Faculty Senate

MINUTES

October 20, 2010, 3:30 p.m.              Division Street Campus                               Room 220

 

 

I.          Introduction of Guest: Mark Fuentes

                        Tracy O’Connor – Knoxville Tourism and Sports Corporation

 

President Fuentes introduced guests Tracy O’Connor and Christine Grider from the Knoxville Tourism and Sports Corporation. They gave an informational presentation about the organization and the services it provides.

 

II.        Call to Order: Tom Gaddis

The meeting was called to order by Tom Gaddis.

 

Members in attendance: Mark Fuentes (President), Ron Bridges (President Elect), Dave Vinson (TBR Rep), Donn King (Parliamentarian), Rick Barber (BCT), Deanne Michaelson (BCT), Joe Zitka (BCT), Sami Ghezawi (EMT), Ken Swayne (EMT), Lawana Day (English), Trent Eades (English), Sydney Gingrow (English), Marilyn Harper (LA), Mike Rose (LA), Ann Preston (Math), Bob Stern (Math), Brad Rose (NBS), Darneta Brown (Nursing), Jean Jackson (Library Services), Pam Smith (Transitional Studies), Tom Gaddis (Business Officer/Division Street), Ashley Boone (Blount County), Jane Stribling (Magnolia Avenue), William Gwin (Adjunct Faculty).

 

Guests in attendance: Mary Monroe Ellis, Eric Butcher

 

III.       Approval of Minutes: Tom Gaddis

The minutes of the September 15 meeting were approved without objection.

 

IV.       Officer Reports:

                  Secretary: Jean Jackson – No Report

 

                  Communications: Ken Swayne – No Report

 

                  TBR Representative: Dave Vinson

                  Faculty Sub Council will meet Friday. The chancellor will not be in attendance.

 

                  President: Mark Fuentes

·         The new portable is in place. It will be primarily classroom space with some office space for Education faculty.

·         New adjunct faculty office space will be built on the second floor in the ERC [in space currently used for Library stacks and student study areas]. The office area may be completed in time for spring or fall use.

·         He will be asking that the O7 parking lot be designated faculty/staff parking.

·         Kae Carpenter, a lawyer from TBR, will be at Pellissippi Campus on Monday, November 15 for a presentation and discussion on faculty legal issues. Three sessions will be scheduled. There was some discussion about the timing of this presentation and about difficulty in attending, especially on a Monday.

Mark will look into the possibility of recording the presentation.

·         A webinar, “23 Practical Strategies to Help New Faculty Thrive,” will be offered on November 22. Further information will be distributed via email.

·         President Fuentes has been asked for information about the search for a new president. As yet, there is no information. The president is an employee of TBR, not the college, so this could be a TBR process. The college may have some input.

·         He has also been asked about the TBR community college reorganization. Discussion about articulation is progressing.

·         Representatives from TBR viewed the Strawberry Plains location proposed for an east campus. The decision on approval may come at the December 2 board meeting. If it is approved, funding will have to be found.

·         There have been questions about Dr. Edwards’ plans for reorganization before he leaves. President Fuentes is not aware of any such plans on the academic side.

·         No changes are planned for summer sessions for 2011. There are issues for summer related to the new funding formula.

 

V.        Committee Reports:

                  Adjunct Faculty: Jonathan Morrell/William Gwin – No report

 

Student Scholarships: Bob Stern – No report. Dates for the book sales will be similar to last year.

 

                  Rules: Donn King – No report

 

                  Nominating Committee: Jean Jackson – No Report

 

                  Promotion/Tenure: Jane Stribling

                  Departmental representatives have been selected and the calendar distributed.

 

                  Faculty Development: Ron Bridges – No report

 

                  Faculty Lecture Series: Trent Eades

Teresa Fulcher will present the next lecture on November 11 at 12:30 p.m. Dave’s lecture was awesome.

 

VI.       Discussion:

                  Fac_Staff Listserv

President Fuentes discussed moderation of the listserv with Dr. Wise and provided the following information:

·         Not many messages get rejected.

·         They try to notify the sender if a message is rejected but it doesn’t always happen. They will try.

·         Dr. Wise thinks that there is no chance of the list being unmoderated.

President Fuentes does not know if there was a response to the Faculty Senate resolution passed in April 2009. He can bring it up again. Antony Wise, Jerry Bryan, and Peggy Wilson are the moderators. President Fuentes will ask for written guidelines for use of the listserv.

 

Report On Electronic Promotion/Tenure Notebooks Pilot

Brad Rose distributed a report summarizing results of the electronic promotion/tenure notebooks pilot (Attachment 1). Feedback was generally positive with some negative comments. The general feeling was that faculty members should be allowed to choose to submit the promotion/tenure notebooks in either e-format or print-format.

 

Brad Rose made the following motion:

 

The pilot allowing faculty to submit promotion/tenure notebooks in electronic format should continue for another year.

 

After some discussion the motion was withdrawn and Trent Eades made the following motion:

 

Faculty members should be afforded the opportunity to choose to submit promotion/tenure notebooks in electronic-format, paper-format, or both.

 

The motion was approved.

 

                  Student Behavioral Issues

There has been a question about what faculty can do about students who are constantly disruptive during class. They can be asked to leave. They can also be asked to leave and not come back until they have met with a counselor or with Dr. Rebecca Ashford. If they refuse to leave, Security may be called to escort them out.

 

                  “20 Graduates Rule”

Dr. Edwards has informed the departmental deans that each major and concentration in every career/technical program must produce 20 graduates each year, beginning in spring 2012, in order to be viable under the new funding formula. Possibly just showing progress would be sufficient to retain the program during that first year. It was noted that advertizing would be needed for these programs in order for this to work. Scheduling and funding were discussed. Suggestions are welcome. There may be a need to educate legislators about the effect of funding on these programs.

 

                  Extraordinary Student Situations

The student success coordinators have reported contact with students who have experienced extraordinary life situations like fires, robberies, etc. that affect their ability to succeed in their classes. There was discussion about whether the college could do something to assist in these situations and where the assistance should be provided. Business Services and Student Life were suggested as possible locations for administration of a fund for this purpose. President Fuentes will investigate the process for establishing such a fund.

 

VII.     Unfinished Business: None

 

VIII.    New Business:

                  Academic Freedom Policy

Mark Fuentes made the following motion:

 

Faculty Senate recommends that the college adopt the revised text of Policy 06:02:03 Academic Freedom and Responsibility (Attachment 2).

 

During discussion minor changes in wording and editorial corrections were accepted without objection. The motion passed with the text amended as discussed (Attachment 3).

 

 

 

IX.       Announcements –

The next meeting is scheduled November 17, 2010, 3:30 p.m. at the Pellissippi Campus Faculty/Staff Dining Room

 

X.        Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.


Attachment 1

 

Electronic Promotion/Tenure Notebooks Pilot Summary

Report to Faculty Senate

 

 

Background

Ann Kronk of Natural & Behavioral Sciences approached me as an NBS Senator with the idea of using electronic promotion/tenure notebooks (hereafter referred to simply as “notebooks”)  as alternative to the traditional physical notebooks that tend to be large and cumbersome in nature. 

 

This proposal was initially brought to the Faculty Senate on October 21st, 2009 for consideration.  After further research and discussion, a motion was brought by myself at the November 18th, 2009 Faculty Senate meeting to allow a one year pilot run for those interested in submitting electronic notebooks as opposed to the traditional bound notebooks.  The motion passed.

 

Ann Kronk, Trish Roller, Joe Zitka and Brad Rose all submitted notebooks in electronic format.  Additionally, Joe Zitka submitted a traditional notebook as well at the request of his department head.

 

 

Implementation

After much discussion of various options, it was decided that D2L was the most convenient platform for the notebooks, both in terms of actually making the notebooks as well as minimizing inconvenience to those that would be viewing them.  Through collaboration with Audrey Williams and Brandon Ballentine, a “course” was set up in D2L which allowed for easy upload of all requisite documents by notebook authors as well as allowing reasonable control as to what parties had access to what information.   Reviewers could digitally “sign off” on each notebook after having reviewed it and clicking a link that logged their user information and acknowledgment of having read the document.

 

 

Results

Positive Feedback

·         Structured table of contents made it easy to review material and was preferred to a large, single pdf file.

·         Access was limited to only those who had a need to view the information, thereby providing a sense of security to author(s).

·         Electronic preparation was much easier and allowed for a better presentation of the material.

·         Improved flexibility to those required to review the notebooks as they can do it from their own computer rather than having to go to a different building.

·         Promotion/tenure committed did not have to transport numerous large notebooks to promotion meeting rooms.

·         Ease of access for faculty members at satellite campuses.

·         Several requests to expand the electronic offering as it provides a platform to demonstrate their teaching activities (web simulations, software, etc.) which cannot be done using paper notebooks.

·         Was recommended for continuation and even phased in as an eventual requirement for promotion/tenure notebooks.

 

 

Negative Feedback

·         Multiple complaints about spending long periods of time reading a computer screen – complaints of eyestrain.

·         Concerns about ease of access to scanning hardware and pdf file-making software.

·         Those who were less tech/computer savvy were less comfortable with this format.

·         On one person’s computer, it took an excessively long time to open some notebook components resulting in that person having to use the traditional, bound notebook.

 

 

Miscellaneous

·         Multiple faculty members felt the option of choosing either electronic or bound format should remain available and that they should not be forced into an electronic format.

·         It was suggested that a webinar be created to help those new to the process learn how to do it.

 

 

The Numbers

Joe Zitka completed notebooks in both electronic and bound format.   Upon examining the statistics in D2L, he found that of 28 faculty members in his department, only 5 accessed the electronic version.

 

Of Joe’s 5 users who reviewed the electronic notebooks,

·         One user visited 1 topic.

·         One user visited 3 topics.

·         One user visited 16 topics.

·         One user visited 17 topics.

·         One user visited 21 topics.

 

Brad rose completed his notebook only in electronic format.  Upon examining the statistics in D2L, he found that of 35 faculty members in his department, 23 had accessed the electronic notebook.  Only five of those who accessed it were actually required to do so and sign off on the notebook.  Those five are chemistry faculty members.  There were a total of 80 topics available to visit.

 

 

 

 

Five Required:

·         One user visited 8 topics for an average time per topic of 0:10. 

·         One user visited 13 topics for an average time per topic of 0:47.

·         One user visited 13 topics for an average time per topic of 2:00.

·         One user visited 20 topics for an average time per topic of 1:00.

·         One user visited 39 topics for an average time per topic of 0:37.

 

 

Eighteen Not Required:

·         One user visited 1 topic for 0:21 seconds (zero minutes, 21 seconds).

·         One user visited 2 topics for an average time per topic of 4:52.

·         One user visited 3 topics for an average time per topic of 2:21.

·         Two users visited 4 topics for an average time per topic of 1:01.

·         Two users visited 6 topics for an average time per topic of 0:51.

·         One user visited 8 topics for an average time per topic of 2:43.

·         Two users visited 9 topics for an average time per topic of 1:09.

·         Two users visited 11 topics for an average time per topic of 3:23.

·         One user visited 15 topics for an average time per topic of 1:30.

·         One user visited 19 topics for an average time per topic of 0:29.

·         One user visited 25 topics for an average time per topic of 0:19.

·         One user visited 26 topics for an average time per topic of 0:48.

·         One user visited 31 topics for an average time per topic of 0:14.

·         One user visited 38 topics for an average time per topic of 0:29.

 

 

Substantially more statistical data is available if desired.


Attachment 2

 

POLICY 06:02:03

ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY

 

 

Introduction:

Pellissippi State Community College affirms that academic freedom is fundamental to the faculty’s role in preparing students to be independent, critical thinkers equipped to fully participate in a free society.

Academic freedom is essential to fulfilling the ultimate objectives of an educational institution – the skills for enabling the free search for truth – and applies to both teaching and research.  Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth, and academic freedom in teaching is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the faculty member in teaching and of the student to freedom in learning as well as for leading the student to effective critical thinking skills.  Delete this paragraph and insert the following:

Academic Freedom is essential to fulfilling the ultimate objective of an educational institution – fostering the skills for enabling the free search for truth – and applies to both teaching and research.  Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth, and freedom in the classroom is fundamental to protecting both the rights of faculty members to teach effectively and the rights of students to develop the ability to think critically.

 

Because of the rigorous process by which faculty members become qualified and maintain qualifications to teach in a college or university, they as a group are best qualified to set and determine professional standards.

Academic Freedom and Responsibility:

                  I.    Each faculty member is entitled to freedom in teaching his or her subject, including, but not limited to the right to determine pedagogical techniques, activities, delivery systems and assignments.

                II.    Faculty, as members of departments, are responsible for creating master syllabi constructed in such a way that allows individual faculty members maximum liberty in designing their his or her own syllabi within the limits or requirements of the master syllabi.

               III.    Each The faculty member is entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of his or her other academic duties.

              IV.    Each The faculty member is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution.  When the faculty members speaks or writes as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations.  As man men or women woman of learning and an educational officers, they he or she should remember that the public might judge the profession and the College by the faculty member's utterances.  Hence, all a faculty members should, at all times, be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they do not speak for the College.

               V.    Implicit in the principle of academic freedom are the corollary responsibilities of the faculty who enjoy that freedom.  Incompetence, indolence, intellectual dishonesty, failure to carry out assigned duties, serious moral dereliction, arbitrary and capricious disregard of standards of professional conduct – these and other grounds as set forth in the policy on academic tenure may constitute adequate cause for dismissal or other disciplinary sanctions against faculty members, subject to the judgment of peers.

              VI.    The right to academic freedom imposes upon the faculty an equal obligation to take appropriate professional action against faculty members who are derelict in discharging their professional responsibilities.  The faculty member has an obligation to participate in tenure and promotion review of colleagues.  Thus, academic freedom and academic responsibility are interdependent, and academic tenure is adopted as a means to protect the former while promoting the latter.  While academic tenure is essential for the protection of academic freedom, all faculty members, tenured or non-tenured, have an equal right to academic freedom and bear the same academic responsibilities implicit in that freedom.

This policy on academic Freedom and responsibility is consistent with the Tennessee Board of Regents Policy No. 5:02:03:30: Academic Freedom and Responsibility.

 

 

 

Approved:     


Attachment 3            

 

POLICY 06:02:03

ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY

 

 

Introduction:

Pellissippi State Community College affirms that academic freedom is fundamental to the faculty’s role in preparing students to be independent, critical thinkers equipped to fully participate in a free society.

Academic freedom is essential to fulfilling the ultimate objectives of an educational institution – the skills for enabling the free search for truth – and applies to both teaching and research.  Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth, and academic freedom in teaching is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the faculty member in teaching and of the student to freedom in learning as well as for leading the student to effective critical thinking skills.  Delete this paragraph and insert the following:

Academic Freedom is essential to fulfilling the ultimate objective of an educational institution – fostering the skills for enabling the free search for truth – and applies to both teaching and research.  Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth, and freedom in the classroom is fundamental to protecting both the rights of faculty members to teach effectively and the rights of students to learn and develop the ability to think critically.

 

Because of the rigorous process by which faculty members become qualified and maintain qualifications to teach in a college or university, they as a group are best qualified to set and determine professional standards.

Academic Freedom and Responsibility:

                  I.    Each faculty member is entitled to freedom in teaching his or her subject, including but not limited to the right to determine pedagogical techniques, activities, delivery systems and assignments.

                II.    Faculty, as members of departments, are responsible for creating master syllabi constructed in such a way that allows individual faculty members maximum liberty in designing their his or her own syllabi within the limits or requirements of the master syllabi.

               III.    Each The faculty member is entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of his or her other academic duties.

              IV.    Each The faculty member is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution.  When the faculty members speaks or writes as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations.  As man men and women woman of learning and an educational officers, they he or she should remember that the public might judge the profession and the College by the faculty members’ utterances.  Hence, all a faculty members should, at all times, be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they do not speak for the College.

               V.    Implicit in the principle of academic freedom are the corollary responsibilities of the faculty who enjoy that freedom.  Incompetence, indolence, intellectual dishonesty, failure to carry out assigned duties, serious moral dereliction, arbitrary and capricious disregard of standards of professional conduct – these and other grounds as set forth in the policy on academic tenure may constitute adequate cause for dismissal or other disciplinary sanctions against faculty members, subject to the judgment of peers.

              VI.    The right to academic freedom imposes upon the faculty an equal obligation to take appropriate professional action against faculty members who are derelict in discharging their professional responsibilities.  The faculty member has an obligation to participate in tenure and promotion review of colleagues.  Thus, academic freedom and academic responsibility are interdependent, and academic tenure is adopted as a means to protect the former while promoting the latter.  While academic tenure is essential for the protection of academic freedom, all faculty members, tenured or non-tenured, have an equal right to academic freedom and bear the same academic responsibilities implicit in that freedom.

This policy on academic Freedom and responsibility is consistent with the Tennessee Board of Regents Policy No. 5:02:03:30: Academic Freedom and Responsibility.

 

 

 

Approved: