whose lectures were to be videotaped this term to sign a form giving all rights to the tape to the University. Students in classes to be taped also were told to sign release forms. There were enough objections from faculty and students that the forms are being revised.

2. Graber distributed side-by-side copies of the April, 1993 and (final) August, 1993 versions of the Compensated Outside Services policy. The final version includes a provision that services performed on behalf of the UT Institute for Public Service need not be included in the total of activities covered by extra-service pay and compensated outside services. Several possible topics and questions for the campus workshops were suggested and discussed. Peterson and Phillips noted that difficulties at other institutions (e.g., Stanford University and MIT) might provide topics. Graber plans to create and circulate to the committee a summary of the problems raised. After it is revised (if necessary), it will be delivered to Bob Levy.

3. Graber reported that the Graduate Council wishes to hear only appeals dealing with policy. Relevant documents are to be revised to indicate clearly where various kinds of appeals should be directed.

4. Graber reported on further developments concerning the censorship resolution passed during the last Faculty Senate meeting. Discussions with various student groups are continuing. Graber noted that the Faculty Handbook does not address artistic expression and that it probably should do so. Peterson moved that Graber appoint a committee to develop a possible statement for the Faculty Handbook. The motion was seconded and then approved unanimously.

5. Graber next reported that the Undergraduate Academic Council would like to have the course syllabus for each course each semester made available in the library after the course is completed. The idea apparently is to help future students select courses. There was a general feeling that the UAC had identified a good problem, but not a good solution. Graber will refer the matter to the Educational Policy Committee.

6. Graber reported that revisions of the faculty handbooks at UT-Martin and UT-Memphis have prompted a number of questions and concerns. Graber is attempting to get copies of their handbooks. Peterson suggested that minutes of the UTK Faculty Senate for the last several years be reviewed to ascertain whether various actions are included in any new handbook for UTK.

7. Graber reported that the UT-Memphis Faculty Senate Executive Committee would like to visit the UTK Faculty Senate Executive Committee. He proposed holding a special meeting for such a visit. The UT-Memphis Faculty Senate is reviewing its entire operations and organization.

8. In response to a question from T. Davies, Graber reported that the proposed committee to consider religion and the campus has not been appointed. He hopes to appoint it within the next month. B. Blass noted that the committee's charge perhaps should cover not only religion, but respect for diversity. T. Davies suggested intellectual tolerance as a focus.

9. J. Peters reported that Chancellor Snyder soon will present a charge to the Planning and Budget Committee. Snyder wants to update the university's five-year plan and to reconsider the role and mission statement.

The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
November 1, 1993

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Paul Phillips, Ham Bozdogan, Marla Peterson, Betty Ruth Carruth, Anne Bridges, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, John Peters, Dhyana Ziegler, John Haas, Tom Davies, Scott Kinzy, Bill Snyder, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1. Graber's draft memo regarding issues, questions, etc. related to the new Compensated Outside Services Policy was discussed briefly. Graber suggested that committee members with ideas for improvements to the memo might indicate those ideas on their copies and send them to him.

2. Graber next considered a proposal from the Graduate Council on the matter of approval of faculty to teach 500-level courses. The proposal will be taken to the Faculty Senate by the Educational Policy Committee.

3. The Chancellor's recent memo on updating the five year plan was discussed next. B. Snyder noted that the President asked that the plan be updated. He expressed his view that planning must be a dynamic process integrated with budgeting. The Planning and Budgeting Advisory Committee includes faculty, administrators, students, and staff with faculty being a majority. It is not a resource allocation committee. Many groups will be providing information and suggestions to the Committee. Snyder noted the need to know who we are and what we want to become, to identify goals and resources, and to determine ways to achieve our goals. Snyder asked the Executive Committee to respond to his memo and, in general, to make suggestions to the Planning and Budgeting Advisory Committee. John Peters noted the need to develop general long-term goals, rather than "wishlists" of specific objectives.

H. Bozdogan asked whether it would not be more efficient for the Chancellor to provide his thoughts before the Executive Committee responds. Snyder responded that he has his ideas about all these matters, but he does not want to bias the process by laying them out at the beginning. He will provide the Planning and Budgeting Advisory Committee his answers to the questions raised in the memo as simply one more survey response. J. Peters reiterated the idea that the current efforts are aimed at finding out where we are relative to the current five year plan so that Snyder can report to the Board of Trustees on December 7. Then efforts will be redirected toward the future.

In response to a question from D. Ziegler, Snyder expressed his views that the university must not insulate itself from society at large, that it must understand what it is and where it is going and then educate the state about itself. He emphasized his view that the university's fundamental mission is to develop individuals.

It was agreed that each committee member will complete the surveys in the Chancellor's memo and send it by November 12 to Graber who will deliver them to the Chancellor's Office.

In the discussion Snyder listed for the committee the new "peer institutions". They are the University of Florida, Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Georgia, University of Kentucky, Louisiana State University, University of Maryland. North Carolina State University, University of North Carolina, Texas A&M University, University of Texas, University of Virginia, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

4. Graber next turned to the concept of combining the current Senate/Chancellor Course Evaluations and Student Government Association course evaluation. It is technically feasible to combine the evaluation forms. F. Grimm noted that it would be helpful to be able to separate out responses to certain sets of questions. T. Davies expressed concerns about the total number of questions; as the number of questions increases, the number of students willing to complete the evaluations decreases. Graber noted that there now is and will be a long delay between the administration of evaluations and the tabulation of responses. This matter will not be taken to the Faculty Senate without the questions to be asked on the SGA course evaluations.

The meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
November 29, 1993

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Al Dom, Ham Bozdogan, Fred Grimm, Bill Blass, Marla Peterson, Peter Groer, Paul Phillips, Tom Hill, Anne Bridges, John Peters, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:40 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 630.

1. Graber first reported on reasons to hold and reasons not to hold a meeting of the Faculty Senate in December. One report cannot be distributed in time; another will be ready, but not with much time for consideration. After some discussion, it was decided that the Executive Committee will meet next on January 10, 1994 and the Faculty Senate will meet next on January 24, 1994. There will be no meeting of the Faculty Senate in December.

2. Graber next distributed the Report of the General Education Committee of the Undergraduate Council Regarding the Report of the Chancellor's Task Force on the First-Year Experience. Issues related to the Report were discussed briefly. The desirability of having a substantial number of faculty, especially Faculty Senate members, on the various proposed committees was emphasized. The need to include representatives from the department and college structures also was agreed upon.

3. A list of committee members' e-mail addresses was circulated for confirmation of accuracy, corrections and additions.

4. The matter of updating the Five-Year Plan was discussed very briefly. Various groups are considering the Plan and making suggestions. A request for additions to the Plan will be distributed (probably in January). It is hoped that three or four priorities can be identified to guide this year's allocations.

5. Graber reported that he has been receiving telephone calls from faculty concerned about health insurance and which organizations will sign on with Blue Cross. There seem to be few answers now.

6. J. Peters reported that East Tennessee legislators will visit the campus on December 7. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee will be invited to a reception for the visitors.

The meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
January 10, 1994

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Ham Bozdogan, Marla Peterson, Fred Grimm, David Fox, G. W. Harris, Jr., Tom Hill, Marianne Woodside, John Haas, Paul Phillips, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1. Graber distributed the agenda for each of the Faculty Senate meetings scheduled for January 24 and February 7, 1994.

2. Graber discussed in some detail the agenda items for the January 24 meeting. He plans to consider the First-Year Experience Task Force Recommendations item-by-item. He also plans to focus attention on the Academic Review Policy recommendations. The report of the Teaching Council on Activities of the Learning Research Center will be discussed, but not item-by-item; T. Hood is expected to present the report and to highlight some of the more important points of the report.

3. Graber turned next to the agenda for the February 7 meeting. Each item was reviewed briefly. He noted that the Student Government Association questions which are proposed for inclusion in the Chancellor's Teaching Evaluation Program (CTEP) questionnaire, are not entirely directed to course evaluation (as had been suggested to the SGA). Committee members expressed mixed feelings about the SGA questions and the CTEP questions. It was decided that before taking the SGA questions to the Faculty Senate, Graber should ask the administration to comment on the purposes and value of the CTEP.

4. Graber next distributed material he obtained at a meeting to generate questions for the Tennessee Town Meeting to be broadcast simultaneously on all Tennessee PBS television stations on Sunday, January 23, 1994. from 8-9 p.m. EST. The purpose of the Tennessee Town Meeting is to provide information about fundamental issues in national health care reform. Graber asked for volunteers to represent the faculty at future meetings. It was suggested that a representative from the Benefits Committee might be appropriate.

5. P. Phillips asked for suggestions about who might be an appropriate parliamentarian for him to appoint. J. Kovac is stepping down as parliamentarian.

6. S. Jordan reported that several faculty and staff had asked whether a petition or other action were in progress to express dissatisfaction (similar to that expressed by Knox County and TVA) with the Blue Cross/Blue Shield approach to TennCare. T. Hill reported that the Benefits Committee was trying to get a meeting with N. Wormsley on the matter, but had not been successful so far.

The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
February 21, 1994

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Ham Bozdogan, Paul Phillips, Marla Peterson, Anne Bridges, Fred Grimm, Betty Ruth Carruth, Tom Davies, John Peters, Tom Hill, Albert Dom, Scott Kinzy, Bill Snyder, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1. Graber began with a discussion of the Moratorium on Review of Administrators process and a resolution concerning the moratorium from the Faculty Affairs Committee. Graber noted that he and Chancellor Snyder had received comments, both pro and con, on the matter of reviewing administrators. Snyder distributed copies of a memo from him to deans, directors, department heads and others. He reported that the memo reaffirms the importance of an administrator review process, but notes that there are problems with the current process that should be improved. He expressed his conviction that a moratorium is the best action for the campus. He also expressed his concern that the proposed resolution would be tantamount to "drawing a line in the sand" between faculty and administrators.

P. Phillips spoke in favor of a review of the process. J. Peters said he believes there is a need for reworking the process, since too many do not support the current process. Phillips noted that the Standing Committee continually reviews the process and that it is clear that policy changes are needed, but cannot be made by faculty alone. F. Grimm asked Snyder to suggest how he (Grimm) should respond to faculty who feel that Snyder has "Drawn a line in the sand." Snyder noted that reviews in process for which surveys have already been distributed will be continued; it is only new evaluations of administrators that will be delayed. He also noted that he knows there is mistrust, but that he believes that in four months those concerns will have been met. M. Peterson made a plea that there be a continued high level of faculty involvement in the review process and, in particular, that faculty have considerable control of the process. J. Peters observed that evaluation of administrators is a responsibility he and the Chancellor cannot turn over to someone else and that any review process must involve faculty. Snyder had to leave the meeting at this point.

J. Peters said that he is aware that certain groups on campus, such as women and tenure-track faculty, often feel that they cannot be honest in evaluations of heads and deans for fear of retribution. He said that the administration must correct that situation. He sees the moratorium as a way to improve the evaluation process and to correct flaws.

P. Phillips reminded everyone that the committee which developed the current review process had many present and former administrators on it and that the proposal was passed by the Faculty Senate and accepted by the Chancellor without change. B. Blass remarked that the way the moratorium has been handled is the major problem. A. Bridges expressed the opinion that the moratorium would have been received better if the announcement had come from Snyder and the Standing Committee. There was general agreement that the perception among faculty is that the moratorium is a "slap in the face". J. Peters noted that it is important to have a process with widespread support, so that it will not disappear.

F. Grimm suggested that the Faculty Senate receive a joint memo from the Chancellor, the Standing Committee and Graber. B. Blass moved that the resolution be returned to the Faculty Affairs Committee. B. R. Carruth reported that she has found general faculty support for the current process and asked from where the complaints are coming. There was general agreement with her evaluation of the situation; there were no answers to her question. M. Peterson noted that it is imperative to restore the "Joint" to the joint Chancellor/ Senate review process.

B. Blass suggested that the Executive Committee should meet in a week and review interim developments. It was agreed that the Executive Committee would meet Monday, February 28.

2. Graber proposed moving the Executive Committee meeting originally scheduled March 21 to March 14. It was agreed to do so.

3. J. Peters reported on the Search Committee for Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean of Undergraduate Academic Programs of which P. Kaufman is the chair. Committee members are: Tom Broadhead, Al Burstein, F. Grimm, D. Habel, D. Hendricks, J. Hickman, J. Kiger, N. McGlasson, J. Paul, L. Squires and F. Tompkins.

The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
February 28, 1994

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Fred Grimm, Marla Peterson, John Peters, Paul Phillips, Wayne Andrews, Anne Bridges, George Harris, Tom Hill, Albert Dom, Scott Kinzy, Marianne Woodside, Ham Bozdogan, Bill Snyder, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1 . Graber first reminded the committee that its March 21 meeting was moved to March 14 and informed everyone that the meeting will be in Room 220 of the University Center.

2. Graber next reported that the Faculty Senate Executive Committee at UT Martin would like to meet with this committee Friday afternoon, April 15, and Saturday morning, April 16. F. Grimm noted that the Budget Committee meets April 15, so the date may be changed.

3. Graber returned to the matter of the Chancellor's Moratorium on Review of Administrators. He distributed information on tentative membership of the committee to review the current process and the tentative timetable for the review process. Chancellor Snyder distributed copies of a draft of a policy paper on the review of administrators. He would like to have a final version completed by August 1. M. Peterson asked how this proposed policy relates to the current Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual. Snyder responded that he would prefer to have the new policy initially be a campus policy, so that it can be implemented more quickly. He would not oppose its official adoption by the Board of Trustees, but would want a separate brochure for it for easy reference. He noted that Board approval would be necessary for some possible policies, such as term appointments for administrators. P. Phillips noted that changes already made in the review process, rather than the initial process as indicated in the draft, should be the starting point for any review. In response to question from B. Blass, Snyder indicated that he expected responsibility for review committees to be shared by faculty and administrators. Peters expressed his belief that faculty want guaranteed input that will be protected. M. Peterson noted that it is important to develop an articulated system for providing funding to improve performance. Snyder returned to the question of B. Blass and said that the proposed steering or standing committee, which he expects to be appointed by the Chancellor and Senate President, will determine the composition of the review committees.

4. Graber next reminded the committee that the last Faculty Senate meeting ended in the middle of a discussion of student evaluation of instruction. He also indicated that copies of the Bylaws revisions will be distributed at the next Senate meeting and then briefly reviewed some of the revisions. He next noted that the Senate's resolution on Tenncare had been acknowledged. He also reminded the committee that structural changes have been made in the College of Education and that. consequently, there probably will be many course changes coming to the Senate from that College. P. Phillips then asked for time at the next Senate meeting to remind Senators to be present at the April meeting to cast their ballots for the Committee on Committees.

The meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
March 14, 1994

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Scott Kinzy, David Fox, Paul Phillips, John Peters, Dhyana Ziegler, Anne Bridges, Fred Grimm, Marla Peterson, Albert Dom, George Harris, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in University Center Room 220.

1. Graber reviewed the situation concerning the First-Year Experience Task Force recommendations. The Liaison Committee will have nine members with three appointed by each of P. Schuerer, J. Peters, and G. Graber. Appointments also will be made soon for the committee charged to do a feasibility study regarding academic orientation. P. Phillips moved that the Executive Committee recommend that these committees be chaired by faculty. The motion passed unanimously.

2. Graber next reported on his attendance at the recent forum on TennCare. D. Manning, representing the State, seemed unconcerned that TennCare is causing so many so much trouble. The Blue Cross representative also seemed unconcerned by his company's shortcomings. Graber intends to ask both the Fringe Benefits and Legislative Committees whether further action regarding TennCare should be taken.

3. The request by students for CTEP data from Fall, 1993, was considered next. M. Moffett reported that the current CTEP forms have the word, "confidential", written on them. For each section taught one copy of the report goes to the instructor and one goes to the department-, no other printed copies exist. Several expressed concern that faculty (inappropriately, as it turns out) had been assured of confidentiality when the CTEP was approved, but there was general agreement that the student requests should be responded to in a positive way. After some discussion. B. Blass moved that (1) the faculty be informed of the current situation with respect to confidentiality; (2) participation in CTEP be optional this term and (3) a copy of the data tape be provided to the students. P. Phillips noted that the faculty must abide by the state's "Sunshine law" and suggested that data be printed from the tape and the printed material be provided to the students to save them some difficulties. Others felt that providing a data tape would be kinder. J. Peters suggested that the Office of Assessment should provide only the data students want in the form they want. P. Phillips spoke in favor of developing a motion to take to the Faculty Senate. J. Peters agreed to distribute to all faculty. on behalf of the Executive Committee. a memo explaining the situation regarding confidentiality, provided he also is able to report that further action is occurring. Finally, it was decided to take to the Faculty Senate a motion that Spring 1994 through Spring 1995, a printout of the CTEP analysis in a form agreed upon by the SGA and the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, will be provided to the students. There also was a consensus that the committee to study the evaluation of teaching should be instructed to report in time for action to be taken for the 1995-1996 academic year. It was decided next not to propose any mechanism to allow faculty to refrain from participating in CTEP.

4. P. Phillips asked the committee for assistance in determining nominations for the Committee on Committees. The list of nominees will be distributed at the next meeting.

5. P. Phillips next discussed the question of access to the Office of Research Administration faculty database. Faculty, for example, might benefit from being able to search the database for other faculty with common interests or certain expertise. There are, of course, potential problems with wide access to a database. The discussion will be resumed at a later meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.



EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
April 18, 1994

Glenn Graber, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Scott Kinzy, Paul Phillips, John Peters, Dhyana Ziegler, Anne Bridges, Fred Grimm, Marla Peterson, Albert Dom, Tom Hill, Glenn Graber and Sam Jordan.

Graber called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Hodges Library Room 605.

1. P. Phillips discussed the question of access to the faculty database. One objective of the system is for it to be a useful interactive database for faculty to locate other faculty with related interests. Some would like for the system to be totally open; others would like some sort of restricted access. L. Riedinger would like input before May 10, 1994. from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee or the Faculty Senate. J. Peters noted that maintaining the system will require significant resources. He raised the question whether faculty and their records are public goods. F. Grimm said he would like to see cost estimates before deciding how to respond. Graber suggested requesting specific questions from L. Riedinger. P. Phillips noted that the Executive Committee should consider the questions before taking them to the Faculty Senate. D. Ziegler asked whether Riedinger might attend an Executive Committee meeting to discuss the matter. It ultimately was decided to ask someone to make an informational presentation to the Faculty Senate and to wait for a draft policy before having a full debate.

2. Graber next distributed copies of the charge to the Chancellor's Teaching Evaluation Program Task Force. B. Blass suggested that B. McLean would be a good addition to the Task Force, if a statistician were wanted. F. Grimm expressed his hope that whatever is proposed would provide feedback to instructors to help them improve their teaching. Graber agreed that links to faculty development should be included.

3. Graber next distributed the most recent draft of a memo from the chancellor and him to members of the Faculty Senate/Chancellor's Office Joint Committee to Investigate Issues Related to Religion and the UTK Campus Context. He also distributed a form showing possible constituencies to be involved in the committee and a few possible names. Additional suggestions were requested. M. Peterson suggested including someone connected with athletics. D. Ziegler suggested including the chair of the Institutional Relations Committee of the Athletic Board. F. Grimm emphasized that the proposed committee is to identify issues. rather than to propose actions. Graber plans to distribute the draft memo and form to the Faculty Senate. M. Peterson recalled that the chancellor once noted that this process could be an educational opportunity and that funds could be found to bring speakers to campus.

4. Graber briefly described other reports to be brought to the next meeting of the Faculty Senate. None required discussion.

5. J. Peters reported that his survey of faculty concerning deans has had many responses. He predicted that approximately 700 responses would be received.

6. Graber expressed his hope to be able to announce at the next Faculty Senate meeting the winner of the balloting for president-elect of the Faculty Senate.

The meeting adjourned at 4:40 p.m.

---

Senate Directory    Officers    Committees    Members

Governing Documents    Senate Bylaws    Faculty Handbook    Tenure Policy

Search Reports

Calendar Archives

Resources Senate Home

---

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