August 29, 1994

October 3, 1994
November 7, 1994

January 23, 1995

February 20, 1995
March 13, 1995

April 17, 1995

May 31, 1995


August 29, 1994

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Hamparsum Bozdogan, Ann Bridges, Glenn Graber, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, Dolly Hough, David Johnson, John Peters, Paul Phillips, Greg Pompelli, Josette Rabun, Neal Shover, Bill Snyder, Kenneth Walker, Dhyana Ziegler.

Phillips called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

1. President's Comments. a) Phillips explained the uncertainty at present about the location of the office and provision of clerical support for the Faculty Senate. He urged that a telephone line be installed which was dedicated to Faculty Senate business and a secretary assigned part-time to Senate business. John Peters explained the difficulties of adding staff at present, indicated that a secretary may be assigned to Senate activities half-time in the 1995-1996 budget, and promised that emergency arrangements would be developed in the interim.

b) Phillips outlined his ideas for reorganization of the Faculty Senate and explained that he had assigned Dhyana Ziegler, in her capacity as Chairperson of the By Laws Committee, to coordinate these changes. Among the changes he recommends: a more effective committee structure, including a fixed, multiple-year term for both chairs and committee members in order to allow for greater continuity; possibly re-structuring the Executive Committee to consist of Committee Chairs.

c) Phillips outlined changes he recommends in the appointment of faculty representatives to campus Administrative Committees. He has urged the Chancellor's office to prepare prospective committee lists in April rather than July or August; then the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees might be made a standing committee and function to advise the Faculty Senate President in recommendations for membership on these committees. This change would, in turn, require electing the Committee on Committees from continuing Senators instead of, at present, including retiring Senators on that committee.

d) Phillips urged that faculty representatives to UT System advisory committees (e.g., Faculty Counselors to the President) be appointed from the membership of the Faculty Senate, since these are the faculty leaders elected by the faculty.

e) Phillips presented a resolution which had been developed by the Faculty Senate officers of all UT campuses to recommend that a faculty representative be appointed to both the UT Board of Trustees and the Tennessee Higher Education Commission. This was passed without dissension, though with some revisions the specific wording of which was to be left to negotiations between Phillips and officers of the other campus Senates. The gist of the revisions was to specify that the faculty members of each body were to be rotated among the UT Campuses (in a way similar to the current rotation Of Student representatives) and that the Senate President should be the campus representative.

f) Phillips presented a second resolution developed by all the Faculty Senates of all UT campuses, this one calling for the appointments of faculty representatives to Board of Trustees subcommittees to be made from Chairpersons of Faculty Senate committees. This would allow for better communication between the relevant committees and Board considerations and actions. This resolution was approved for inclusion in the agenda for the September Faculty Senate meeting, pending exploration by the Chancellor's office to determine whether Senate action is necessary to achieve this goal or whether it might simply become a matter of campus policy.

g) Phillips proposed that a Faculty Senate Five-Year Plan be developed. He distributed a worksheet asking Executive Committee members to list twenty goals for the Senate for the next five years. Someone will be asked to coordinate compiling these lists and beginning the process of developing a five-year plan.

2. Update on Searches, etc. John Peters commented first on the "Notes from Academic Affairs" that had been distributed over the Summer. Around 2,000 were distributed to faculty and academic affairs staff. Numerous comments have been received, but far fewer from faculty than from staff.

a) Dean of Admissions and Records.--Five candidates were brought to campus for interviews. The search committee will meet in the next few days to review the results of interviews.

b) Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean of Undergraduate Academic Affairs.--The interview process was suspended for die Summer to allow greater faculty participation. The first candidate was brought to campus on the day of the Executive Committee meeting.
    Meanwhile this position is vacant and duties are being handled by Peters and others in his office.

c) Associate Dean for Undergraduate Academic Services (formerly, Director of First-Year Studies).--This search has been suspended until the Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs has been appointed so that person can have a voice in this search.

d) Faculty Associate to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.--A report from the search committee has just been received. Action on this appointment should come quite soon.

e) Associate Vice Chancellor for Research.--Jerry Stoneking has been asked to chair this search. The remainder of the search committee will be appointed soon.

f) The Office of Assessment Services has been restructured and renamed "Academic Affairs Programs and Evaluation Services." In addition to coordinating the Campus Teaching Evaluation Program, this off-ice will now handle the details of scheduling Program Reviews, as well as certain other academic affairs matters.

g) The Administrative Review Committee is working "with all deliberate speed" to develop a process that will be acceptable across the campus.

h) The Council on the First Year has been constituted through negotiations between Glenn Graber, Phil Sheurer, and John Peters and has begun to meet. i) The Academic Orientation Feasibility Committee has begun to develop plans for contact with incoming first-year students, from soon after their admission until well into their first semester in residence.

j) The CTEP Task Force is busy reviewing the evaluation program and may be prepared to report as early as the October Senate meeting.

3. Chancellor's Comments. a) With regard to the Five-Year Plan, Chancellor Snyder stressed that this is a dynamic document that should be subject to discussion and review across the campus. The Chancellor's Planning and Budgeting Advisory Committee will sponsor several campus- wide discussions of aspects of the plan. Snyder pointed out that he had already come to the conclusion that two elements are insufficiently addressed in the plan: information technology and outreach.

b) Snyder announced that he would soon be appointing a Campus Beautification Task Force.

c) Snyder presented material about the state funding formula, which developed by a task force of THEC and is to be presented for adoption by October 15. Several items (including, notably, the equipment category) are now enrollment-driven, which works to the detriment of UTK with our enrollment cap. Snyder pointed out that this matter was in considerable ferment, but that significant changes in the funding formula were likely.

4. Committee on Religious Issues. Glenn Graber reported that the membership of this committee was still being formulated, and indicated that it should be in place by the time of the September Faculty Senate meeting.

5. Faculty Club. Glenn Graber presented to the Executive Committee a letter, which will be going out to all faculty soon, Outlining the planned expansion of the Faculty Club and the plans proposed to fund the expansion. Faculty comments and suggestions regarding any aspect of operation of the faculty Club were solicited.

There being no Old Business, nor any New Business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:57 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
Glenn Graber, Acting Secretary


October 3, 1994

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Jim Applegate (Intern, Chancellor's Office), Bill Blass, Hamparsum Bozdogan, Anne Bridges, Glen Graber, Fred Grimm, Peter Groer, David Johnson, Sam Jordan, Ray Mundy, Paul Phillips, Josette Rabun, Bill Snyder, Dhyana Ziegler

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

1. President's Comments. Phillips announced that J. Peters would not be able to attend and, therefore, item 7, Affirmative Hiring on the agenda (distributed at the meeting) would not be discussed. He also announced that the recent agreement between the institution and Delta Airlines does not mean that faculty lose their frequent flyer miles.

2. Chancellor's Comments. Snyder conveyed J. Peters' regrets for not being able to attend. He then announced that Nina Elliott is being promoted to Assistant Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. In her new position she will deal with certain aspects of academic personnel matters, multi-cultural activities and physical operations. He next discussed his interests in "outreach," which he sees as an important part of marketing UTK to the public. He distributed copies of a pamphlet titled, "Strategic Plan for The University of Tennessee, Knoxville/Business and Industry Partnerships." Finally, Snyder discussed the matter of improving faculty salaries. He noted that using a relatively small fund across the entire campus would mean not doing much for anyone. He also pointed out the possibility of trying to address salary problems by discipline with those most underpaid the first to be addressed. Also noted was the need to address gender and race disparities. Snyder asked for comments both now and later. All agreed on the need to consider merit. Current plans are to deal first with internal disparities, such as those related to race and gender and then to deal with disparities in relation to national averages. Several members noted that certain classes of faculty missed out on reasonable raises simply because of the time they came to UTK and the timing of impoundments and other problems. R. Mundy emphasized the need to deal with root causes and the effect on younger faculty of seeing the salaries of senior faculty. Snyder noted that funding for adjustments will come off the top of the usual state appropriations, so that there will be less money for other needs. D. Ziegler emphasized the need for exceptionally good communication with the faculty on this matter; Snyder indicated that efforts in this direction already have begun. B. Blass noted that the salaries of one or two highly paid faculty in a given rank in a department (for example, salaries of recently hired faculty) can greatly skew the data for that rank.

3. Computing. Phillips next raised the matter of the status of computing on campus. Snyder noted that a long-range plan is being developed for inclusion in the institution's five-year plan. Networking, telecommunications, micro-computer labs, a disaster recovery system and software needs are a few of the topics being discussed. Several committee members noted that faculty do not seem to have input into the process and most are not aware of the activities. Ziegler suggested that reports of study groups/committees be distributed to faculty for comment. It was suggested that J-M Griffiths report to the Faculty Senate.

4. Review of Administrators. Phillips reported faculty discontent with the rate of progress of the process to revise the Review of Administrators Policy. It has been reported that the committee has not been meeting. It was suggested that Peters be asked to report at each meeting of the Executive Committee. (Another matter about which faculty are curious is the revision of the Faculty Handbook.)

5. Committee on Religious Issues. Snyder reported that he had explained to President Johnson the broad charge of the Committee on Religious Issues. Graber reported that one co-chair has been identified and that other members are being sought. Snyder reported that prayers occur at football games because of trustee action.

6. Code of Ethics. Phillips reported that a faculty member had written Snyder to encourage the establishment of a code of ethics for the institution. He requested comments from committee members, several of whom asked whether there is a need. Others noted that several existing policies and official statements address various aspects of an ethical code. D. Johnson recommended an article on ethics in the current issue of "Academe." F. Grimm noted that there are booklets on ethics for faculty and for students, but that there is not one for staff. The committee ultimately agreed not to pursue the matter, except to suggest to an appropriate person that a handbook for staff be developed.

7. CTEP. Graber reported on a draft statement (distributed at meeting) of a Preliminary Report of the CTEP Task Force. The University of Washington has an evaluation system designed to provide a general evaluation, information about the course for students, and diagnostic feedback for the instructor. The CTEP Task Force is proposing adoption of The University of Washington Instructional Assessment System. Graber noted that faculty at UW are very positive about the system, which has been used for approximately twenty years. Samples of the UW material will be distributed with the agenda for the next Faculty Senate meeting.

There being no Old Business, nor any New Business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Samuel Jordan, Secretary


November 7, 1994

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Anne Bridges, Paul Phillips, Glenn Graber, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, Dolly Hough, Sam Jordan, J. G. Peters, Neal Shover, Bill Snyder, Kenneth Walker, Dhyana Ziegler. Also present were: Jan Allen, Jim Applegate, Jose-Marie Griffiths, Trish McClam

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

1. President's Comments. Phillips noted concerns about the safety of the area north of Cumberland Avenue where more university structures are being built. A faculty member was mugged in the area recently. Phillips intends to discuss the matter with P. Scheurer. D. Ziegler noted that there have been attacks in parking lots south of Cumberland Avenue also.

2. Chancellor's Comments. Snyder reported that he has started a sequence of "listening sessions" to which all black faculty are invited. J. Peters will have meetings with individual black faculty. Snyder wants to focus on the climate issue as well as the recruiting issue. One black faculty member has suggested having non-black faculty visit predominantly black institutions and/or spend a weekend with a black faculty member. D. Ziegler noted the importance of educating non-black faculty about the real purpose (seeing individuals as humans) before any visits.

3. Vice Chancellor's Comments. J. Peters thanked the Chancellor and others for messages of condolence upon the death of his father. He then noted that the intention is to resume reviews of administrators spring term, 1995. He indicated that a common ground is still being sought in the process. Faculty Senators will receive a status report from Peters. Peters also noted his pleasure in hiring Linda Maxson as Associate Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate Studies. The Dean of Admissions and Records position has been accepted by Susie Coleman-Archer, who will begin in January, 1995. Other searches are proceeding. Peters then distributed copies of the UTK Enrollment Management Strategy document and noted that he has been talking to many about the kind of flexible affirmative action approach the institution needs.

4. Computing. J-M. Griffiths distributed material on computing and telecommunications issues at UTK. She briefly commented on various issues and on actions being taken to study various situations and plan for the future. Her plan is to receive and distribute by February, 1995, reports from the Organizational Improvement Project and from two User Advisory Groups (Computing, chaired by Peter Cummings, and Networking and Telecommunications, chaired by Ralph Gonzalez). Faculty then will be invited to make comments. Other groups will report later. B. Blass noted the need to identify the operations model to be used and to seek faculty input on the matter. Griffiths agreed, reported her efforts already made, and noted that she will be meeting soon with Cummings and Gonzalez to discuss such matters. D. Ziegler noted the need for a course to introduce all freshmen to the Internet. Griffiths agreed that there is a need and suggested that such a course should be a general requirement. Griffiths will report at the next Faculty Senate meeting.

5. Academic Prelude. J. Allen distributed a report of the Academic Orientation Feasibility Committee (Academic Prelude) and discussed its contents page by page. The proposal is to run the program Sunday afternoon, Monday and Tuesday before the semester begins on Wednesday. There also will be monthly events in September, October and November. D. Ziegler noted that plans for emphasizing diversity are not made clear in the report. K. Walker commented that the amount of time planned for Academic Prelude is not sufficient. Its shortness is the result of the dormitories not being available earlier. F. Grimm commented that the academic calendar may be the actual problem. Phillips remarked that the proposed agenda does not address students' shortcomings, such as poor study habits. Graber noted that the monthly meetings offer an opportunity to work on study skills. Grimm suggested that having each student keep an activities journal for the first one or two weeks would be beneficial. The consensus was that the proposed Academic Prelude is a beginning and will have to evolve. Walker suggested that the committee should study the first effort of fall term, 1995, and then report back to the Faculty Senate. It was decided that, with a few changes (including an executive summary), the report should be on the agenda of the next Faculty Senate meeting.

There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 5: 10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Samuel Jordan, Secretary


January 23, 1995

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Anne Bridges, Glenn Graber, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, Sam Jordan, John Peters, Paul Phillips, Josette Rabun, Neal Shover

Phillips called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m.

1. President's Comments. Phillips reported that there now is a 75 % time secretary for the review of administrators process. She is Ms. Sara Smith and her telephone number is 4-2703. Phillips next sought a volunteer to attend a breakfast for the Chancellor's Associates on Tuesday, February 21; Fred Grimm volunteered.

2. Vice Chancellor Peters reported on the recent murder on campus; he complimented Vice Chancellor Scheurer for his handling of the case, which did not involve university-affiliated individuals. Peters also praised Scheurer for his work on safety with the College of Human Ecology. He next reported that the new family campaign has begun and emphasized that participation, rather than total funds donated, is the important aspect of the campaign on campus. He also encouraged participation in the discussions of computing on campus. B. Blass emphasized the need to proceed cautiously, so as not to damage the good aspects of the current situation. Blass also expressed his feeling that the Senate Executive Committee or other committee should engage the administration in a discussion of departments' woefully inadequate operating budgets. Phillips noted the discontent among those faculty members in departments that have paid for their own computing systems when they see other units getting similar systems, but not having to pay for them.

Peters reported that the university is proceeding with the hiring process in the expectation that the new governor's hiring freeze is temporary. Also, he is studying the extensive renovation activities and trying to bring some order to what is done and the order in which it is done. He is asking deans to report in the budget process about expected renovations and space needs in general. F. Grimm noted that classroom space needs a spokesperson and Peters replied that he is taking that role. Peters also hopes to establish more control over general-purpose classroom space.

Peters also reported that the ad hoc committee to review the process for reviewing administrators has made considerable progress and should have its report ready soon. He also noted that he is studying the problem of faculty compensation. He expressed the opinion that across-the-board raises are not likely under the new governor. Peters already has studied salary problems for women and minorities; approximately $200,000 has been allocated for some corrections. He would like to do something for long-term employees who have given yeoman service, but whose salaries have not been increased in a reasonable way.

3. Phillips reported that Randol Waters, Chair of the Faculty Senate Student Affairs Committee, has written him about the idea of having faculty discuss the student honors statement at the beginning of each course and include it in syllabi. Waters' committee would like for the Faculty Senate or its Executive Committee to endorse the idea. G. Graber spoke in favor of the idea and, in particular, in favor of faculty being precise about what is appropriate and acceptable for each class. B. Blass suggested that Waters be allowed to present the request at the next Faculty Senate meeting, so that Senators will have a better understanding of the variations across campus. F. Grimm agreed and suggested that a resolution also be prepared. Phillips will ask Waters to prepare a resolution. Waters' memo and its attachment will be distributed with the agenda; the resolution will be available at the Faculty Senate meeting.

4. P. Cummings next made a presentation on the charge and work of the Committee on Computers and Telecommunications Planning, one of the three focus areas in a current study. The goal is to identify needs for the next five years and make plans for those years. Establishing a distributed computing environment is expected to be a central theme of the committee's proposal. Financial and other reasons for such action, as well as related changes were outlined. The expected outcomes are more computing power at lower cost, better support, and an opportunity to be at the forefront in academic and administrative computing. Cummings said that comments may be sent electronically to OR

5. G. Graber reported that the CTEP committee has a draft document, which will be distributed with the agenda if it is approved by the committee tomorrow.

There being no Old Business, nor any New Business, the meeting was adjourned at 5: 10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Samuel Jordan, Secretary


February 20, 1995

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Anne Bridges, Glenn Graber, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, Dolly Hough, Sam Jordan, John Peters, Paul Phillips, Greg Pompelli, Josette Rabun, Neal Shover, Bill Snyder, Marianne Woodside, Dhyana Ziegler Also present: Martha Alligood, Jim Applegate, Carl Asp, Matthew Gregory, Ann Mayhew, Carolyn Nelson, Alexander Van Hook

Phillips called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

1. President's Comments. Phillips reminded everyone that most of the meeting would be devoted to a discussion with the Campus Budget and Planning Committee. He distributed copies of two e-mail messages to him from Joe Peterson concerning an impending site visit of the NCAA Certification Peer-Review Team.

2. Carl Asp reported for the Athletics Committee about the NCAA Peer-Review Team visit. He described the efforts to prepare for the visit. He noted that the report prepared for the review is available for Executive Committee members to review and will be made public after the review. In response to a question from Phillips, Asp noted that several private interviews with faculty have been scheduled.

3. D. Ziegler reported for the Bylaws Committee on early versions of proposed changes to the Bylaws. The proposals will not be considered by the Faculty Senate until the April meeting. One proposal adds the President of the Faculty Senate as an ex-officio member of the Committee on Committees. Another calls for the Executive Committee to consist of the chairs of the Standing Committees, the Chancellor, the Chief Academic Officer, the President, the President-Elect, the Secretary and the immediate Past President. A third proposal would create an Executive Council of the Executive Committee and empower it to represent the Senate in all urgent matters arising in the summer. There was some discussion of the need for an Executive Council to be representative of the entire campus. F. Grimm suggested including only the chairpersons of selected committees and continuing to elect other members from across campus. The proposals will be discussed further with various groups before being taken to the Faculty Senate. A final proposal would unify and regularize the election process for senators so that faculty, rather than college deans, would be in charge.

4. Phillips turned the meeting over to Ann Mayhew who chairs the Campus Budget and Planning Committee. She introduced members of the committee and then described the committee's advisory nature. She turned next to recommendations for updating the five-year plan and asked Bill Snyder to make comments. He noted that creation of the Campus Budget and Planning Committee was a response to an "obligatory recommendation" resulting from the SACS review of the campus. He also expressed his view of the plan as a dynamic document to be updated yearly. In particular, he pointed out the omission in the document of discussions of telecommunications and outreach activities.

Mayhew asked that Executive Committee members read carefully the goals stated in the five-year plan and comment about their values and relative importance. M. Alligood suggested that groups should be identified to consider specific recommendations. Mayhew then spoke in favor of having a discussion of how the five-year plan fits in with other planning efforts. She also asked for suggestions for getting the campus involved in a discussion of the plan. B. Blass suggested having the plan available in a World Wide Web-type presentation with hypertext connections to further information about the institution. F. Grimm noted the lack of feedback about the accomplishment of recommendations in previous five-year plans. J. Peters observed that there are many assessment activities, but their findings are not available in one place. D. Ziegler reminded everyone of the need to disseminate information through the traditionally print means for those who are not yet involved in electronic communications.

Mayhew discussed the need to view the five-year plan as more than simply a road map for the central administration. There are goals which require action by colleges and departments. J. Peters reported that some colleges are developing their own five-year plans. G. Graber noted that the Trustees have exhibited interest in whether actions on campus are in step with the five-year plan. Snyder reiterated the need for goals to direct resources rather than for the allocation of resources to determined goals. Mayhew then suggested that faculty interest might be increased by informing everyone that the five-year plan will strongly influence how impoundments and budget reductions are met.

Snyder agreed with suggestions that an annual report on progress toward goals, perhaps in a well advertised open forum, would be very helpful.

5. G. Graber discussed an addendum to CTEP Task Force Report of February 6, 1995 (distributed at meeting). It is the task force's response to comments and suggestions made in the last Faculty Senate meeting. The addendum will be distributed with the next agenda.

6. B. Blass expressed concern about the calendar proposed by P. Cummings for changing computing and telecommunications on campus. He noted that the plan to eliminate the VAX system could create significant problems for many individuals and groups. He argued for a multi-year migration from one system to another and for a reconsideration of the proposed calendar. There was general agreement with his comments. Blass asked for suggestions of how to proceed and reiterated his concern that the Executive Committee should be aware of the possible impending chaos. Phillips suggested that J-M Griffiths should be informed of the potential problem. F. Grimm noted that the unrealistic date for eliminating the VAX system could lead to unrealistic budget decisions. Phillips then suggested that Blass might raise the matter at the next Senate meeting. F. Grimm suggested that Griffiths should be informed by someone other than Blass.

Blass then turned to a recommendation to the Networking Committee that actions be taken to simplify faculty involvement in the use of computers. He asked how hard the idea should be pushed. There was a consensus that it should be pushed hard.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:17 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Sam Jordan, Secretary


March 13, 1995

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Ham Bozdogan, Anne Bridges, Dolly (Hough) Davis, Glenn Graber, Fred Grimm, Peter Groer, G. W. Harris, Tom Hill, Sam Jordan, John Peters, Paul Phillips, Greg Pompelli, Josette Rabun, Dhyana Ziegler

Phillips called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

I . President's Comments. Phillips announced that Gleb Mamantov, Head of the Department of Chemistry, died during the weekend. He then reported on the spectrum of comments he has received about his proposal for elective College Councils. It has been suggested that senators from a college could become a caucus which might develop into a council. In response to a question from D. Ziegler, Phillips said that only one college dean had responded to Phillips' proposed council structure in strong negative terms. J. Peters said that he feels a representative body to advise each dean is important, but that lie feels it is a faculty matter within each college. B. Blass expressed his preference for a caucus to avoid another layer of bureaucracy. In response to a question from D. (Hough) Davis, Phillips said that his interest is in seeing an elected group in each college with an elected representative from each unit. He noted that a common thread in responses for a five-year plan on Senate activities is a request to get administrators off the Senate. Since a dean does object to the council approach, Phillips is inclined to pursue the caucus approach. Others objected that one person should not be allowed to block all progress and urged the formation of elected councils in those colleges whose deans were receptive to the idea. Peters noted that he needs a representative faculty group in each college with which to interact and encouraged Phillips to proceed with the caucus concept.

Phillips next asked committee members to look carefully at the draft revision of the Faculty Handbook. He noted that on page nine there is a reference to departmental bylaws, although there is no mechanism to assure there are bylaws for each department. He continued with two other similar items which he said he had found quickly. He suggested that such items could be topics for discussion next year. Peters said that the idea is to distribute an updated version and then to go through it topic-by-topic.

Phillips then called attention to the recently distributed report on the policy for review of administrators. He encouraged everyone to read the report and send him any comments before Wednesday when he has a meeting with the chancellor to discuss the report. Peters noted that the review committee has met its charge, but is ready to explain to Phillips and Snyder why the committee did what it did.

2. Otto Kopp spoke briefly on the matter of an ethics policy. He feels that there is an ethical crisis locally and more widely. He noted that the word, "ethics," does not appear in the index to the existing Faculty Handbook. He displayed a small folder distributed by Martin Marietta to all its employees to inform them of its code of ethics and penalties for violations. Other such codes also were exhibited. lie is hopeful that the Senate Executive Committee or the Senate will encourage the administration to consider seriously the possibility of establishing a committee to investigate creating a code of ethics and a set of penalties for violations for all university employees. No one had a question for Kopp, who then left.

Phillips next asked how the committee wished to proceed. Graber expressed the view that policies do exist. There was general agreement with the spirit of Kopp's proposal, but also a general conviction that putting rules in writing would not alter behaviors. Graber noted that matters of ethics are considered throughout the Faculty Handbook. Peters spoke in favor of general guidelines. Bridges noted that Kopp wanted something for all employees, not simply faculty, and encouraged some consideration by somebody of the possibility of creating a set of general guidelines. Snyder noted that the Personnel Policies and Procedures document does provide some guidelines. Phillips suggested requesting the Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs to review the Faculty Handbook and the Personnel Policies and Procedures document for ethical guidelines and requesting Phil Scheurer to assign someone to make a similar search in relation to his operation. Responses would be made to Graber for compilation and comment. A due date of the end of the semester was set. Graber will report to the committee. The suggestion proposed by Blass, seconded by Ziegler and approved unanimously.

3. Other Business. Blass noted upcoming opportunities for faculty to comment on the reports of the committees reviewing campus computing and telecommunications. He encouraged interested individuals to attend one of the sessions and to make their views known.

4. Nominations for Committee on Committees. Phillips described the nominating task, distributed a list of the Faculty Senate membership, and identified those who will continue to serve. The nominees are Bobby Bledsoe and Joanne Logan from Agriculture Sciences and Natural Resources, Tom Hill from Agriculture Extension service, Mike Ware from Architecture and Planning, Bryant Creel and Mary Papke from Humanities, Ed Clark and Earl Wehry from Natural Sciences, Pearl Gordon and Ronald Foresta from Social Sciences, Ray Popp from Biomedical Sciences, Jean Gauger and Sarah Gardial from Business Administration, Mark Miller from Communications, Dennie Kelley and Charles Thompson from Education, Denise Jackson and Joe Wilkerson from Engineering, Mary Dale Blanton and Randy Bresee from Human Ecology, Pat Fisher from Information Sciences, Neil Cohen and Reba Best from Law, Agnes Grady and Flora Cobb from Libraries, Mitzi Davis and Betsy Smith from Nursing, Catherine Faver from Social Work, Montgomery Smith and Ahmad Vakili from the Space Institute and Janice Bright from Veterinary Medicine.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:48 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Sam Jordan, Secretary


April 17, 1995

Paul Phillips, Presiding

Members present: Bill Blass, Ham Bozdogan, Anne Bridges, Dolly Davis, Glenn Graber, Fred Grimm, Tom Hill, Sam Jordan, John Peters, Paul Phillips, Greg Pompelli, Josette Rabun, Bill Snyder, Dhyana Ziegler

Phillips called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m.

1. Phillips reported that he and Dean Ratner had had a long discussion and that the College Councils will be reconsidered in the five-year plan.

2. Phillips reported that Sandra Thomas will become chair of the Standing Committee on Review of Administrators for the remainder of the year. Lonnie McIntyre will be chair for the next academic year. George Frazier will succeed Phillips as a member of the committee.

Phillips reported that he and Chancellor Snyder have reviewed and modified the report of the Evaluation of Administrators process chaired by J. Peters. The report was distributed at the meeting Snyder and Phillips briefly pointed out the more important modifications. The report will be presented at the next Faculty Senate meeting.

3. Phillips distributed a Teaching Council report on its activities. It will be on the agenda of the next Faculty Senate meeting.

4. Phillips introduced Eric Ward and Mark Van Patten who described the Faculty Senate Bulletin Board System on which they are working. During discussion of the gopher, B. Blass suggested that it would be better to have faculty first go into the World Wide Web and then access the gopher from there. Phillips expressed the view that lack of access to World Wide Web makes the gopher approach more appropriate now. Ward voted that a gopher's structure makes it easy to locate information. The committee was impressed with the power of the gopher.

5. Phillips next distributed a proposal to establish a Senate-Chancellor Committee to investigate the general subject of "Campus Climate." Ziegler asked why "Campus Culture" was not used. Phillips reported that Scheurer and Phillips found "Campus Climate" acceptable. Other possibilities were suggested. There was general support for "Campus Cultural Life." This proposal will be on the agenda of the next Faculty Senate meeting.

6. Phillips reported that the House of Representatives tabled for a week the motion to provide a faculty seat on the Board of Trustees. The currently worded motion requires that the faculty and student representatives each year be from the same campus. Although the original intention was to avoid this approach, the motion may pass in this form.

7. G. Graber reported that the committee looking at religious issues should have its report ready this summer.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:43 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Sam Jordan, Secretary


May 31, 1995

Members present: Dolly Davis, Sam Jordan, Paul Phillips, Greg Pompelli, Josette Rabun

Phillips called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m.

1. Phillips reported that a system has been established for communication with the Tennsen organization (composed of the faculty senate presidents at the four UT campuses). It is based on a bulletin board established in Memphis; its e-mail address is For World Wide Web access the address is html.

2. Phillips turned next to the measure in the legislature to add a faculty member to the Board of Trustees. The bill has passed. He briefly reviewed the details of the bill. In particular, Phillips will be the first representative. An attempt will be made next year to get a faculty seat on the THEC.

3. Phillips distributed copies of an e-mail message from G. Graber concerning the draft version of the proposed General Policies on Conflict of Interest. Graber had not had time to digest the document, but identified several serious concerns from only a first reading. General concern was expressed by everyone with the fact that the policy has been developed "over the past year" without the faculty or campus administration being informed until a very few weeks before a response is needed and after the academic year. Major, legally binding documents deserve fairer consideration.

Phillips went through the proposed policy to identify changes and additions to the prior policy. Section A, paragraph 1 is essentially unchanged. Section A, paragraph 2 is significantly different in intent and degree of detail. Expansions of it and of section A, paragraph 3 are vague and subject to diverse interpretations, some of which clearly would hinder fair and appropriate research activity. Section B of the proposed policy is an extensive expansion of an examples section of the earlier version; among other things, it requires an employee to report interests of an extensive list of relatives. The Council members strongly question the legality of such a requirement. They also perceive a serious inconsistency between items 4 (page 4) and 6 (page 8); in addition, item 6 appears to be a loophole for the Office of Legal Counsel.

Among several procedural requirements included in the proposed policy, the one requiring the establishment of a committee of three unspecified entities to review all reports from a campus drew particular attention for its lack of precision and impracticality, at least, at UTK.

Reporting forms for faculty and for certain administrators also raised concerns and questions. For example, it is not clear which administrators use the administrator form. Also, it is not clear why the administrator form should include an item allowing the respondent to check a box to indicate that the previous report is still valid, but the form for others should not include such an item.

The Council agreed upon and unanimously approved the following statement:
The Executive Council of the Faculty Senate of UTK rejects the proposed Conflict of Interest Policy in its present form for a multitude of reasons, including inconsistencies in the policy, and furthermore strongly suggests that the system administration follow its own prior procedures for like matters by forming a system-wide representative faculty committee to be involved in the generation of an acceptable form of the policy. These prior procedures have involved formal votes by the senates of the constituent campuses on the resultant policies with adequate notice being given for discussion of said policies.
There being no further business, the Council adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

Senate Directory
Governing Documents
   Senate Bylaws
   Faculty Handbook
   Tenure Policy



Senate Home

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