My apologies for not getting a report out on the April

meeting more quickly. This is a report from the April and

July meetings.

DAVE'S STANDARD DISCLAIMER: I am reporting this stuff to

the best of my ability to take in all of the information

that is presented, but there's a lot of it, and it comes

fast, so if I misrepresent anything that was said, I

apologize in advance, and will correct it as soon as I find

out.

APRIL MEETING

1)We were introduced to the new Chancellor, Dr. Charles

Manning. When he entered the TBR system, he was plopped

down in the middle of that contentious budget mess, and he

admitted that initially it was a little overwhelming (I

guess that's an oxymoron), but that he was beginning to

feel his way around. He did talk briefly about TBR's

response to some legislator's suggestion that TBR draw on

its renewal and replacement funds. More on that in the July

notes below .

I was very impressed by Dr. Manning. He stressed that he

held faculty in high esteem, and that faculty concerns

would be instrumental in the steps TBR would take as an

institution to improve the quality of higher education in

the state. Dr. Manning seemed eager to take questions from

members of the subcouncil, which was a welcome change.

2)Strategic Planning-Dr McPhee presented TBR's top five

quality goals as access, accountibility, funding (tied into

academic excellence), articulation, and workforce

development.

3)Articulation Issues-Work proceeds towards the

establishment of common course rubrics throughout all

schools governed by THEC.

4)Distance Learning-Dr McPhee asked for endorsement of the

draft of the Distance Education Report, a copy of which can

be found on TBR's site. Subcouncil passed the motion for

endorsement.

5)There was discussion of tenure procedure, particularly in

instances where people who have been moved to

administrative posts but retain their tenure voting rights.

The thrust of the argument made on behalf of several schools

was that in many instances, these people become so far

removed from their original positions that they can no

longer be regarded as 'peers'. Dr McPhee responded that TBR

requires that individual institutions establish their own

tenure policy, and that such problems should be handled at

the campus level. When I described the situation at

Pellissippi, many members expressed their surprise that the

entire department voted, and strongly recommended that we

move instead to a tenure committee format, stressing their

belief that particularly with a school of our size, our

system almost couldn't help but become unmanageable. I am

mostly neutral in my opinion regarding our tenure policy,

but I will admit to laughing uncomfortably when someone

said "Just scheduling the meetings must be a nightmare".

Bingo!

6)I presented my salary vs CPI analysis, showing that we

were running about 6 percent behind the inflation rate over

the previous 5 year period. No one really seemed too

surprised.

7)Don Windham of Roane State was elected president of

subcouncil for the 2000-2001 academic year. If you don't

know Don, just let me say that he will pursue faculty

concerns vigorously.

8)Subcouncil passed a motion unanimously thanking Pete

Cansacro for his years of service to Faculty Subcouncil,

and wishing him a happy retirement

JULY MEETING

1)Dr. McPhee's Strategic Planning

presentation-Disappointingly, Dr Manning couldn't attend,

but sent word that he hoped not to miss any future

meetings. Dr. McPhee reiterated his earlier intention to

be an "advocate for the faculty of TBR", and that "I see

myself as a faculty member on loan to TBR administration".

Dolores Gore, from Austin Peay, spoke in support of Dr.

McPhee's integrity. Dr McPhee laid out some of his

priorities, which include

-make academic affairs more effective and responsive

-acting on suggestions rather than just listening

to them

-continue the Excellence in Teaching presentations

instituted last year, where faculty members get

the opportunity to present academic successes to

the board members, a break from past meetings

which focused almost exclusively on administrative

concerns

2)Articulation Update-By new law, students must be able to

transfer freely from one state institution to another; this

led to the recent initiative to standardize course numbers,

while still attempting the opportunity for schools to offer

unique courses. The common rubric/course numbering has been

largely dealt with, but difficult questions remain. Senate

Bill 2752 calls for "the establishment of track programs

for ALL MAJORS AND BACCALAUREATE DEGREE PROGRAMS (emphasis

mine)"; TBR doesn't quite know what to do with this clause

in the law. There are so many disparate degree programs

that there is some fear that this will be impossible; it's

almost like passing a law to make water flow uphill. Still,

TBR is dedicated to getting as close to the intent of this

legislation as possible.

There has been suggestion from some legislators that a 120

hour cap be placed on all undergraduate degrees in the

state. This does not mean that a student could not take

more than 120 undergraduate hours, but it may mean that all

hours beyond that limit would require that students pay

out-of-state fees. This is going to be particularly hurtful

to programs that have more than 120 hours mandated by their

accrediting organizations; ABET, for instance, has a 132

hour minimum for accredited programs. This might mean that

an engineering student in this state will have to pay for

at least 12 hours at the out-of-state rate; if the state

tries to institute a 120 hour engineering major, students in

this state will face entering the marketplace with a degree

from an unaccredited institution. The state of Florida does

not supplement student fees beyond the 120 hour mark, and

lord knows, if anybody anywhere is doing anything whatsoever

to save a dollar, we have to get some of that action. Sorry,

I guess that was an editorial opinion.

2)Confidentiality of Service and Research

Contracts-Frankly, I understood very little of this, and it

may not be of consequence to too many of us, but according

to the summary document, "Confidential sponsored research

agreements no longer require review and approval by the

Attorney General and the Chancellor". From what I could

gather, prior to this, state-affiliated research was more

open, and now there is this layer of proprietary

protection. It's SB2139 and HB 2769, if you would like to

go to the state website and examine it.

3)Dollars Spent Per Student-Predictably, this goes up, but

not nearly as fast as the cost of education. The state

formula calls for a state-student fee split of 70-30; at

present, it's right at 60-40, and the state's part is still

dropping. The average two-year student subsidy across the

state was $3988 last year, up 1.7% from $3889 the previous

year. At Pellissippi our folks are doing a little better

percentage wise, with $3445 up 6% from $3250. The

differences are due to several factors, including

facilities, and student compensation by discipline, which

differs for instance, between liberal arts courses and

science lab courses.

4)Update on Statewide Faculty Development Conference - We

are planning some sort of in-service program that will be

open to all TBR schools, similar to those programs

presented recently by the Colloquium of Eastern Schools

Whose Name I Can't Remember, that Judy Fethe and Donn King

helped coordinate. There was a desire to get faculty from

different schools to interact and see what will happen. The

first program will probably be during Fall 2001, with it

possibly being moved ahead to Spring.

5)Outside Employment-There is a personnel policy outlining

conditions for outside employment, but the individual

schools have some leeway in how they implement that policy.

Our policy is available through the human resources office,

and basically says that it's OK as long as the outside

employment does not present conflict-of-interest problems,

and it can be done without hurting the performance of your

Pellissippi duties. The President of the school should be

notified in writing; the suggestion at the meeting was that

most schools want an annual notification, and I believe

that is the case here.

6)Faculty Salaries-Across the board, statewide faculty

expressed satisfaction with the current salary structure.

Just kidding.

This was, as you might guess, a VERY involved discussion,

and I will try to summarize the main points, but it won't

be easy.

First of all, as to the status of the equity studies;

approval of equity studies was tabled at the June board

meeting, not out of any squeamishness about budget issues

in general, but specifically because there was not a state

budget in place at that time. In Dr McPhee's words, "The

chancellor is committed to bringing all current equity

studies to the September board meeting, with results

retroactive to July 1". This could have a significant

impact on our salaries, especially since our administration

showed the foresight to prepare for funding such results.

For other salary discussion, I am just going to share from

my notes

-the news media plays up salary impingement on student fees

-many legislators do not believe there is a salary problem

-we are required by law to hold back 2% of our school's

budget in a sort of emergency fund; in addition, there

are sometimes balances in building funds that don't get

reported in the current budget because of carry-over of

the construction projects into the next fiscal year;

altogether, these non-discretionary funds add up to

50-60 million dollars for all THEC schools; this money

was misrepresented to the media as a "slush fund" and

"money that had been hidden from legislators"; this

misperception persists with the public, largely because

media outlets have not exactly gone out of their way to

correct it

-the persistent problem of "compressing", that is, of

having entry salaries nearly equal to those of longtime

employees, is, in Dr McPhee's opinion, "unavoidable";

equity studies should help correct this to some extent

-some legislators have suggested that we use the

previously mentioned "surplus" to fund faculty salary

increases; in that instance, we would just have to hope

that, for instance, tornadoes don't strike Austin

Peay...ooops! Too Late!

-we should talk to legislators and ask them for very

specific things that they plan to do to improve the

educational environment at Pellissippi, and not be shaken

off by general claims of being "in support of education";

to that end, I will bring a motion to the next faculty

council meeting requesting permission to invite a number

of legislators to our October meeting; you are also

encouraged to write and call your legislators with

specific questions...they live to serve, and love to hear

from you

7)Web-based Programs-TBR's moving full speed ahead towards

a Regent's Online Degree, similar to those offered by

Phoenix University and Franklin. The train's about to leave

the station. Faculty input is encouraged.

Miscellaneous notes

-TBR is suggesting GPA recalculation recommendations,

specifically that institutional GPAs include ONLY points

earned at that institution; this comes as a result of a

request from the provost of ETSU, and seems to be in

keeping with the articulation movement; over 60% of all

accredited institutions in the country use this method

-many faculty members are concerned with their low level

of involvement in the selection of institution presidents,

as well as in the under-representation of faculty on board

committees; while the board does include 3-4 faculty

members on each committee, frequently they are not voting

members; perhaps more importantly, they are not selected by

other faculty members, but by the school's presidents;

furthermore, the faculty Regent is selected in the same

way; if TBR notified President Edwards that 2002 was

Pellissippi's year to have the faculty Regent, he would

just pick one, and the full faculty would not have to be

included in his pick; subcouncil hopes to have this policy

changed

-there was some discussion regarding granting full

professorship to faculty-members without a terminal degree,

but McPhee said that in his opinion, that's not likely to

change; it's a board policy that many presidents feel very

strongly about, and while occasional exceptions will be

considered on a case by case basis, no sweeping changes in

the possible are ever likely

-adjunct issues were considered; this will be discussed at

the next meeting, but the major concerns were about

terribly low salaries, extreme differences in salaries from

school to school (some as low, apparently, as $1000 for a

three hour course), adjunct rights to office and storage

spaces on campuses, and adjunct representation on state

subcouncil; Don Windham shared a sadly funny story about

losing one of his school's best adjunct faculty members to

the more lucrative vocation of full-time dog grooming.

There you have it. Write me if you need clarification, have

an issue you would like to have discussed at the next

subcouncil meeting, let me know.

dave

----------------------------------------

DAVID VINSON

Email: dvinson@pstcc.cc.tn.us

"Pellissippi State Technical Community College"