Faculty Senate Meeting
President: Safdie, Robert
Vice President: Lanza, Don
Secretary: Crotty, Pat
Sub Council Rep:
Past President: Alfonso, Robert
Business/Technology: Fox, Brad; Wurth, Pat; Rath, Dave
Health Science/Nursing: Stamm, Lisa; Young, Marty
Humanities: Hilliard, Peggy; Knox, Jim; Thomason, Sarah; Currie,
Library: Vaughn, Laura;
Math/Science: Bailey, Pat;
Social/Behavioral Science: Gomezdelcampo, Stella; Cordell, Sharon;
2. Motion to approve agenda: Agenda was unanimously approval.
3. Motion to approve minutes: Minutes of
4. Treasury Report: Acct. # 2-61920 Starting Balance $720.00; Current Balance: $685.65. No Changes to report.
5. Committee Reports
A. Faculty Evaluation Committee:
The committee (and volunteers from the faculty) completed a pilot program using both companies that we are considering contracting with (Online and IDEA). The committee has not met to discuss the results but will be doing so within the next two weeks. We need to make a decision about which one to adopt before the budget process begins.
B. Travel Time Equal Office Hours Committee:
The committee reported that no community college surveyed provided “substituting office hours with travel time” when the faculty member travels from home to arrive at his or her first place of work. The committee however, wishes to address several conditions that make this issue a particularly difficult one to address. First, the TBR system, as far as the committee’s research could ascertain, has no policy regarding “substituting office hours with travel time.” State regulations do not permit travel reimbursement for traveling from home to work and that RSCC’s current practice of “substituting office hours with travel time” is based on the travel reimbursement model. Finally, the committee feels that any changes in the current compensation practice at RSCC would have a statewide impact. It is the recommendation of the committee that the faculty senate take no action on this issue until we study how changes at RSCC could impact current “substituting office hours with travel time” practices throughout the TBR system.
C. Curriculum and Academic Council meeting:
D. Faculty Sub-Council:
(The following report submitted by Betty Denison.)
1. The Special Ed Diploma in the state of TN has been discontinued (a spec ed diploma student did not have immediate access to community colleges). This could result in more special ed students having access to community colleges. While community colleges are all about access, we are unprepared for special ed students. A state-wide committee has explored the ramifications of this (Ed Smith is RSCC committee member, Jim Brun (PSTCC) is chair), and is recommending that a Reading Standard be implemented as an admission tool. The recommendation is that the minimum Reading Standard will be set at an ACT of 12, a Compass of 53, or an Asset of 34. Ramifications: Compass will now become an admission tool instead of a placement test? probationary enrollment?
2. We will be using WebCT version 4.1 the remainder of this year and next year, and then there will be a GIANT migration to whatever new product (or company) the state of TN contracts with. I am NOT SURE whether we are talking academic years or calendar years. But by fall 2008 (and maybe January 2008), all online classes (including RODP) and web-assisted classes will be using a different platform.
3. Some of you may remember that Senator Fowler was going to introduce a bill last semester in the legislature that would have put a moratorium on all new programs and online classes. It turns out, his main issue was that there needed to be some oversight as to programs across the state. He didn't want UM to offer an online MBA, ETSU to offer an online MBA, and TTU to offer an online MBA. Since he was unsure about OVERSIGHT, he was going to introduce a bill that would stop all programs until there was some oversight. TBR folks negotiated with him and by adding a few sentences to an existing policy of oversight (Policy Approval of Academic Programs, Units, and Modifications), he was willing to drop his bill. This is great news for TBR schools. The added sentence to the policy was: "...if the development cost of a fully online Internet course exceeds $9,500 for the course, then justification must be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs for approval."
4. There is a draft (finally) of an articulation of Diploma Programs in Technology Centers to Associate of Applied Science Degree programs in Community Colleges. A student (who has completed a diploma program consisting of at least 900 contact hours at a Tech Center ) must meet all regular admission requirements, must meet all DSP requirements, must complete 15 - 17 hours of the general education component, must complete 15 hours of college-level work in the appropriate concentration--(a total of about 30 hours), and then 30 hours of credit will be awarded from the Tech Center transcript. The student's GPA will consist only of the hours completed at the community college. They can receive an AAS degree in General Technology.
6. Promotion & Tenure Policy Review Committee; Sarah Thomason et al. (The following was submitted by Sarah Thomason.)
Draft Tenure Policy Report
III. B. Length of Probationary Employment
--language is clearer
--declare at the beginning of 5th year
--a second attempt is possible after five years
--visual is included
--can choose to wait until beginning of 6th year to apply
IV. Criteria To Be Considered in Tenure Recommendations
--three categories are teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research
IV. A. Tenure-track Faculty Evaluation Process and Schedule
--student evaluations: required from all classes throughout probationary period
--peer evaluations: three components
--a mentor (mandatory) assigned by the dean for newly-hired faculty. The mentor has several responsibilities, including writing a narrative summary of the candidate’s progress after each semester of the probationary period and when considered helpful, collaborating with the faculty member to devise a plan for improvement.
--other peers (optional). As in the previous policy, a faculty member may ask a colleague to do a class observation, materials review, etc.
--optional ad hoc tenure review committee. At all times (regardless of whether problems are perceived or not), tenure-track faculty may request a preliminary review by an ad hoc tenure review committee prior to application for tenure as a mechanism to assess the progress of the candidate toward tenure. This committee shall be composed of the mentor (who serves as chair), one tenured faculty from outside the department, the dean of the department where tenure will be granted and, if desired, one tenured faculty member from outside the division.
--dean/library director or program director evaluation
--has the responsibility for an initial conference, a mid-year review, and a faculty evaluation summary at the end of each year
--collaborates with the faculty member and mentor to devise a plan to remedy any deficiencies noted. If improvement plan does not produce the desired outcomes within two years, the dean has the responsibility not to rehire the individual
--classroom observation schedule is more rigorous.
--minimum two visits per year (first and second year)
--minimum one visit per year (third and fourth year)
IV. B. 2. Service/Outreach: three components
--college service—very similar to current policy
--outreach/public service—emphasizes service to the community and society at large, with major emphasis on the application of knowledge for the solution of problems with which society is confronted
--professional service—work done for organizations related to the faculty member’s discipline or statewide/TBR committees, guest lecturing on other campuses
IV. B. 3. Scholarship/Creative Activities/Research: documented evidence of scholarship, creative activities, and research such as sharing classroom successes in an organized way with colleagues, writing educational articles, performing or creating compositions, and publication in journals
V. C. Tenure Timeline—very detailed in an attempt to provide clarity regarding responsibilities and procedural issues. Faculty who were hired prior to July 1, 2004, may elect to be considered for tenure under the provisions of the current policy: Policy 5:02:03:00.
7. Update: Building Access (See Attachment II)
8. Benroth Award Procedures Review: Awareness Letter; Designating Chairman of Selection Committee; Appointing Selection Committee. FS President & Vice President will review policy and develop letter to be sent to Division Deans to solicit nominations. A Selection Committee was formed of volunteers, one from each division as follows:
Social Science---Don Windham
Business -----Pat Wurth
Health Science---Marty Young
9. Discussion on Strategy to Approach Distance Learning Classes and Academic Freedom: Faculty senate will discuss issues at next meeting.
10. Next Meeting: Harriman Friday February 24, , 2006 Walden Dining Room
11. Adjournment: Meeting ended approximately 4pm
Minutes Submitted by:
Patricia Crotty, MSN APRN BC
Secretary Faculty Senate 2005-2006
Submitted: February 13, 2006 Approved: February 24, 2006
Attachment II Movement on Building Access
Letter from Dr. Goff addressed to Faculty Senate President:
Based on the Faculty Senate's request to allow faculty to have greater available to their offices at the Oak Ridge Branch Campus, we have worked all the details to expand the hours that the campus will be open for faculty.
We will extend the hours of access for faculty during a trial period this Spring Semester as shown:
I have had to keep faculty safety and security in mind as well as the additional costs associated with the additional access. The College could not afford a 24 X 7 access on the ORBC. Based on the additional costs to have security on site while faculty are in the building, I want to do a trial period this semester to see if there is a great need to expand the hours. I believe that this is a reasonable approach.
Please feel free to share this with the Faculty Senate.
Dr. Gary Goff