THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 30 April 1992
1. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the 1991-92 Chair, Professor Linda
Elksnin, at 11:03 a.m. Absent were Professors Woolsey, Alford,
Carter, Bowman, Kelley, Anessi, Dornetto, Salas and Teske. Professor
Elksnin served as proxy for Professor Clees. Also in attendance was
the 1991-92 Secretary, Professor Gordon Wallace, taking Minutes until
a new Secretary was elected.
2. Announcements from the Chair
A. "Memorandum" dated 23 April 1992 from Dean Metts
A letter was distributed by The Chair in which Dean Metts stated his
unhappiness with Faculty Council's letter dated 16 April 1992, which
criticized Dean Metts' decision to share with department heads the
results of the Spring, 1992, student evaluation of instruction forms.
B. Letter dated 24 April from AAUP to President Watts
Professor Elksnin presented copies of the letter from Professor Ted
Tucker, President of The Citadel Chapter of the American Association
of University Professors (AAUP), which was sent to President Watts.
The letter outlined concerns of AAUP about the Citadel
administration's recent procedures on the appointment of department
heads, appointments to endowed chairs, hiring practices, and student
assessment of instruction.
C. Letter dated 17 April 1992 from Professor Greim
Copies of the letter from Professor Greim to Vice President Meenaghan
regarding the student questionnaires and policy were distributed to
faculty. Professor Greim has resigned from the "Ad Hoc Committee on
Student Assessment of Instuction" because of the administraion's
handling of the student assessment situation.
D. Resignation of Professor Joe Tripp from the "Ad Hoc" Committee
Professor Elksnin circulated to Council a letter from Professor Tripp
in which he resigned from the "Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assessment
of Instruction" because of concern of the handling of the situation
by the administration.
3. Introduction of new Chair (Agenda 0)
Professor Peter Mailloux of the Department of English, who will serve
as Chair of Faculty Council for 1992-93, was introduced by Professor
Linda Elksnin and the meeting was turned over to him .
4. Comments from Professor Mailloux
Professor Mailloux thanked and complimented the outgoing Chair,
Professor Elksnin, for her efforts and accomplishments during the
1991-92 Council sessions. He also acknowledged the valuable work of
the outgoing Secretary, Professor Wallace, for his work and effort
during the past year.
5. Approval of the Minutes (Agenda 1)
The Minutes of the meeting of 16 April were unanimously approved.
6. Introduction of Members for the 1992-93 Council (Agenda 2)
Faculty Council Roster: 1992-1993
Business Adm. Bill Woolsey 1994 1st C
Business Adm. Mike Alford 1993 1st A
Education Dan T. Ouzts 1994 1st C
Education W. James Clees* 1993 2nd A
Phys Educ. John S. Carter 1994 1st B
Psychology D. Oliver Bowman 1993 1st B
English Woodrow L. Holbein 1993 1st D
English Peter Mailloux 1994 2nd A Chair
History John S. Coussons 1994 1st B
History Winfred B. Moore Jr 1993 1st C
Library/Museum Sherman E. Pyatt 1993 2nd D
Mod. Languages Christopher McRae 1994 1st A
Political Sci Ed B. Davis 1994 2nd B
Biology B. J. Kelley Jr 1993 1st B
Chemistry Thomas Richardson 1993 1st C
Civil Engin. Thomas J. Anessi 1993 1st D
Electrical Eng Lou D. Dornetto 1993 2nd C
Math/CSSI Margaret Francel 1994 1st D
Math/CSSI Muhammad Ishaq Zahid 1993 1st A
Physics Saul J. Adelman 1994 1st D
Aerospace St Mark Salas 1994 1st A
Military Martin Milukas 1994 1st C
Naval Science Julian Teske 1994 1st D
* replaces Linda Elksnin during 1992-93 sabbatical leave
7. Election of Vice-Chair (becoming 1993-94 Chair) and Secretary (agenda 3)
Professor John Coussons was nominated by Professor Holbein for the
position of Vice-Chair. There were no other nominations. Professor
Davis moved that Professor Coussons be elected by acclamation.
Passed unanimously.
Professor Tom Richardson was nominated for the position of Secretary.
There were no other nominations. Professor Coussons moved that
Professor Richardson be elected by acclamation. Passed unanimously.
8. Election of additional members to Commitee on Committees (agenda 4)
Five additional members are needed: 1 from Cluster B, 2 from Cluster
A, 2 from Cluster C. According to the new charter, these individuals
must be tenured but need not be members of Faculty Council. There
also cannot be more than one member from any one department.
A. Cluster A:
Professor Christopher Spivey, Business Administration, was nominated
by Professor Elksnin, second by Professor Coussins.
Professor John Carter, Physical Education, was nominated by Professor
Holbein and seconded by Professor Elksnin.
Professor Moore moved, second by Professor Adelman, to elect these
members by acclamation; carried.
B. Cluster B:
Professor Jamie Moore, History, was nominated by Professor Adelman,
second by Professor Elksnin.
Professor Frank Frohlich, Modern Languages, was nominated by
Professor Holbein, second by Professor McRae.
Paper ballots were distributed. Professor Frohlich was elected.
C. Cluster C:
Professor Leslie Crabtree, Mathematics, was nominated by Professor
Holbein, second by Professor Coussins.
Professor Steve Comer, Mathematics, was nominated by Professor
Adelman, second by Professor Elksnin.
Professor Saul Adelman, Physics, was nominated by Professor Elksnin,
second by Professor Coussins.
It was m/s/c that Professor Saul Adelman be elected by acclamation.
Paper ballots were distributed. Professor Leslie Crabtree was
elected.
9. Subcommittee Assignments for 1992-1993 (agenda 5)
The Chair noted that assignments for the 1992-1993 year are indicated
on the distributed roster. Subcommittees were asked to meet as soon
as possible to elect a chair and to report the results to the Chair.
Professor Holbein asked that the Chair consider a three-subcommittee
arrangement in view of the new committee structure. Discussion
ensued; such action is not prohibited by the charter of Faculty
Council.
The Chair declared that the Executive Committee would consider the
proposal; meetings of the new subcommittees are therefore suspended
until the fall.
10. Council Meeting Times (agenda 6)
The Chair expressed reservations about the 11:00 AM Thursday meeting
time. Possible alternatives advanced were to (1) "brown bag" lunch
and plan to meet thru 1:00 PM and (2) meet in late afternoon.
Discussion. The Chair requested that Fall 1992 class schedules be
forwarded so that the Executive Committee could consider the late
afternoon possibility. A recommendation will be presented at the
first Fall meeting (at 11:00 AM).
11. Old Business (agenda 7)
A. From Subcommittee A: The AAUP position statement on athletics.
Professor Zahid reported that the subcommittee had met with Professor
Runey (Faculty Athletic Representative) and communicated with Mr.
Nadzak (Athletic Director). A response from President Watts is
expected. The subcommittee report of 10 April 92 is based on the
discussion with Professor Runey. There is no major differences
between the AAUP and NCAA positions.
Discussion: The recent committee reorganization resulted in the loss
of the "Faculty Athletic Committee." This was perhaps subsumed into
the "Internal College Affairs Committee;" the charter is ambivalent.
Professor Moore moved, second by Professor Holbein, that Faculty
Council endorse the AAUP statement of 13 Jun 91 on intercollegiate
athletics. Carried.
B. From Subcommittee B: Student Academic Performance and Attitudes.
It was reported that the various campus offices, committees, and
departments were surveyed about their plans to study student
performance and attitudes. There are few if any such studies
ongoing, although several will be part of the self-study efforts to
begin in fall 1992.
Documents from the Commandant's office were reproduced in the Report.
The Chair expressed concern about these documents and particularly
with the recommendations that "Department Heads should review
professors who have a high percentage of failures or withdrawals;
perhaps the standard are excessive or their teaching techniques need
to be polished" (7 Nov 91) and "perhaps the standards are
unrealistic" (18 Nov 91). The Chair noted that the Commandant was
not an expert on, was not even trained in, academic matters, and that
he was going beyond this authority in suggesting standards for
faculty performance. It was a matter of even greater concern if the
administration was soliciting his, rather than the faculty's opinion
on academic matters.
The subcommittee report has been forwarded to the appropriate
standing committees.
Professor Holbein, second by Professor Coussins, moved that further
discussion be postponed until the fall.
C. From Subcommittee C: Reaction to report of Racial Affairs Committee
The subcommittee's report was distributed.
Professor Elksnin moved, second by Professor Coussins, that the Chair
write an appropriate response to Vice President Meenaghan. Carried.
The Chair was later directed to circulate a draft to members of
Faculty Council.
D. Subcommittee D: Athletics
Professor Holbein briefly outlined the history of the subcommittee's
work with respect to Athletic Department finances and referred to the
1991 reports from the subcommittee. Pertinent points (1) there is no
bookstore surcharge on textbooks, (2) out-of-state athletes receive a
tuition waiver, (3) there are various mandated financial committemnts
incurred by the Citadel by virtue of Division I NCAA membership, (4)
there needs to be an openness in the description of costs and their
funding.
Professor Holbein moved, second by Professor Elksnin, that the report
be received by Faculty Council for information purposes and that the
Executive Committee consider making a new and expanded charge for any
follow up work. Carried.
E. Brown Bag Lunches
The Chair postponed Professor Ezell's request to the fall.
F. Membership Criteria for Faculty Council; related issues
Professor McRae moved that Faculty Council consider a constitutional
change so that tenure-track faculty as well as tenured faculty would
be eligible for Faculty Council membership. NO SECOND
The question was tabled for reconsideration in the fall.
12. New Business (agenda 8)
The Chair postponed discussion of two strategic planning reports to
the fall.
13. Adjournment (agenda 9) at 12:50 PM.
/s/ Thomas H. Richardson
Secretary, Faculty Council
=============================================================================
1991-92
=============================================================================
(Highlights of the 1991-92 Academic Year to be inserted here.)
The Chairs and Secretaries of the 1991-1992 Committees are invited to
forward their reports to Tom Richardson (RICHARDSONT) for inclusion.
The generic charter of the standing committees, as approved in the Spring
of 1992, states:
The committee will prepare an annual report summarizing its activities
over the previous academic year. The report must contain all
non-confidential decisions of the committee. Copies of this report,
both in hardcopy and in electronic form, will be made accessible to
all Citadel faculty, staff, and students.
This is the place to store the electronic form! It DOES NOT have to be
given to me in electronic form! THR 22 Oct 92
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 16 April 1992
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor
Linda Elksnin, at 11:01 a.m. Absent were Professors Strauch,
Wilson, Anessi, Newsome and Gibson. Professor Dorothy Moore of
Business Administration was a proxy for Professor Strauch. Also
in attendance was Professor Jamie Moore as State Representative
of AAUP.
II. Approval and Corrections to the Minutes
The minutes of the regular meeting of 12 March 1992 were
accepted with the following change in paragraph three, sentence
two, of section "III. Announcements from the Chair" to read
"Subcommittee A was asked to draft a response...."
The minutes of the Special Meeting of 2 April 1992 were
accepted.
III. Announcements from the Chair
The Chair indicated that Professor Wallace attended the
Academic Board meeting of March 17. Professor Wallace reported
that the budget figures heard at Faculty Council's Financial
Forum were already outdated. Dean Metts reported that the
shortfall of Citadel funding with appropriations below formula
funding as well as the 1991-92 one time raid which depleted some
money pots will result in at least a $500,000 deficit for
1992-93. Professor Wallace understood that the figure still did
not take into consideration a smaller size freshman class and
resulting smaller FTE figure.
Professor Elksnin was at Academic Board on 14 April and she
reported that Professor Nichols presented a Strategic Planning
Facilities Report which Professor Mailloux will discuss later in
the Faculty Council meeting.
Further, at the Academic Board meeting, Dean Metts presented
Student Evaluation forms which were to be piloted this semester.
This item was not scheduled on the agenda for Academic Board but
was brought up under "Other Business". Professor Elksnin
strenuously objected to lack of faculty involvement in
development of a final form, to the implementation process on
such short notice, and to results of a pilot instrument being
shared with department heads. Further, Vice President Meenaghan
announced that this would be done by fiat, with no vote from
Academic Board. The administration claims that no results will
be used for evaluation this semester or next year.
At this point at Faculty Council, Professor Elksnin asked to
reorder the agenda so that the topic of Student Evaluation could
be taken up by Council for consideration early in this meeting.
A request to obtain further information concerning the
search for the Graduate Dean position was directed to the Chair
who will follow up on this.
The Chair said that the Executive Vice President reported
that President Watts was concerned that the Faculty Council
letter prepared in
response to the Lane Committee Report was sent directly to the
Chair of the Board of Visitors, and not sent via the Executive
Vice President to the President to the Board of Visitors.
Professor Elksnin noted concern of Faculty Council regarding the
process when the administration elected not to pass on issues
Faculty Council wished to address to the Board of Visitors. Vice
President Meenaghan was disappointed that the letter did not
include specific ways that the faculty could become involved in
cadet academic life. Professor Elksnin said that Faculty Council
would provide specific recommendations if formally asked.
Professor Elksnin distributed an article that President
Watts had sent to the Board of Visitors and subsequently passed
to Professor Elksnin by Executive Vice President Meenaghan
regarding a legislator's concern about state college and
university faculty work loads. Professor Elksnin indicated a
need to educate regarding a faculty member's job and handed out
to Faculty Council the formal description from the "Occupational
Outlook Handbook".
IV. Reports
A. 24 Hour Cadet Ad Hoc Committee
Professor Mailloux gave a brief report on the "24 Hour Cadet
Schedule" Ad Hoc Committee formed by Vice President Meenaghan as
part of the response to the Lane Committee Report. There is
still some disagreement on activities for cadets before 8 a.m.,
on activities scheduled between 3:30 - 5:30 p.m., and on the
10:30 - 11:00 p.m. time.
B. Strategic Planning
Professor Mailloux reported that three Strategic Planning
Task Force Subcommittee Reports had been accepted and were to be
sent on to Faculty Council: Facilities, Finances, Aid and
Scholarships. The Reports on Public Service, on Research, on
Endowed Chairs and Minority Hiring were returned to the
subcommittees.
C. Committee on Committees
Professor Elksnin indicated that there were two committee
mission statements and charters left for Council to approve.
Professor Greim said that the Teacher Education Committee was to
be added to the list of other committees and a mission statement
and charter were being developed. The Committee on Committees
has sent out to all faculty the forms to request committee
assignments for the 1992 - 93 college year.
V. Executive Committee Resolutions for Professors Briggs and
Greim
Professor Wallace introduced two resolutions from the
Executive Committee for Council's consideration:
A RESOLUTION
Whereas Professor Patrick R. Briggs, Past Chair of Faculty
Council and Past Chair of the Committee on Committees, has
committed his time and energy to restructuring of committees at
The Citadel during the past three years;
Whereas Professor Briggs worked tirelessly with the Committee on
Committees to develop a plan which would increase the viability
of college committees and avoid duplication of committee efforts;
Whereas Professor Briggs assisted the Committee on Committees in
developing a plan which would decrease the number of committees
to which a faculty member would be assigned;
Whereas Professor Briggs was instrumental in convincing the
administration to implement the new committee structure during
the 1991-92 academic year;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Faculty Council, representing
the General Faculty at The Citadel, recognizes and applauds
Professor Briggs's leadership, dedication, and hard work to
benefit both The Citadel and its faculty.
Professor Emory moved and it was seconded to adopt the
resolution. Unanimously approved.
A RESOLUTION
Whereas Professor Peter Greim, Past Chair of Faculty Council and
Chair of the Committee on Committees, has committed his time and
energy to restructuring of committees at The Citadel during the
past two years;
Whereas Professor Greim assisted the Committee on Committees in
convincing the administration to implement the new committee
structure during the 1991-92 academic year;
Whereas Professor Greim worked tirelessly with the Committee
Chairs and the Committee on Committees to develop mission
statements and charters for each faculty committee;
Whereas Professor Greim worked diligently with the Committee on
Committees in order to present committee mission statements and
charters to Faculty Council for its approval;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Faculty Council, representing
General Faculty at The Citadel, recognizes and applauds Professor
Greim's leadership, dedication, and hard work to benefit both The
Citadel and its faculty.
Professor Zahid moved and it was seconded to adopt the
resolution. Unanimously approved.
VI. Old Business
A. IRM Matters
Professor Zahid had concern about some of the role and
function of IRM. He noted how much service was provided by IRM
since its inception. Professor Zahid was troubled about what he
saw as interference by IRM in his teaching and research
activities. His observation was that the college administration,
often pleading ignorance and that IRM would know best, has given
IRM a free rein to administrate all computer services. He
wondered whether this problem was specific to him because he was
a professor of
computer science or whether others were affected. Several other
faculty members concurred that IRM was not responsive to requests
and that heads of departments were powerless to help. Further
discussion was deferred until the Faculty Council considered the
mission statement and charter for the Computer Services Committee
later at this meeting.
B. Approval of Committee Mission Statements and Charters
Professor Elksnin noted that two committee mission
statements and charters were not presented for approval at the
last Special Meeting of Faculty Council and that Council needed
to ratify the complete Committee on Committees Report.
(1) Professor Dornetto moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Computer Services Committee
be approved with the following changes in the text:
Under "III.2 Specific Activities of the Computer Services
Committee", the text will read, "The committee solicits input
from faculty and students to determine academic computing needs.
It makes recommendations to the Dean of the College. The
committee -- recommends policies in matters of academic
computing, --reviews departmental requests for software budgets
and for hardware equipment, -- reviews, under academic aspects,
all plans for computing facilities prior to their implementation
by Information Resources Management (IRM); this includes site
selection, hardware equipment, and software installation for
computer labs managed by IRM, --receives the annual report of IRM
and reviews it to the extent that it relates to academic
computing. Unanimously approved.
(2) Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Scholarships and Awards
Committee be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(3) Professor Elksnin noted one correction in a committee
title to read: the Faculty Employment Committee.
(4) Professor Mailloux moved and it was seconded that the
Charter for the Committee on Committees be amended by adding as
the second sentence under "II. Structure, A. Chair" the
following: "In the event that the Past Chair for Faculty Council
is unable to chair the Committee on Committees, the Committee on
Committees will elect its own chair."
(5) Professor Greim moved and it was seconded that the
entire Report from the Committee on Committees be accepted with
changes that Council had made. Unanimously approved.
C. IRM Concern
Professor Holbein moved and it was seconded that the
Computer Services Committee survey the departments about IRM
matters [relating to individual research and teaching] to
formulate a policy and report to Faculty Council for its
consideration and recommendations. Unanimously approved.
D. Other Old Business Postponed
Because of a pressing matter, the Chair postponed other Old
Business to the next regular meeting of Faculty Council.
VII. New Business
A. "The Citadel Student Questionnaire"
Professor Elksnin outlined briefly the background and
current situation regarding "The Citadel Student Questionnaire"
from the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies which
faculty will be asked to use in classes during the next few days.
Professor Elksnin distributed to Council a copy of the
Questionnaire, a Memorandum dated 15 April 1992 to Academic
Department Heads and Members of the Faculty from Dean Metts, and
the directions for use of the Questionnaire.
Professor Elksnin explained to Council that at Academic
Board on 14 April, under an agenda item of "Other Business",
Department Heads were presented copies of "The Citadel Student
Questionnaire." After some discussion at the Academic Board,
Vice President Meenaghan told Department Heads that faculty will
be told to use the instrument and no vote would be allowed on the
issue at the Academic Board Meeting.
Professor Elksnin told Faculty Council that the ad hoc
committee had been formed by Vice President Meenaghan to be
comprised of three members appointed by Council and three members
appointed by the Academic Board. The Committee had prepared some
materials and sent them forward to Dean Metts.
The procedure used by Dean Metts since receiving the
material contradicts the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee
on Student Assessment of Instruction. In a memo dated 9 April
to Dean Metts, the committee members stated that they considered
it essential that certain steps be taken in order for their work
to be evaluated fairly. These steps included providing the
faculty, Faculty Council, Strategic Planning Committee, and the
Academic Board with copies of their policy recommendations along
with the proposed evaluation instrument for review leading to an
open discussion by these groups; and use of the instrument to
evaluate individual faculty only after an experiment pilot
supported its validity and reliability. Academic Board saw the
instrument for the first time on 14 April when it was presented
as the last unannounced agenda item; Faculty Council was not sent
a copy of the instrument.
The Ad Hoc Committee also provided Dean Metts with a draft
of a memorandum dated 9 April in which it stated that the
questionnaire is not to be used until tests of reliability have
been met. Further it stated that only the faculty member should
have the results, and in no way should they be used in faculty
evaluation.
Discussion regarding many aspects of this matter brought
heated debate to Faculty Council. Most concerns focused on the
imposition of the instrument on faculty at this time, the
reliability and validity issues, the requirement of any data on
the tentative instrument being shared with department heads,
faculty evaluation in general, federal legal protections for
faculty in these and other instances, and Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools (SACS) as well as other accreditation agency
perspectives on evaluation.
Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the Chair
write a letter to the faculty, the Ad Hoc Committee, the Dean of
Undergraduate Studies, and the Executive Vice President
expressing concerns of Council regarding implementation of the
student evaluation document which had no formal approval of
Academic Board or Faculty Council with results to be shared with
Department Heads. That because normal procedures of faculty
governance were not followed, and as the proposed system may have
pernicious impact on
members of protected classes, the Faculty Council recommends that
faculty not participate in the student evaluation system abruptly
imposed by the Dean of Undergraduate Studies.
In the discussion of the motion, some chronology was related
to give Faculty Council the historical perspective of the issue
of faculty evaluation and student assessment of instruction.
Some faculty recall that as early as 1983, Vice President
Meenaghan commented to the Council that evaluation was of concern
to the South Carolina Human Affairs Commission in that
reliability and validity were essential and other protections for
faculty were within federal and South Carolina guidelines. At a
later point, the administration became aware that Equal
Opportunity Guidelines which focused in some part on evaluation
needed to be examined to insure The Citadel compliance. A
1984-85 ad hoc committee on student evaluation had wrestled with
the question with information coming to Faculty Council in 1986.
In 1988, a computerized scanning sheet was to be used for student
evaluation of faculty, perhaps instituted for a supposed need in
the Department of Education NCATE accreditation. Apparently, the
computerized system was too "expensive" to maintain because it
suddenly ended. At this point in the discussion at Council,
Faculty were told that there were a number of documents for
further information, including old faculty minutes.
The motion was passed unanimously.
VIII. Other Business Postponed
Due to the late hour, Professor Elksnin postponed
consideration of any other business until the next meeting.
XI. Professor Elksnin thanks 1991 - 92 Council
The Chair expressed appreciation to Members of Faculty
Council whose terms were expiring at this meeting. Professor
Elksnin thanked the Faculty Council Subcommittee Chairs for their
efforts this past year. She told Professor Gordon Wallace of her
appreciation for his work as Secretary for Faculty Council.
Professor Elksnin offered the Faculty Council Chair-elect,
Professor Peter Mailloux, her best wishes as he assumes the Chair
at the next meeting of Council.
X. Meeting of Council
The next regular meeting of the new Council will be on 30
April.
XI. Adjournment
Council adjourned at 1:00 p.m.
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
20 April 1992
================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the SPECIAL MEETING of 2 April 1992
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The special meeting was called to order by the Chair,
Professor Linda Elksnin, at 11:14 a.m. Absent were Professors
Strauch, Wilson, Von, Pyatt, Davis, Kelley, Dornetto, Newsome,
Gibson, and Smith. Professor William Sharborough of Business
Administration was proxy for Professor Bruce Strauch and
Professor Todd Baker of Political Science was proxy for Professor
Ed Davis.
Guests were the following Committee Chairs: Professors Bill
Denig of Computer Services, John Braun of Library Services, Larry
Moreland of Tenure and Promotions, Jim May of Faculty
Development, David Allen of Internal College Relations, and
Aquila Lipscomb of Student Affairs. A member of Council present,
also a Committee Chair, was Professor Bob Emory of Curriculum and
Instruction and Representative of Business Administration at
Council, also a Committee Chair, was Professor William
Sharborough of Community Affairs.
Other guests were the following non-Council members of the
Committee on Committees: Professors David Allen and Don Sparks.
Also, members of the Committee on Committees present were
Professors Pat Briggs, Linda Elksnin and Peter Greim.
II. Background of Formulation of the New Committee Structure
Professor Pat Briggs said the process of examining the
committee structure began some years ago during his term as chair
of Faculty Council. It was apparent that some committees had too
many members and other committees had too few meetings. In other
instances, the committees became simply briefing sessions for the
administration's actions and policies. Also, there was
inadequate coverage of topics of interest. The number of ad hoc
committees began to increase. Committees had no clear mission
statements and other committees had changes in missions and did
not know these. In the year 1989-90, Subcommittee B of Faculty
Council began to investigate and study the matter. In the year
1990-91, the Committee on Committees began planning and writing
preliminary documents to make changes.
III. Report by Committee on Committees
Professor Peter Greim began the report by indicating that
the year 1991-92 was a trial run with committees. A number of
changes were made as a result of the new committees' work and
input to the Committee on Committees. Each committee has now a
charter and a mission statement.
Professor Greim presented the document and asked for Faculty
Council approval. It was decided to present the material in the
report on a committee by committee basis.
(1) Professor Greim moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Committee on Committees be
accepted with four changes in the text:
(1.1) In the first sentence under "Charter, I. Membership,
A. Representation", a word be added to read: "The Committee on
Committees is made up of six 'tenured' academic faculty
members...."
(1.2) The first and second sentences will read under
"Charter, I. Membership, B. Tenure": "Faculty members are
selected for a one year term. No faculty member may serve...."
(1.3) The third sentence will read under "III.1 General
Activities of Standing Committees, D. Tasks, 2)": "Students or
other individuals may not assign a task to the Committee...."
(1.4) The scheduled dates will read under "III.2. Specific
Activities of the Committee on Committees": "1 February -
Distributes a request for assignment form to the faculty, 15
February - Receives faculty requests and begins work, 15 March -
Sends list of its recommendations to the Executive Vice
President, 1 April - Publication of committee assignments."
Unanimously approved.
(2) Professor Baker moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Library Services Committee
be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(3) Professor Briggs moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Campus Affairs Committee be
accepted. Unanimously approved.
(4) Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Curriculum and Instruction
Committee be approved with three changes in the text:
(4.1) Under "Mission", the sentence will read: "The primary
mission of the Curriculum and Instruction Committee is to
consider matters relating to The Citadel's undergraduate
program."
(4.2) Under "III.1 General Activities of Standing
Committees, A. Information", the first sentence will read: "The
Curriculum and Instruction Committee gathers, analyzes, and
disseminates information relevant to The Citadel's undergraduate
program."
(4.3) Under "III.2 Specific Activities of the Curriculum and
Instruction Committee, 2.", the last sentence will read:
"Recommendations for changes in the core curriculum will be
forwarded to the Academic Board." Approved with 7 yes, 5 no, 2
abstentions.
(5) Professor Holbein moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Employment Committee be
accepted. Unanimously approved.
(6) Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Financial Affairs Committee
be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(7) Professor Sharborough moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Community Relations
Committee be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(8) Professor Baker moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Undergraduate Admissions
Committee be accepted. Approved with one abstention.
(9) Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Research Committee be
accepted with the following change in the text:
Under "Mission", delete the third sentence which begins, "In
addition, the Research Committee...." Approved with one
abstention.
(10) Professor Holbein moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Faculty Development
Committee be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(11) Professor Briggs moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Sabbatical Committee be
accepted. Unanimously approved.
(12) Professor Holbein moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Tenure and Promotion
Committee be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(13) Professor Holbein moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Student Affairs Committee
be accepted. Unanimously approved.
(14) Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Computer Services Committee
be accepted. After some discussion, this matter was tabled.
(15) Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the
charter and mission statement for the Internal College Relations
Committee be accepted. Approved with one abstention.
The time was drawing short so the Scholarships and Student
Awards Committee charter and mission statement were not
introduced.
IV. The General Charter Elements for Standing Committees
Professor Greim introduced the section on "Charter Elements
for Standing Committees" in the Report from the Committee on
Committees.
Professor Emory moved and it was seconded that the general
section of Charter Elements for Standing Committees be accepted.
Approved with one abstention.
V. Agenda Item for Next Meeting
Professor Emory asked that consideration be given to the
equitability of the present departmental representation on
Council.
VI. Other Business Postponed
Due to the late hour, Professor Elksnin postponed
consideration of any other business until the next meeting.
VII. Meeting of Council
The next regular meeting of Council will be on 16 April.
VIII. Adjournment
Council adjourned at 12:58 p.m.
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
14 April 1992
==============================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 12 March 1992
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor
Linda Elksnin, at 11:03 a.m. Absent were Professors Alford,
Holbein, Pyatt, Dornetto, and Gibson. Invited guests were
Professor Ted Tucker, President of The Citadel Chapter of
Association of University Professors (AAUP); Professor Saul
Adelman, Chairman of the Faculty Employment Committee; and Dean
Spike Metts, Dean of Undergraduate Studies.
II. Approval and Corrections to the Minutes
The minutes of 20 February 1992 were accepted with the
following change in section "V. Old Business, A. Faculty Council
Response to the Lane Report." In the second paragraph, add to a
sentence so as to read, "Many faculty felt that students should
become more involved with the academic life of faculty through
further participation in academic activities, 'rather than
requiring faculty involvement in the non-academic aspects of
cadet life'."
III. Announcements from the Chair
On 2 March, the Faculty Council Chair attended an
Affirmative Action/EEOC Seminar which focused on AA, EEOC, and
sexual harassment. Dr. Elksnin has additional information.
The Chair was at the Graduate Council meeting of 5 March.
No further information regarding the search for a new Graduate
Dean was made available at the meeting.
The Chair distributed copies of the Race Relations Committee
Report of 9 March 1992 to members of Council. Subcommittee A was
asked to draft a response to the report for Council's consideration.
IV. Reports
Professor Mailloux briefly reported on his attendance at the
Strategic Planning Subcommittee on Facilities. A report will be
presented from the Steering Committee to Faculty Council.
Professor Elksnin announced that attendance at the Financial
Forum sponsored by Faculty Council on 27 February included
approximately half of the faculty. Many favorable comments were
given to the Chair afterward.
V. Old Business
A. Faculty Council Response to the Lane Committee Report
The second draft of the Faculty Council letter prepared by
the Executive Committee responding to the Lane Committee Report
was accepted by Council with 21 votes in favor and one opposed.
VI. New Business
A. Selection of Endowed Chairs
Professor Greim noted recently in "The Citadel Calendar
Comments" an appointment of a faculty member to an endowed
professorship in the Department of Psychology. He was concerned
about the method of appointment for endowed chairs. Policies in
the "Faculty Manual" seemed not to be followed since the
Selection Committee for Endowed Chairs no longer exists. Upon
some investigation, he learned that several small contributions
to The Citadel have been made that carry the title of "endowed
professorship" rather than "endowed chair" where remuneration for
a faculty member is only about $1000. Decisions regarding
faculty appointments such as these have faculty input on the
departmental level.
B. New AAUP paper on Intercollegiate Athletics
Professor Ted Tucker presented and discussed a new AAUP
position paper regarding regulations for student athletics which
is aimed at correcting abuses around the United States. The
paper addresses a variety of issues and Professor Tucker asked
for full adoption by Faculty Council.
Professor Mailloux moved adoption in principle and it was
seconded. In the discussion that followed, it was noted that the
document would mean far greater faculty oversight of athletics
and involvement in its budget. The vote was 7 in favor, none
opposed, and 7 abstentions. Faculty Council elected to send the
document to Subcommittee C to draft specific comments on
implementation relative to The Citadel for Council's April 16
meeting .
C. Faculty Employment Committee Report and Resolutions
Professor Saul Adelman addressed Council regarding a report
from the Faculty Employment Committee (FEC) which contains three
resolutions. He felt it would be appropriate for the Faculty
Council to act on the resolutions before the report went to the
administration.
Professor Mailloux moved and it was seconded to adopt page
one of the Faculty Employment Committee Report which contained
the three resolutions as follows:
l. The Faculty Employment Committee recommends that The
Citadel provide scholarships for those dependents of Citadel
faculty and staff who want to attend The Citadel.
2. The FEC recommends that The Citadel establish a
scholarship program to aid Citadel faculty and staff who want to
take college courses to improve their qualifications and job
skills.
3. The FEC recommends that The Citadel administration work
towards the establishment of a South Carolina State Program for
dependents, faculty, and staff which would result in
substantially reduced tuition at all State Colleges and
Universities.
The motion was passed unanimously.
Professor Adelman discussed at length the Committee's
consideration of the salary issues at The Citadel. In making
salary average comparisons with our peer institutions, he noted
that many factors are not evident in the data such as degrees,
years of experience, or faculty age. The FEC proposed a salary
study be undertaken and the administration has agreed to hire a
statistician to analyze data.
Professor Adelman asked faculty to provide input to him on
sources of detailed salary data in the various academic
disciplines.
D. Faculty and Department Head Evaluations
Council members had been provided with copies of several
documents to use in understanding the evaluation process at The
Citadel. Dean Metts was invited and available to respond to
concerns of faculty. It appeared that contradictions existed in
the "Memorandum" of 27 November 1990 by Metts and Mahan compared
with the "Memorandum" of 24 February 1992 by Metts. Interrelated
with these two documents was General Order 15. Dean Metts
affirmed that the policy outlined in the 1990 Memorandum was
still in force.
Faculty members see three areas of difference in the 27
November 1990 and 24 February 1992 documents. First, in the 1990
document appears the phrase "the faculty member's commitment to
his/her profession" which differs from the wording in the 1992
document, "focus has been shifted from individual, isolated
events (attending a meeting, reading a paper, publishing a book,
etc.) toward a planned approach for individual professional
development in concert with the goals of the department and
college." Each department and the college have written goals.
In discussion, it became clear from an illustration presented
that perhaps for a scholar with interest, expertise, and research
in 15th century literature, little relation could be made
directly to the "goals of the department and college." Yet, such
scholarly activity is as serious and meaningful with an outcome
worthy of as great a reward as a faculty member whose
contribution related directly to department and college goals.
Second, in the 1990 document is the wording "emphasize how
he/she has enhanced student learning" versus 1992 phraseology
"emphasis is placed on how the individual has helped his or her
students learn." The original formulation lends itself less to
putting the responsibility of student performance on the
instructor. Third, the 1990 memorandum has "deleted any specific
reference to CDF programs" but the 1992 memo retains such
wording. After Council members' questions and Dean Metts'
lengthy responses on issues of emphasis on teaching versus
service and research, the mission statements, the annual review
process versus the tenure and promotion review, it was decided
that Dean Metts and Professor Elksnin would prepare a letter
jointly resolving differences which would be distributed to
faculty.
E. Other New Business Postponed
Due to the late hour, Professor Elksnin postponed
consideration of any other new business until the next meeting.
VII. Meetings of Council
A Special Meeting of Council will be held on 2 April from
11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.and if unfinished will continue 2 April at
5:30 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing new committee structure
missions and charters presented by the Committee on Committees.
The next regular meeting of Council will be on 16 April.
IX. Adjournment
Council adjourned at 12:47 p.m..
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
1 April 1992
==============================================================
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 20 February 1992
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor Linda Elksnin,
at 11:03 a.m. Absent were Professors Alford and Strauch.
II. Approval and Corrections to the Minutes
The minutes of 16 January 1992 were accepted with the following change
in section "IV. Reports, Committee on Committees." Replace the sentence
beginning, "A few committee have been reduced in size..." with the sentence,
"One point of discussion was the size of the Faculty Development Committee
where not every department is represented."
III. Announcements from the Chair
On 21 January, the Faculty Council Chair was at the Academic Board
meeting. A report was given by Ronald Gaskins, Administrative Dean and
Registrar, concerning undergraduate student admissions. A formula using
predicted GPA is in use. In order to attempt to fill the freshman class, SAT
scores may have to dip into the 700's. Only 30 percent of the class is from
South Carolina at this point.
Another report at the Academic Board was given by Jerry Lyons, Vice
President for Financial Management, concerning the college budget which has
been cut by another one percent in February. The President's reserve fund,
normally with a balance of $400,000, is now at the $35,000 - $40,000 level.
At the 17 February meeting of the Academic Board, the Board of Visitors
passed a resolution directing the President to implement recommendations set
forth in the Lane Report.
In other matters, Professor Suzanne Edwards gave an update on the SACS
Review. Also, it was announced that a general faculty meeting will be held
19 March for the purpose of hearing Jack Allen from SACS and that the SACS
office will be set up in Grimsley Hall.
The Academic Board considered the proposal for having a Maymester at The
Citadel and Department Heads will ask faculty to nominate appropriate courses
to be taught during this period.
President Watts announced that The Citadel was in the process of filling
the Director's position for the Capital Fund; Melissa Gill was hired as
Foundation and Corporate fundraiser for the college.
The State legislature endorsed a three percent pay increase and one-time
bonus for State employees but it is unclear at this time how the salary
increase will be financed.
IV. Reports
A. Committee on Committees
Professor Peter Greim reported that charters for 15 faculty committees
are needed, in fact, perhaps 16 committees to include Committee on
Committees. Of the 15 committees, three have responded with final draft
packages and eight have some draft charters prepared. Two committees have
not yet been heard from. Professor Greim hopes that the process of charter
review can begin at Faculty Council next month. Discussion followed as to
when the best time would be to have Faculty Council meet to consider the
charters. Selection of a time for discussion was postponed to the end of
today's Council meeting.
B. Graduate Dean Search
Professor Elksnin reported that Dr. David Reilly, a finalist, was on
campus yesterday and met with various college officials.
C. Strategic Planning/Strategic Budgeting
Professor Peter Mailloux attended two meetings. First, on 23 January,
there was a presentation of the "Recommendation for Strategic Budgeting at
The Citadel" which was disseminated to Faculty Council members. Strategic
Budgeting will be implemented on a trial basis this academic year. Vice
President Lyons will create the Budget Review Committee based on membership
outlined in the report. Second, on 13 February, the Facilities Task Force
outlined future needs of the physical plant. Of major concern is deferred
maintenance, now at about 7.5 million dollars. Strategic Planning is trying
to determine priorities.
Professor Jean-Marie Pages of the Mathematics Department who was
approved by unanimous vote of Council will serve as the faculty
representative on the Budget Review Committee.
D. Report from Subcommittee B
Professor Joe Kelly gave a progress report of the subcommittee examining
student performance and student attitudes. The subcommittee contacted
academic department heads and other individuals to ascertain whether any
types of studies were underway. A number of individuals are interested in
the performance of students, some favoring an exit exam such as the Physical
Education Department has.
Professor Greim moved that Subcommittee B study further and make a
recommendation as to how to handle the gathering of information on student
performance and student attitudes. In the discussion, many suggestions and
comments were offered as to who or what office was to be responsible for this
task. The motion failed.
Professor Emory moved that matters relating to instruction be assigned to
the Curriculum and Instruction Committee and matters of attitudes be sent to
the Student Affairs Committee. The motion was seconded. In the discussion
that followed, it was noted that the charter as submitted for
the Student Affairs Committee did not include such a mission. It was
observed that Faculty Council had approved a mission last spring which was
far broader than the mission and charter proposed. The motion passed with 14
in favor and 2 opposed.
E. Report from Subcommittee D
Professor Holbein gave an interim report. A meeting had occurred with
Mr. Hunter of the Citadel Student Bookstore, Mr. Reiger of CDF, and Vice
President Lyons. A final report from Subcommittee D is expected for the
April meeting of Faculty Council.
V. Old Business
A. Faculty Council Response to the Lane Committee Report
The Chair offered the draft of a letter prepared by the Executive
Committee as charged by Council and asked for Council member comments.
Captain Coussins felt that the fourth paragraph did not give sufficient
importance to the "service" of faculty for involvement with cadets. He
observed that the third paragraph isolated faculty academically and faculty
need further involvement with the military aspects of the college.
Capt. Coussins moved that the letter be sent back to the Executive
Committee to redraft with specific attention to the third and fourth
paragraphs. The motion was seconded. In the discussion, in a Company
Academic Policy memo dated 4 February 1992, the Administration announced that
the option of having faculty serve as "OC's" with the active duty OC is
currently being studied. Further, it was noted that many students do not
perceive that academics should come first. Many faculty felt that students
should become more involved with the academic life of faculty through further
participation in academic activities, rather than requiring faculty
involvement in the non-academic aspects of cadet life. The motion passed.
The Chair requested that a deadline of the middle of next week be set
for faculty to provide further comments to the draft letter. In addition,
Professor Elksnin noted that a vote should be taken by ballot so that the
letter could be presented as soon as possible.
VI. New Business
A. The Financial Forum
The Chair asked faculty members to help publicize the Faculty Council
sponsored "Financial Forum" with the administration which is scheduled for
Thursday, 27 February at 11:00 A.M. in Duckett Hall Auditorium.
B. Faculty Council meeting schedule
Professor Holbein moved and it was seconded that the Executive Committee
of Faculty Council should schedule any further meetings of Faculty Council.
Motion passed unanimously.
C. Other New Business Postponed
Due to the late hour, Professor Elksnin postponed consideration of any
other new business until the next meeting.
VII. Next meeting of Council
The next meeting of Council will be on 12 March.
IX. Adjournment
Council adjourned at 12:48 p.m..
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
1 March 1992
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 16 January 1992
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor Linda Elksnin,
at 11:03 a.m. Several departments have Council Representative changes for
the remainder of the academic year as follows: Professor Judy Vonn
(untenured) of Psychology for Oliver Bowman (on sabbatical leave), Professor
John Coussons of History for Doug Porch (on sabbatical leave), Professor
Sherman Pyatt of Library (returning after sabbatical leave) will assume his
seat represented by Herb Nath, Professor George Gibson of Military for Don
Zodun. Absent were Professors Moore, Dornetto, Newsome, and Smith.
II. Approval and Corrections to the Minutes
The minutes of 12 December 1991, submitted by Ed Davis for Gordon
Wallace, were accepted with the following changes: in section "III.
Reports/Updates" replace the word "repead" with "repeat" and in section "IV.
Old Business" replace the word "mimo" with "memo". Section "IV. Old
Business, C. Academic Performance" should read "At the last Faculty Council
meeting, Prof. Greim expressed concerns...."
III. Announcements from the Chair
The Chair introduced to the Council the new members and a member
returning from sabbatical.
IV. Reports
A. Subcommittee C
Professor Tom Richardson, Chair of the subcommittee, presented a report
concerning internal promotion of a faculty member of low rank to department
head and the interrelated issue of promotion and rank. The subcommittee
recommended leaving the situation as it is currently. The committee felt
that there were very few instances of the issue and no action should be
taken.
Professor Holbein moved for acceptance of the report and it was
seconded. Discussion followed on some concern that internal candidates for a
position were handled in a different way than the external candidates. It
was pointed out that the college has had only two such situations in the last
15 years or so.
The motion to accept the report was passed.
B. Committee on Committees
Professor Peter Greim reported that charters for faculty committees were
to go to Faculty Council. Of the 15 committees, five have responded with
drafts and two have some work on charters underway. Every committee has a
contact person on the Committee on Committees to offer some guidance.
Professor Greim hoped that the process would be completed by the end of
February. One point of discussion is the size of the Faculty Development
Committee where not every department is represented.*) Professor Greim
requested time on the agenda of the March Faculty Council meeting.
________________________
*) original formulation "A few committees have been reduced in size such as
the Research Committee where not every department is represented." corrected
in February 20 meeting, II. Approval and Correction to the Minutes.
V. Old Business
A. Faculty Salaries
It was noted that Professor Saul Adelman headed the Faculty Employment
Committee. Among Committee considerations was having merit distributed
across departments as well as to individuals.
Professor Pat Briggs moved that Professor Elksnin should write and
request a report from Professor Adelman.
The motion was approved unanimously.
VI. New Business
A. Lane Committee Report
With the Lane Committee Report now out, the Chair asked for Council's
position on the report. Professor Greim stated that this is a college and
academics are most important. The faculty should make suggestions on how
academics could be improved. Professor Emory had concern about attitudes
that military training and parking stickers are more important than
academics. He observed that student military obligations conflicted with
academics during this semester registration day, leaving faculty waiting
during the morning to do advising. Professor Wilson felt that there is a
general lack of communication and further that there is a "don't care"
attitude on the part of some. Professor Gibson noted that the military
faculty have no control of some areas because much comes directly from the
Commandant. Professor Briggs observed that the academic administration and
the commandant were creating the problems, not the military personnel or
departments since they do not control many situations. Professor Greim said
that at the present moment no faculty committee had been fully approved with
a charter to look at this issue directly. Professor Briggs noted that
history would say that Faculty Council had these issues appear previously.
Professor Briggs moved that written communication be sent to the
Executive Committee of Faculty Council to distill and draft a response to
present at the February meeting of Council. This was seconded.
Motion carried unanimously.
Professor Emory moved that a note be sent from the Chair to the
Commandant and Undergraduate Dean stressing more coordination to avoid
conflicts in military obligations and academics. This was seconded.
Motion carried unanimously.
VIII. Next meeting of Council
The next meeting of Council will be on February 20.
IX. Adjournment
Council adjourned at 11:41 (a record in recent memory).
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
17 February 1992
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of December 12, 1991
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor Linda Elksnin,
at 11:00 AM. Absent were Professors Strauch, Wallace, Wilson, Kelley, Greim,
Newsome, Zodun, and Smith.
The Minutes of the November 14, 1991, meeting were approved unanimously,
without change.
II. Announcements from the Chair
A. Prof. Elksnin noted that the Graduate Council met on December 5,
1991. A draft report was submitted on the criteria for Graduate Faculty
status, but this was only a recommendation and no action was taken.
B. Prof. Elksnin reported on the Academic Board meetings of November 19,
1991, and December 10, 1991.
From the November 19 meeting, Council was provided with a copy of the
statement dealing with academic minors which was adopted "in principle." The
proposal from the Department of Political Science was also adopted "in
principle."
Council was also provided with copies of two handouts dealing with
the academic performance of Freshmen. The mid-semester grade distribution of
the Freshman class led to a general discussion by the Academic Board.
At the December 10 meeting, the Academic Board had a review of the
promotion and tenure procedures by COL Metts. Two changes were noted: (1)
the person on probation appears in person to defend the decision, and (2) the
Office of the Dean of Under-graduate Studies retains the Personal Data Sheet.
The repetition of courses was discussed again.
The issue of minors was discussed again.
Jack Allen from the SACS staff will be on campus on March 19, 1992.
There will be a general faculty meeting at that time.
The Lane Report was given to COL Risher and to LtGen Watts. It will
be released to the public in January 1992.
III. Reports/Updates
A. Graduate Dean Search--A letter was sent to the Executive Vice
President and Dean of the College requesting repeat visits by two of the
candidates.
B. Committee on Committees--Only one committee mission statement has
been received and discussed (Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee). Others
will be discussed later.
IV. Old Business
A. Faculty Salaries--Distribution of this data was made at the last
meeting. The question was raised as to whether or not Faculty Council wanted
to do anything further at this time or have the Employment Committee consider
it. Faculty Council action was deferred until January 1992.
B. Course Repetition: Subcommittee A, Professor Zahid--The Academic
Board met before the Faculty Council could provide input. Council members
did poll their departments for reactions prior to the Academic Board meeting
so that Prof. Elksnin could provide input. Prof. Zahid reported on the
process leading to the report. He noted that his subcommittee recommended
that a grade of "C" or above should end any repetition of courses. The
Academic Board, however, decided the issue. The decision was to endorse the
proposal by COL Metts rather than that from Faculty Council. The Board
decided to allow students to retake a course if a student has a "C" or below.
Other restrictions apply as noted in COL Metts' memo. Department heads have
a copy.
C. Student Academic Performance--At the last Faculty Council meeting,
Prof. Greim *) expressed concerns about the performance of students and
especially about their critical thinking activities. Prof. Elksnin
distributed information to members. She noted that COL Metts had distributed
a mimo on Freshmen and that the Academic Board had discussed changing the
curriculum for Freshmen. What should the Faculty Council do regarding this
issue? It was decided that Council needed additional information prior to
further discussion. Subcommittee B was assigned to secure copies of various
reports on Freshmen, especially the one from the Commandant's Office, for the
February 20 meeting.
_______________________
*) original formulation "Prof. Mailloux" corrected in January 16 meeting,
II. Approval and Correction to the Minutes.
V. New Business
A. Recruitment and Changing Demographics--Ron Gaskins is available to
present the same report that he presented to the Academic Board. It was
decided that Faculty Council did not need it.
B. Inviting BG Meenaghan to Next Meeting of Council--It was decided not
to invite him.
C. Other--No other new business came before Council.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:55 AM.
The next meeting of Faculty Council will be January 16, 1992.
Submitted by Ed Davis
for Gordon Wallace
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of November 14, 1991
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor Linda
Elksnin, at 11:05. Absent were Professors Strauch, Alford, Wallace,
Wilson, Anessi, and Zodun. The History Department was represented by
Professor Jamie Moore.
The minutes of the October 8, 1991 meeting were approved
unanimously, without change.
II. Announcements from the Chair
A. Prof. Elksnin reported that she had met with President Watts to
discuss Faculty Council's letter to him about the fourth class system.
She distributed copies of the revised Faculty Council letter and General
Watts' response to the Council. She also reported that she had written a
letter to the Chairman of the Board of Visitors expressing Faculty
Council's concern that no current Citadel faculty members were appointed
to the committee investigating possible abuses in the fourth class system.
She distributed copies of this letter and Col. Risher's response.
Following these letters, the committee asked Faculty Council to nominate
three faculty members to address them . Rather than thus restrict faculty
input, the Executive Committee of Faculty Council issued an invitation to
all faculty who wished to address the committee, either in writing or in
person. Eight faculty members responded and their names were forwarded to
the Fourth Class Committee, which agreed to accommodate them.
B. Prof. Elksnin also reported that there were no meetings of the
Academic Board or the Graduate Council since the last meeting of Faculty
Council.
C. Finally, Prof. Elksnin repeated a reminder from Professor Dot
Moore, Chairman of the Research Committee, that the deadline for Research
Proposals was November 21, 1991 by 5:00 p.m.
III. Reports/Updates
A. Fourth Class Inquiry Committee
Professor Mailloux reported on his visit to the committee
investigating the 4th class system. All eight professors were invited to
speak to the committee on Tuesday, November 5 and each was given 15
minutes to address the committee. He reported that he then was asked
several questions. He emphasized that the committee seemed receptive to
the issues he raised, but that he had not yet heard anything further from
them.
B. Graduate Dean's Search
Professor Bowman reported that the search had been narrowed to four
candidates, that their names had been forwarded to Gen. Meenaghan, and
that all four had been invited for campus visits. The first of those
visits would be by Dr. Milton Grodsky from Sunday, Nov. 17 to Tuesday,
Nov. 19. All four candidates were scheduled to give presentations at open
faculty meetings.
C. Committee on Committees
Professor Peter Greim reported that 2 members of the Psychology
Department have been appointed to the Research and Curriculum Committees,
but that it was still not certain who would represent the Psychology
Department on the College Tenure and Promotion Committee. He said no
committees had yet sent their revised charters to the Committee on
Committees.
He also explained that the Committee on Committees had not yet
staffed the Military Liaison Committee because it believed a preferable
alternative would be to form a sub-committee from the Internal College
Relations Committee, adding to that sub-committee two members from ROTC
faculty and one student. Some discussion followed, during which it was
pointed out that the purpose of such a committee was to confront and
resolve conflicts between the students' academic and military
requirements, not conflicts between ROTC and academic demands, and that
therefore a representative from the Commandant's Office might be
preferable to further ROTC representation. The history of this committee,
which was formed last year with a charge from the president to inform the
campus of the academic/military concept of The Citadel, and of similar
committees previously in existence was also discussed. It was then moved
that a Liaison Committee composed of three faculty members from the
Internal College Relations Committee, one ROTC member, one representative
of the Commandant's Office, and four students, one from each class, the
Senior, Junior, and Sophomore members to be class officers and the
Freshman to be the Star of the West freshman, be formed, and that that
committee report directly to the standing Committee on Internal College
Relations. The motion passed unanimously.
D. Strategic Planning
Professor Mailloux reported that the Task Force chairs had met with
Gen. Meenaghan on Tuesday, October 22 to discuss priorities of their
respective planning issues. The deadline for the completion of these
priority issues is 1 March, 1992. Preliminary reports should be out soon,
according to Professor Nichols, the Chairman of the Strategic Planning
Committee.
IV. Old Business
A. Committee Assignments
Professor Briggs explained his concern about the late date at which
the list of committee assignments was released. Although the list was now
out, Prof. Briggs worried that the same thing problem might arise again
next year or thereafter. He therefore made a motion that Faculty
Council direct the Committee on Committees to come up with an official
deadline for the deans to release the list, after which the committee
would release it themselves. During the ensuing discussion, Professor
Greim mentioned that the Committee itself might be late this year, so
maybe the motion might be delayed for one year. Professor Holbein
wondered why the deans needed to be involved at all in the selection of
faculty committees. Professor Greim said that the deans' involvement
turned faculty committees into college committees and Professor Jamie
Moore added that it was necessary often to appoint student or staff
members. Professor Moore then made a counter motion that Faculty Council
direct the Committee on Committees to release to the faculty in general
the list of recommended committee membership at the same time it sent the
list to the deans. This motion was unanimously carried.
B. Policy on English Fluency for Faculty
Professor Zahid said that he had met with Dean Metts concerning how
The Citadel might best comply with the state law requiring that teachers
and professors demonstrate fluency in English. The school's policy is
that problems should be dealt with by the Grievance Committee rather than
by a new, specially created committee. The school's policy also says that
applicants to be faculty members must now give a presentation during their
campus visits that can be attended by faculty and students who will evaluate
English fluency of the speakers by using evaluation forms.
C. Accessibility to Parking near Campus Buildings
Professor Emory explained his concern that, due to overcrowding,
faculty who wanted or needed to use Capers Hall in the evening were not
able to find parking in the lot. He said that he had raised the same
issue last year and that a memo had then gone from Col. Stackhouse (dated
Feb. 9, 1990) to physical plant to paint signs reserving certain spaces
for faculty. This has not yet been done because of lack of funds. A
motion was made that the matter be referred to the Campus Affairs
Committee and this carried unanimously.
IV. New Business
A. Faculty Salaries
Professor Elksnin distributed copies of the CHE 1990-91 academic year
salary report previously distributed to the Academic Board and faculty
salary data for the 1990-91 academic year from General Meenaghan's office.
She then raised the question whether Faculty Council wanted to consider
the issue of Faculty Salaries. The issue will be put on the agenda for
the next meeting.
B. Subcommittee Reports
Professor Elksnin reminded Subcommittee A that it would be giving its
report on a policy regarding course repetition, Subcommittee C that it
would be giving its report on policy regarding promotion without CATPA
involvement, and Subcommittee D that it would be giving its report on
Athletic Department finances, all at the next meeting. Professor Greim
suggested that the issue of student academic performance should be studied
by Faculty Council. It was mentioned that several college committees are
already examining this issue, but Faculty Council still might act as a
liaison between these various groups. Professor Briggs mentioned that he
was head of the Strategic Planning Committee studying the issue of
academic performance and that he would be willing to cooperate and would
certainly welcome any observations or proposals from faculty. Professor
Elksnin is going to determine which committees are now studying the issue
and discuss with them how Faculty Council might best become involved.
The meeting adjourned at 12:11 p.m.
Submitted by Peter Mailloux
for Gordon Wallace
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 17 October 1991
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor Linda
Elksnin, at 11:03 a.m. Absent were Professors Alford, Bowman and
Newsome. The Department of Military Science was represented by
Professor Gibson.
II. Announcements from the Chair
A. The Chair recognized an observer, Mr. Frank Heflin, reporter
from The State newspaper. Professor Elksnin reminded Council that Mr.
Heflin's presence was as a result of a request under the Freedom of
Information Act which was documented in the packet distributed to
Council members yesterday.
B. Professor Elksnin reported that the Executive Committee of
Faculty Council had met on October 2. Discussion centered on two
items. First, Faculty Council might focus on one important issue for
the academic year, and second, Council response to the letter of
President Watts to Council regarding his appointment of an Associate
Dean of Engineering.
C. She met with President Watts before his news conference of
October 3. The Chair inquired under what college regulation the cadets
were prohibited from speaking with the press regarding recent
developments at The Citadel. The President replied that this was his
decision. Further, she asked why faculty was not represented on the
blue ribbon committee preparing to study fourth classmen problems and
alleged hazing. The President indicated that this Committee was
appointed by the Board of Visitors. On another matter, Professor
Elksnin asked if Faculty Council could have a representative at the
President's Executive Staff meeting and approval was granted by the
President.
D. Also, on October 3, the Chair observed at the Graduate Council
meeting. She reported that Professor Ron Templeton was elected Vice
Chair. This election was needed due to the retirement of Graduate Dean
Thomas Mahan. At this point, it is expected that Executive Vice
President George Meenaghan will assume many of the duties of the
Graduate Dean in the interim period but not chair the Graduate Council.
Professor Elksnin reported that Graduate Council had appointed a
subcommittee of Professors Templeton, Leonard, and Baker to examine
graduate faculty status and teaching loads.
E. The Chair observed at the Academic Board meeting of October 15.
Director of Institutional Research Elise Davis-McFarland presented a
report on the ACT instrument. Faculty and staff are invited to examine
the report on reserve at the Daniel Library. In other matters, the
Academic Board considered the concept of having undergraduates complete
a minor in addition to the major for a degree. Also, the Board
considered a memorandum from Undergraduate Dean Isaac Metts regarding
the repeating of courses already passed and on the transcript.
Professor Elksnin reminded Faculty Council that subcommittee A was
studying the latter issue.
F. She reported on the response Memorandum from Chief of Staff M.E.
Smith regarding Faculty Council's letter asking about implementation of
the Travel Management Proposal. It appeared that adopting the Travel
Management Proposal seemed disadvantageous with the small number of
controllable travel dollars.
III. Approval and Corrections to the Minutes
The minutes for the meeting of 19 September were approved with the
following changes: first, the next to last sentence of SECTION V, A.
beginning, "He felt that the college..." should read, "He said that the
deans concede to Council's (and Committee on Committee's) position that
the new committees, among other functions, still receive charges from
and report to administrators"; second, SECTION VII, H. should read,
"Professor Greim asked that an agenda item for next time be the
procedure of academic promotion of a faculty member without the
involvement of CATPA."
IV. Reports and Updates
A. Committee on Committees
Professor Peter Greim reported on activities of the Committee on
Committees. The suggestions for faculty on committees were sent to the
Deans on September 11 and the Deans are getting closer to finalizing
the assignments. Dean of Undergraduate Study Isaac Metts wanted to
include committees for the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools
(SACS). Professor Greim prepared a letter regarding committee mission
and charter matters to be distributed as well.
Some discussion followed regarding why assignments were being made
so late in the year. It was noted that some committees began to meet
because of pressing needs and deadlines even though not formally
announced through the administration. The Chair stated that the
committee structure was in transition and that next time the
assignments would be submitted to the Deans in April.
Professor Greim continued his discussion about the composition of
some committees this transition year. He outlined problems of the
Sabbatical Committee to be composed of both faculty serving on the
Faculty Development Committee and the Research Committee. This would
allow for information to move among the two groups. It has been the
feeling of the Committee on Committees that a balance must exist in
committee representation and departmental representation on the
Sabbatical Committee.
Professor Greim moved that Faculty Council endorse the Committee on
Committees suggestion that the Sabbatical Committee be a joint
committee of the Research Committee and Faculty Development Committee,
with both committees about equally represented, and with one member of
each academic department. The motion passed with one opposed.
B. Graduate Dean's Search
Professor Elksnin reported that 145 applications had been received
to date. Of that number, 60 had been reviewed. There will be a
meeting this afternoon for further review and cutting.
C. Executive Committee action on Associate Dean of Engineering
position
The Chair announced that the Executive Committee met to discuss
Faculty Council's further response to the President's appointment of an
Associate Dean of Engineering. The Executive Committee was dismayed
that President Watts had cited the nonexistent position of "Assistant
Undergraduate Dean" which is actually the Assistant to the
Undergraduate Dean as a precedent in his recent appointment. The
Executive Committee had decided to have a letter sent to Undergraduate
Dean Isaac Metts requesting that the new Faculty Manual revision
reflect that all dean's positions will have search committees.
V. Old Business
A. Promotion without CATPA involvement
The Chair announced that Professor Greim had obtained copies of the
position announcement and job description for the Head of the Daniel
Library. Although the position announcement did not specify rank, the
job description stated that the Head holds the academic rank of
Associate or Full Professor. College Regulations also state that
Department Heads hold the military rank of Lieutenant Colonel or
Colonel. Faculty must hold academic rank at the Associate or Full
Professor levels to be accorded this military rank. Therefore, the
candidate was granted academic rank at the Associate level by the
administration. The Chair felt that explicit procedures governing the
promotion of internal candidates need to be developed, including
whether or not CATPA should review credentials and recommend promotion.
After some discussion, Professor Holbein moved that the question be
submitted to Subcommittee C. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Policy on English fluency for faculty
Professor Elksnin distributed copies of the document "Policies on
English Fluency for Faculty." She asked that Faculty Council members
share it with their department members. This must be finalized to send
off to the Commission on Higher Education to meet the deadline of 23
October.
VI. New Business
A. Proposal of a letter regarding recent Corps problems
Professor Porch distributed a draft of a letter of concern regarding
recent Corps problems. He stated that he felt that it was incumbent on
faculty to make some statement regarding recent events which related to
hazing charges. He felt that if faculty members did not speak out,
they would appear to have no stake in the situation, particularly the
effects of the fourth class system on academics.
Professor Porch moved that the letter be sent to President Watts and
every member of Faculty Council have an opportunity to sign it.
Discussion followed. Professor Porch observed that the letter did not
contain specifics, except to request that the administration re-examine
the many reports prepared over the last decade or so regarding the
fourth class system. Discussion considered the situation of why no
faculty member, particularly one who teaches many fourth classmen, was
on the blue ribbon committee appointed by the Board of Visitors.
The Chair felt it was important to divide these two issues. Faculty
members noted that President Watts during his fall semester visits to
academic departments was hearing much concern about the fourth class
system. An amendment was offered and accepted to the Porch document to
add the word "alleged" in the first sentence in front of the word
"hazing." The motion to send the amended letter to President Watts
with Faculty Council members signatures was passed, 18 voting to
approve, one opposed, and no abstentions.
Professor Holbein moved that the Chair send a brief letter to the
Chairman of the Board of Visitors expressing the concern of Faculty
Council that no faculty were included and asking that faculty members
who wished to address the Committee be offered an opportunity to be
heard. The motion passed unanimously.
VII. Agenda items for Council meeting of 14 November
A. Professor Briggs asked that an agenda item for next time be the
problems regarding the publication of college committee assignments and
the status of work completed when the committees meet even though not
officially announced by the administration. He would like to see a
date established in the future for committee assignment announcements
by the administration.
B. Professor Emory requested that an agenda item be added that
would consider whether or not there is a problem about the access to
buildings and parking spaces for faculty who wish to be in during
evening college hours.
VIII. Next meeting of Council
The next meeting of Council will be on November 14.
IX. Adjournment
Council adjourned at 12:15 p.m.
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
23 October 1991
=============================================================================
THE CITADEL FACULTY COUNCIL
Minutes for the Meeting of 19 September 1991
I. Call to Order and Attendance
The meeting was called to order by the Chair, Professor Linda Elksnin,
at 11:03 a.m. Absent were Professors Strauch, Wilson, Emory, Dornetto, and
Zodun. It was noted that Professor Herb Nath will be the representative
from the Library while Professor Sherman Pyatt is on sabbatical first
semester.
II. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the meeting of 18 April were approved.
III. Comments from the Chair
The Chair reported on recent meetings that she has attended. On 5
September, she was at the Graduate Council meeting which focused on
graduate faculty teaching loads. On 12 September, Professor Elksnin
attended the Strategic Planning Committee meeting where discussion
considered a revised mission statement, new objectives, interrelationship
of task force committees with new college committees, and interrelationship
of strategic planning committees with SACS committees. On 17 September,
the Chair had been at the Academic Board meeting and reported that no joint
Faculty Council-Academic Board will be held at this time. Also, at that
meeting she noted discussion focused on the college assessment process,
core curriculum matters, and the Commission on Higher Education (CHE) and
FTE's. In addition, she reported that data were released from the
Undergraduate Dean to Department Heads regarding salaries by academic
discipline which related to salaries at sister institutions. These data
are available for faculty to examine.
IV. Election of a new Vice Chair
Professor Joe Kelly wrote to Professor Elksnin earlier in the summer
indicating that he would be unable to serve as Vice Chair for l991-92 for
personal reasons.
Professor Elksnin outlined the duties of the Vice Chair which include
among others Liaison to the Strategic Planning Committee and Chair of the
Faculty Council for 1992-93.
The nominee for Vice Chair was Professor Peter Mailloux. Professor
Mailloux was elected by acclamation.
V. Reports and Updates
A. Committee on Committees
Professor Peter Greim reported on actions of the Committee on
Committee. A list of committee assignments had been prepared and submitted
to the Deans who wished some changes. It was noted that no professor in
the Department of Psychology will be eligible to serve on the Committee on
Academic Tenure Promotion and Awards (CATPA) in the spring semester since
Professor Bowman will be on sabbatical. Professor Greim said that the
committee assignments were sent to the Deans' offices on 11 September for
publication. He felt that the college committees have some autonomy
although chartered by and reporting to an administrator. Committees could
collect and disseminate information of concern to them.
B. Graduate Dean's Search
Professor Oliver Bowman reported that there seemed to be about sixty
applicants. At present the committee members were reading and studying all
applications. The next meeting is the first week in October.
VI. Old Business
A. Travel Management Proposal
Professor Elksnin indicated the the Travel Management Proposal was not
implemented by the admninistration. Professor Greim stated his concern
that no explanation was given as to why. Council directed the Chair to
write to the administration for the rationale for this decision.
B. Position of Associate Dean of Engineering
The Chair announced that she had written a letter of concern as
directed by Faculty Council to President Watts including the Resolution
passed by Faculty Council. The President's response letter was in the
packet distributed to Faculty Council. Council noted that he was mistaken
in the sentence which stated, "In fact, we have a precedent of several
years in the position of assistant dean of undergraduate studies where the
appointment was administrative in nature." That position is titled
"Assistant to the Dean of Undergraduate Studies" and is not an Assistant
Dean position. It was pointed out that in decisions such as this, the
President has executive privilege. Council was disturbed that an action so
important as this which affected faculty did not have faculty input.
Further, it was observed that over the last few years, the number of
faculty slots has stayed about the same, but the number of administrative
positions has increased substantially. Professor Holbein moved that this
matter be sent to the Executive Committee. The motion passed unanimously.
C. Subcommittee D report on Athletic Department funding
Professor Briggs reported that money is generated from many sources
for the Athletic Department. The committee examined records back to 1978
and took note of an increasing imbalance in funding up to about $800,000 at
present which must be transferred in the Activities Budget. Among transfer
funding sources included the Gift Shop, Print Shop, and Book Store. He
noted that The Citadel did take advantage of a special State "scholarship"
plan for reduction in tuition designed to attract some out-of-state
students. The committee found that all such "scholarships" at present are
offered only to athletes, so far as the committee could learn. The
committee is still studying if it is coincidence that prices are
artificially high for college textbooks in comparison to the College of
Charleston for instance, or if it is not coincidence since that profit can
take care of Athletic Department financial shortfalls. Professor Briggs
concluded by stating that all records were accessible in financial offices
to the committee's study. Professor Kelly moved that Committee D continue
work in this area. The motion passed unanimously.
VII. New Business
A. Letter to Council concerning parking problems.
Professor Leslie Crabtree sent to the Chair a copy of his letter to
Col. Stackhouse, Director of Public Safety and Provost Marshal, concerned
about auto parking that "I am too absent-minded to remember, every single
morning, to replace the (hanging) decal on my rear-view mirror." Professor
Crabtree asked whether there could be an option, either hanging decal or
sticker. Professor Briggs of Council moved that this matter be sent to the
Campus Affairs Committee for action or information. The motion passed
unanimously.
B. Letter to Council Chair regarding GPA issue
Professor Charles Jumper wrote to the Chair with concern about the
number of times a student might elect to repeat a course to increase the
overall Grade Point Average. Professor Jumper observed that the college
has a loophole that enables a student to repeat a course as many times as
he wishes, each time obtaining transcripts credits and the associated
grades which can artificially raise the student's GPA. Professor Briggs
moved that this matter be sent to Committee A for study. The motion passed
unanimously.
C. Letter to Council Chair from Professor May
Professor James May sent a letter to the Chair with two concerns.
First was the fact that the Commandant had refused his request for 8
geology students to take a field trip on Saturday, April 13, 1991, because
it conflicted with the President's Inspection Day. "I was willing to
accept that verdict until I was informed that an entire company was being
excused from standing because they were participating in a parade on
Sunday...." On a second matter, Professor May was concerned that during
Spring Pre-Registration, appointment times had been assigned students who
had class or a lab during afternoon pre-registration period. Thus, a
course or needed section might be filled before the student could
pre-register. Professor Greim moved that the matter be sent to the
Intergovernmental Committee. The motion passed unanimously.
D. Letter to Council regarding freshmen advising
Professor Philippe Ross, Professor and Head of Biology, asked Professor
Kelly, the Department of Biology Council representative, to convey to
Council has concern about advising and orientation sessions for fourth
class cadets who were members of the football team. Professor Ross noted
that the fourth classmen biology major athletes reported to him on 21
August, at 11:45 A.M. on their own time and stated that a member of the
Athletic Department staff told them they were completely registered, need
not attend any academic orientation sessions, could not attend the Tuesday
evening academic department freshmen meeting or the Wednesday morning
meeting due to football activities. Professor Ross is further concerned
that these freshmen did not know the names of their faculty advisors.
Professor Kelly moved that the matter be sent to the Intergovernmental
Committee. The motion passed unanimously.
E. "Draft, Master Plan for Campus Development," for January 1992
The Chair had distributed copies of the draft of the "Master Plan for
Campus Development" which was anticipated to be finalized in January 1992
by the Office of Facilities and Construction, Col. Robert H. Barton, Jr.,
Vice President. The Chair asked if Faculty Council wished to comment on
any aspects. After some discussion about deferred maintenance and other
projected plans, discussion ended. Faculty Council took no action.
F. Letter from Faculty Senate Presidents at Clemson Univ. and USC.
The Chair received a joint letter from the Faculty Senate President,
Gunther J Holst, of USC and Faculty Senate President, B. Allen Dunn, of
Clemson University requesting consideration of formulating an Advisory
Group or Committee representing faculty views to the Commission on Higher
Education. If advisable, the group will petition the Commission on Higher
Education for such a Committee recognition. Professor Briggs moved that
Professor Elksnin as Chair of Faculty Council send a letter endorsing the
concept. The motion passed with one opposed.
G. New South Carolina Law, "English Fluency in Higher Education Act"
The Chair opened discussion of the Memorandum of Gail M. Morrison of the
South Carolina Commission on Higher Education and the attached South
Carolina Act that must be implemented in each state college not later than
22 October 1991. This Act is to, first, "ensure that the instructional
faculty whose second language is English possess adequate proficiency in
both the written and spoken English language" and that, second, a mechanism
at each college must be established for student grievances. In addition,
the college must give clear evidence to the Commission that policies for
implementation included faculty and student involvement. After a very
brief discussion, Professor Greim moved that the Chair of Faculty Council
suggest to the administration that a committee be formed to include the
Faculty Council Chair, Dean of Graduate Studies, Dean of Undergraduate
Studies, a student, and a faculty member whose second language is English.
The motion passed unanimously. Next, Professor Greim moved that Professsor
Elksnin nominate Professor Muhammad Zahid as the faculty member
representative. The motion passed unanimously.
H. Agenda item for Council meeting of 17 October
Professor Greim asked that an agenda item for next time be the
situation, mechanism, advertising used in the recent selection of the
Daniel Library Head.
VII. Next meeting of Council
The next meeting of Council will be on October 17
IX Adjournment
Council adjourned at 12:38 p.m.
Submitted by
Gordon A. Wallace
Secretary to Faculty Council
24 September l991