Appalachian State University

Faculty Senate Minutes

April 24, 2006 (First Session, Approved)

The Faculty Senate meeting was called to order by Chair Moore at 3:18 pm in the William Strickland Conference Room in I.G. Greer on Monday, April 24, 2006.  Senator Kaenzig and Senator Felkel were not in attendance.

I.        Announcements

A.        Chair Moore welcomed senators and visitors to the meeting.  Visitors were Dr. David Haney, Dr. Wilber Ward, Dr. Bobby Sharp, Dr. Tim Burwell,

Dr. Harry Williams, Dr. Paul Gates, Dr. Gayle Weitz, Dr. Michael Ramey (Chemistry), Dr. Ellen Carpenter (FCS), Dr. Diane Mines (Anthropology), Mrs. Elizabeth Williams (Library), Dr. Beth Davison (Sociology), Mr. Michael Coston (Bookstore), Ms. Suzette Patterson (CSIL), Mr. Aaron Sperling (App Allies), Dr. Glenn Ellen Starr Stilling (Library), and Dr. Terry Cole (Communication).

B.        Chair Moore asked Senators to submit their annual committee reports by Friday, May 5, 2006.

C.        Chair Moore reported that Chancellor Peacock and the Board of Trustees approved the changes in faculty office hours noting that SGA opposed this change.

D.        Chair Moore presented Dr. Paul Gates, Dr. Gayle Weitz, Ms. Beth Cramer, Dr. Tom Jamison, Dr. Martha McCaughey, Dr. Susan Staub, and Dr. Patrick Rardin with framed Certificates of Appreciation for their service to the Faculty Senate.

E.        Dr. Bill Ward presented Chair Moore with a plaque in recognition of Dr. Moore’s leadership as Faculty Senate Chair and his service to Appalachian State University.

F.        Vice Chair Marking presented Chair Moore with gifts from the Faculty Senators and office staff in appreciation for his service as Faculty Senate Chair.

II.       Visitors’ Reports

A.        Ms. Suzette Patterson (CSIL) and Mr. Arron Sperling (College of Business undergraduate student) shared with the Faculty Senate information about the Appalachian Allies initiative on campus, which was developed in 2003 by the BGLAD Task Force, as an advocacy and educational outreach program.  Ms. Patterson noted that there are opportunities for faculty involvement as Appalachian Allies.  On May 22, 2006 from 1:00 – 4:00 pm, a three-hour mandatory training session will be conducted for individuals who are interested in participating.

III.      Minutes

A.        Chair Moore asked for a motion to approve the April 10, 2006 minutes.  Senator Marking moved and Senator McBride seconded.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #1).

IV.       Nominations

A.       Chair Moore opened the floor for nominations for Faculty Senate Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary.  Senator Malloy nominated Senator Marking for Chair.  Senator Ramsey nominated Senator Butts for Vice Chair who respectfully declined, noting his involvement as Chair of the AP&P committee as his reason for not accepting the nomination.  Senator McCaughey nominated Senator Arnold as Vice Chair.  Senator Marking nominated Senator Harris for Secretary.  Chair Moore closed the nominations, noting that nominations can be reopened in the second session immediately following this Faculty Senate meeting.

B.        Chair Moore presented the nominations for University Committee Service from the Committee on Committees noting changes, deletions, and additions as follows:

Academic Integrity Board

Julie Horton (C&I)

Steve Smith (Communication)

Heather Waldroup (Art)

Admissions Committee

Betsey Williams (Library)

Sunghoon Roh (Political Science)

Awards Committee

Jose Sanqui (Math)

Core Curriculum Committee

James Ivory (English)

Margot Olson (Tech)

Cultural Affairs Advisory Committee

Alecia Jackson (C&I)

Faculty Grievance Assistance Committee

Ray Russell (CS)

Sandie Gravett (P&R)

Stella Anderson (MGT)

Faculty Staff Benefits Committee

John Quindry (HLE)

Library Services

Billy Irwin (LRS)

Erik Rabinowitz (HLE)

Frank Barry (CS)

Non-Tenure Track Faculty Committee

Erik Rabinowitz (HLE)

Registration and Calendar Committee

David DeHart (Library)

Traffic Policy

Carol Truett (LES)

Thomas Reeves (Tech)

Nominations were approved.   (See Vote #2).

V.          Provost’s Report

A.          Dr. Aeschleman thanked Dr. Moore for his service as the Faculty Senate Chair. The Provost updated the Faculty Senate on three outstanding motions as follows:

              Motion 05-06/03-04 regarding Honoring Our Faculty Proposal.  Motion was approved.

              Whereas, tenure and/or promotion in rank mark major achievements in the professional life of a faculty member, being the culmination of years of work and representing excellence in teaching, research, and service to the University and to the wider community;

And Whereas, the interdependence of faculty and the University Library are crucial to the academic life of the University and of the wider community, and that the strongest bonds of mutual respect for contributions that advance human knowledge should be encouraged always;

And Whereas, the Library Services Committee and the University Librarian have given formal support to this proposal;

Therefore, The Faculty Senate requests the Chancellor to have the University Library establish a program called “Honoring Our Faculty” to begin in the fall semester 2006 that is described herein below.

The “Honoring Our Faculty” program invites promoted and/or tenured faculty members to choose a book for the University Library collection and to have a bookplate placed in the book to commemorate their success. Honored faculty members would be encouraged to select a book representing something personally or professionally meaningful to them. The books selected would then be purchased for the library collection and provided with a bookplate with the faculty member’s name, department or school, year and promotion/tenure information. Honored faculty members would be invited to provide a brief statement describing why they chose that book.

Annually, there would be a display in the University Library of the books and their selector’s statements for a period of time. The names of honored faculty, the titles of their chosen books, and their personal statements will be collected, maintained together, and be made available to the public.

The program would be annually conducted in fall semesters, by honoring faculty promoted or tenured in the previous year. It would be administered by the University Library with assistance from Academic Affairs.

              Dr. Aeschleman reported that the resolution supporting the Traffic Policy Committee’s motion to have a percentage of ticket sales earmarked for ongoing maintenance of parking facilities was not approved.  The Provost stated that this would be too cumbersome to implement and that there is no centralized process to accommodate such a process.

Motion FS 05-06/02-01 regarding the Proposed Supplemental Pay Policy, “tiered approach” (Report #2) was approved with one modification.  Under Tier 1, the minimum mileage was increased from 5 miles to 20 miles which has no affect on any existing distance education programs.

Report #2

Supplemental Pay Proposal #2.

V.        Committee Reports

A.          Academic Policies (HUELSMAN, Butts, Ehnenn, Mamlin)

Motion FS 05-06/04-24/01 to approve Educational Materials Course Development Agreement (See Appendix A).  Motion passed.  (See Vote #3).

B.          Agenda Committee (MOORE, Marking, Harris, Aeschleman)

              No Report.

C.          Budget Committee (STRAZICICH, Kaenzig, Staub)

              No Report.

D.          Campus Planning Committee (MARLAND, Jamison, McKinney)

              No Report.

E.          Committee on Committees (MALLOY, Cramer, Jones, Lambert, McBride)

Motion FS 05-06/04-24/02

Whereas, the AP&P Committee has submitted new guidelines for its operation;

Therefore, the Committee on Committees recommends approval of the new guidelines (see below) as submitted to the Faculty Senate.

Proposed text to be stated in Chapter II of the Faculty Handbook, and in Section A. of the 

Academic Governance Handbook. 

ACADEMIC GOVERNANCE 

The basic mission of the University is instruction of students; therefore, the procedures for 

curriculum modification are most important and should be clear. 

The basic and most important unit in determining curricula is the academic department. 

Departments recommend their own departmental courses and programs after careful consideration by the faculty of that department. Each department should have a representational curriculum committee involving faculty and undergraduate students (and graduate students, if there are graduate programs in that department). 

Each college/school shall have a curriculum committee to carefully consider changes to courses, programs, policies, or structures within or affecting that college/school. This curriculum committee should include faculty and undergraduate students (and graduate students, if there are graduate programs in that college/school). 

In addition, the Graduate Council, the Teacher Education Council, and the Core Curriculum Council shall each carefully consider changes to courses, programs, or structures within or affecting their programs. These curriculum committees shall include faculty, undergraduate students, and graduate students. 

The Academic Policies and Procedures Committee is the final committee to carefully consider changes to the University’s curriculum, policies, and structures. 

The Provost and the Chancellor shall communicate to the University in a timely fashion their decisions on proposals and motions involving changes in academic policies, programs, or structures. 

GUIDELINE I 

Any proposal for changes in a department’s courses or programs must first be acted upon by the department before being submitted to the college advisory council. Any proposal for changes (excluding course changes within existing programs) in a college’s or school’s programs or structures must first be acted upon by the faculty of the college or school concerned before being presented to the Academic Policies and Procedures Committee. After a proposal for curricular or structural change has been acted upon by a college or school and after the dean of that college or school has submitted the proposal to all other necessary groups, the dean may then present the proposal to the Academic Policies and Procedures Committee. 

GUIDELINE II 

Recommendations for changes in general academic policies or academic programs must be submitted to the Academic Policies and Procedures Committee by any of the following: 

A. Department, program, college or school 

B. Faculty Senate

C. Student Government Association 

D. Graduate Student Association Senate 

E. Deans’ Council 

F. Council of Chairs 

If the proposal does not originate from a specific academic department, it must go through one of the bodies listed above. 

GUIDELINE III 

The Academic Policies and Procedures Committee is, in most circumstances, the final recommending body to the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor and the Chancellor. Faculty and student members on this committee serve as representatives for the faculty and students, respectively. 

GUIDELINE IV 

If a proposal for changes in a department’s curriculum is not approved by that department, the group initiating the proposal may appeal (within 90 days after rejection) first to the advisory council of the college to which that department belongs. If the proposal is rejected by the college 

or school, the group may appeal (within 90 days after rejection) to the Academic Policies and Procedures Committee. 

When a department proposal is not recommended by other necessary groups, the department may appeal to the Academic Policies and Procedures Committee (within 90 days after rejection).

Proposed text to be stated in Chapter VII, Section 7.3.4.2 of the Faculty Handbook, and in 

Section B. of the Academic Governance Handbook. 

ACADEMIC POLICIES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE 

Members on Committee: The membership of AP&P shall not exceed fifteen and shall include at least one faculty member from each college or school with additional faculty members based on the current proportions of full-time equivalent (FTE) faculty in the colleges and school.  The term for appointment of faculty is three years.  The student membership (one-year terms) shall include one graduate and three undergraduate students as voting members and be representative of the five degree-granting colleges and school.  The ex officio membership of AP&P should include Provost’s Office, and General Studies.   Corrected Sentence reads:  “The ex officio membership of the AP&P should include one person from each of the following areas:  Deans’ office in each college or school, library, registrar, Provost’s office, and General Studies.”

The chair of AP&P shall be a tenure-track faculty member and shall be elected from the membership as a non-voting chair.  The seat vacated by the chair shall be filled by a voting member from the same college or school.  The term of the chair is three years and is renewable. The chair shall receive one-quarter reassigned time per semester. 

Report to: The Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor 

Areas of Responsibility: The major area of responsibility shall be the curriculum and academic policy.  Other areas are: advanced placement; graduation requirements; appeals concerning academic matters from any college, school, department, member of the faculty or students, and matters referred to it by the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor or the Chancellor.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Senator Malloy noted that the last sentence under section Academic Policies and Procedures Committee of Motion FS 05-06/04-24/02 was incomplete.  It should read the following:  “The ex officio membership of the AP&P should include one person from each of the following areas:  Deans’ office in each college or school, library, registrar, Provost’s office, and General Studies.”

Senator Butts stated that Academic Policies and Procedures Committee revised the guidelines, which were originally published in 1990, to bring policies into alignment with current practices.  Senator Scherlen asked why faculty librarians could not be voting members as has been the practice in the past.  Senator Butts stated that the library is consulted and included on the form; but, since the library does not offer degree-granting programs, the committee felt that consulting the library was sufficient.  Senator Butts clarified that AP&P was not removing the library from the process.  Chair Moore emphasized that this was a constitutional change and would need to be submitted to the Fall faculty meeting for approval.  Senator Scherlen moved and Senator Marland seconded to amend Motion FS 05-06/04-24/02 to include faculty librarians as members of the AP&P Committee.  Senator Butts moved to amend the main motion to include the words “and the library” in the first sentence under the section Academic Policies and Procedures Committee.  The amended sentence should read:  “Members on Committee:  The membership of AP&P shall not exceed fifteen and shall include at least one faculty member from each college or school and the library with additional faculty members based on the current proportions of full-time equivalent (FTE) faculty in the colleges and school.”  Motion passed.  (See Vote #4).

Discussion related to the proposed guidelines included concerns regarding the vagueness of Guideline II, excluding opportunities for departments to review and consider proposed changes in general academic policies or academic programs, particularly those that directly relate to or impact their department or unit, and the potential for SGA to appeal directly to the AP&P committee bypassing departmental involvement.

Senator Ehnenn moved and Senator McBride seconded a motion to separate Guidelines I - IV section of Motion FS 05-06/04-24/02.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #5).  Senator Ehnenn moved and Senator McBride seconded a motion to refer the guidelines back to the AP&P committee for clarification.  Chair Moore noted that the proper course of action would be to refer the guidelines to the Committee on Committees who would then refer them to the AP&P Committee.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #6).

Senator Rardin moved and Senator Ehnenn seconded to amend the motion to include “Ex officio members of AP&P do not vote.” as the last sentence in paragraph 1, under section Academic Policies and Procedures Committee.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #7).  Chair Moore called for a vote on the motion as amended.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #8).

Senator Malloy moved and Senator Arnold seconded to refer the entire Motion FS 05-06/04-24/02 to an ad hoc faculty senate committee.  Motion failed.  (See Vote #9).

Chair Moore presented Motion FS 05-06/04-24/03 to the Faculty Senate for discussion and vote.  Chair Moore noted that Academic Computing will be proposing in the fall that university websites, in particular those related to university committees, councils, and task forces, utilize a singular template when updating their site for consistency and uniformity.  Senator Ramsey stated his concerns about workload issues for committee members who will be responsible for updating their respective committee, council, or task force sites.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #10).

FS 05-06/04-24/03

Whereas, the basic guidelines for all University committees/ councils is chapter 7 of the Faculty Handbook, and as Chapter 7 is currently not in compliance with recent amendments passed by Faculty Senate and approved by the chancellor, and contains anachronistic and incorrect information;

And Whereas, committee charges and memberships are not in all cases up-to-date, which makes committee work confusing, and burdens the Senate secretary with trying to keep information up-to-date on the Senate’s website;

And Whereas, not all University Committees develop and maintain a continuity file (to contain a full description of the committee's duties and authority, its current membership, its policies and procedures, and its actions and recommendations) and deliver that file to that chair’s successor, as required by FH 7.3.3.2, and that current committee reporting procedures, compliance, recordkeeping, etc. are inconsistent and inadequate, so that some have not made annual reports to the proper authority and none have made reports to the Faculty Senate;

Therefore, the Faculty Handbook Committee of the Faculty Senate should review and update information regarding University Committees and Councils in Chapter 7 of the Faculty Handbook, and provide clear procedures to be followed by all University Committees, especially in FH 7.3.1 – 7.3.3.4;

And Therefore further, that every University Committee, Council, Board, Task Force, etc. must have a website whose basic features adhere to a university adopted template, which can easily be filled up and which lists information such as committee charge, membership, meeting dates, agenda, minutes (including a history of minutes for at least one year), annual reports (including a history for at least two years), links to documents and working materials, and listing a continuity file, all to be done in timely fashion.

F.           Faculty Handbook Committee (Moore, Gates, Arnold, MARKING)

FS 05-06/04-24/04

Whereas, The Faculty Senate Handbook Committee submitted a proposed amendment to the Faculty Constitution for presentation at the Fall 2006 Faculty meeting regarding section 2 of the Constitution that was passed by Senate (see March 20, 2006 Faculty Senate minutes FS05-06/03-02);

And Whereas, subsequent consideration by Committee members resulted in the need to more precisely state the voting eligibility of faculty so that part-time, phased retirement, and other similarly situated faculty would be eligible to vote only for a full academic year;

And Whereas, faculty workloads no longer reflect that faculty will only be teaching;

And Whereas, the text proposed to be changed by this motion stated that:

Section 2.

All members of the faculty, excluding emeriti faculty, adjunct faculty, and part-time faculty teaching less more than six (6) hours per semester, have the right to hold faculty offices and to vote in faculty meetings and faculty elections and in departmental and college committees on which they serve except as noted in Article II, Section 3.

Therefore, the following amendment to the Faculty Constitution is to be substituted for Section 2 (above) of the Senate motion 05-06/03-02:

Proposed Section 2.

All members of the faculty, excluding emeriti faculty, adjunct faculty, and part-time faculty teaching less whose workload is more than twelve (12) hours per academic year six (6) hours per semester, have the right to hold faculty offices and to vote in faculty meetings and faculty elections and in departmental and college committees on which they serve except as noted in Article II, Section 3.

Discussion on Motion FS 05-06/04-24/04 included questions pertaining to the definitions of teaching, workload, instructor, lecturer, part-time, and short-term contact, who is eligible to vote, and the implications inherent in the wording “teaching more than 6 hours per semester” in comparison to “whose workload is more than 12 hours per academic year”.   Senator Butts moved and Senator Ehnenn seconded to refer Motion FS 05-06/04-24/04, Proposed Section 2 back to the Faculty Handbook Committee.  Motion failed.  (See Vote #11).  Senator Rardin called a point of order concerning Motion FS 05-06/04-24/04, Proposed Section 2.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #12).

G.          Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee (FELKEL, Harris, Horton, McCaughey)

FS 05-06/04-24/05

Whereas the Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee, responding to Faculty Senate direction, has some ongoing concerns about the rather frequent rescheduling of Fall Break over the past few years;

And Whereas, the Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee has had some very encouraging and productive discussions, with the chairperson of the University Registration and Calendar Committee, regarding the scheduling of Fall Commencement;

And Whereas, the primary responsibility for protecting dates for planned events rests with the unit(s) planning the events,

Therefore, the Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee recommends:

1.  All units of the university (academic and non-academic) should inform the University Registration and Calendar Committee, at least 6 months in advance, of the dates for events that are being planned.  Academic Departments should take special pains to inform the committee of all conferences and/or faculty/student academic trips, which are to take place during university breaks.  All units of the university are to be notified at least annually to provide this sort of information to the committee.  Units that do not provide such information to the committee assume the risk that their planned events may be disrupted by necessary changes in the university calendar.

2.  The University Registration and Calendar Committee, when considering changes to an established university calendar must consult all units of the university that have informed the committee of planned events that could be in conflict with the proposed calendar changes.  In addition, academic events should take precedence over non-academic events.  Academic events may include, but are not limited to, commencement and other academic ceremonies, as well as on-campus conferences and faculty/student academic trips, which have been scheduled at least six months in advance, and which have been intentionally scheduled during a university break.  For example, if a calendar change, requested in relation to a non-academic event, would create problems for or result in the cancellation of a planned academic event, the committee’s recommendation must be to deny the requested calendar change.

3.  That Faculty Senate support the University Registration and Calendar Committee’s decision to hold commencements after final exams are completed.

Motion FS 05-06/04-24/05 passed.  (See Vote #13).

FS 05-06/04-24/06

Whereas according to an approved Faculty Senate resolution from April, 2001 (http://www.facsen.appstate.edu/Minutes/apr92001.html#attachment%20#2 ), Dean evaluations are to be conducted every other year;

And Whereas, the UNC Faculty Assembly’s document on Faculty Governance recommends faculty review of upper administration;

And Whereas, the last dean evaluation was done in 2001;

And Whereas, FS02-03/04-04 (Recommend quantitative, advocacy and narrative questions be used in faculty evaluation of the Deans Fall 2003 (as amended)) (http://www.facsen.appstate.edu/Minutes/april142003min.html) was approved;

And Whereas, the Deans of Arts and Sciences, Business, and the Graduate School have been in their positions less than one year;

Therefore, the Faculty Senate is responsible for implementing Dean evaluations in the Fall 2006 semester for the Deans of Education, Fine and Applied Arts, and the School of Music.

Per FS 02-03/04-04 the questions should be:

QUANTITATIVE QUESTIONS: (answers can be: "don't know" OR ranging from "strongly agree to strongly disagree")

1.  The Dean's office functions effectively and efficiently.

2.  The Dean makes fair decisions in regard to hiring, reappointment, promotion, and tenure.

3.  Allocation or resources, space, and workload:

a.  The Dean allocates resources fairly among departments.

b.  The Dean allocates space fairly among departments.

c.  The Dean works to improve the facilities of the college.

d.  The Dean allocates workload fairly among departments.

4.  Leadership qualities: 

a.  The Dean effectively articulates a vision for the college that is in accord with the university mission.

b.  The Dean effectively communicates policies and procedures, and the rationale for  decisions.

c.  The Dean supports faculty self-established professional goals that are in accord with the university mission.

d.  The Dean is accessible and effectively interacts with the faculty.

e.  I trust my Dean.

5.  Advocacy: 

a.  The Dean is an effective advocate for teaching.

b.  The Dean is an effective advocate for scholarship/creative activity.

c.  The Dean is an effective advocate for service.

d.  The Dean is an effective advocate for needed space.

e.  The Dean is an effective advocate for equal opportunity.

f.  The Dean is an effective fundraiser.

NARRATIVE QUESTIONS:

6.  Comment on your Dean's strengths.

7.  Comment on your Dean's weaknesses.

8.  Provide suggestions for improvement.

9.  Other comments.

Per Faculty Senate recommendation made May 6, 2002, the Faculty Senate will need to form a Reading Committee for each Dean.  As a reminder, the recommendations are printed below:

1.            Faculty members who are eligible to vote in department, college, and university elections will be eligible to complete the survey instrument.

2.          The Faculty Senate will approve a Reading Committee for each Dean. Each Reading Committee will be composed of one senator and one department chair from outside the college/school, and one faculty member and one chair from within the college/school. The Senator will serve as chair of the committee.

3.          The Faculty Senate Chair will work with Academic Computing for statistical analysis of the structured questions. To provide year-to-year continuity, there will be a rotation of membership on the Reading Committee so that half of the Reading Committee serves another year on the Committee for that dean.

4.          The responses to the survey will be given to the Faculty Senate Chair who will distribute the results to the specific Reading Committee.

5.          Each Reading Committee will examine the responses and then meet with the Provost and the Dean to discuss the evaluation. The results of the survey (both structured and open-ended data) will be shared with the Provost and the Dean. 

6.          The chair of each Reading Committee will collect all materials and give them to the Faculty Senate Chair when the process is completed.

New Recommendations:

1.       Rather than Academic Computing, the senate should work with the Office of Institutional Research, Assessment, and Planning to administer the evaluations and for statistical analysis of the structured questions.  The evaluations should be ready for faculty use by September 30, 2006.

2.      The Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee should recommend members of the Reading   Committee for each dean, with advice from the Faculty Senate Chair, to the Senate.  These committees should be formed by October 15, 2006.

 Dr. Sharp (Institutional Research and Assessment) commented that his office is willing to work with the faculty senate chair or designee in regards to administering and analyzing deans’ evaluations and that the September 30, 2006 deadline was reasonable.

Motion FS 05-06/04-24/06 passed.  (See Vote #14).

H.          Welfare of Students Committee (RARDIN, Ramsey, Scherlen, Smith)

The chair of the Faculty Senate asked the Welfare of Students committee to look into the following matter:  Varsity athletes are required to take two P.E. courses whereas students in Marching Band and four-year ROTC students are exempt from this graduation requirement.

The Chair of the committee contacted the Director of Athletics regarding this matter, who replied: “After discussing [this matter] with Jean Roberts and Jay Sutton, we would like to request the 2-hour exemption [of P.E. courses for the graduation requirement]. Our rationale is that our student-athletes are getting benefits, knowledge and exposure to physical activity through their sports participation.  This does not preclude [them] from taking any PE course as an elective.

FS05-06/04-24/07

Motion to request that the AP&P Committee review and implement an exemption for students who have completed at least two years as varsity athletes from the 2-hour P.E. graduation requirement.

Chair Moore clarified that varsity athletes would still be required to take two hours in another elective course(s).  Chair Moore remarked that the Athletic’s Council reviewed and supports this motion.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #15).

I.            Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Retirement (MOORE, Terry Cole (CMU), Marvin Hoffman (PS/CJ), Len Johnson (HRS), Harold McKinney (MUS), Susan Keefe (ANT), Fred Webb (Emeritus)

No Report

J.            Ad Hoc Committee on the Role of the Faculty Senate (ARNOLD, Gates, Lambert, McBride, Rardin, Scherlen)

Senator Arnold withdrew the committee’s report until the Faculty Senate meeting in the fall 2006 semester.  (See Report and Motions in Appendix B.)

VII.       Unfinished Business:

              None.

VIII.      New Business:

A.        Request for feedback by the Chancellor about the Report of the University Bookstore Committee concerning Textbook Rentals at Appalachian.

The Report has been circulated to all faculty and the Chancellor has requested feedback from Faculty Senate, Council of Chairs, SGA, and Deans Council. The Chancellor’s Office website has a specific email address for all faculty and university community responses: www.chancellor.appstate.edu

The Committee Report and supporting documents are available at this URL:

http://www.library.appstate.edu/ubc

Following are the main recommendations of the Committee regarding textbook rental (pp. 24-25).

The following recommendations were approved by majority vote.

1. We recommend that Appalachian keep the textbook rental system, as modified by the following recommendations.

Committee vote: In favor—3. Opposed—1.

2. Modify the textbook rental program so that the rental cycle is a minimum of two years. To keep costs down, faculty are encouraged to use the same book as long as possible.

3. Each course can use two rental texts. To keep costs down, faculty are encouraged to use one rental book per course if possible.

4. The rental fee may be increased if necessary.

5. All course materials should be selected by the faculty member teaching the course.

6. If a course using a rental textbook has a large number of sections, it will be possible to adopt more than one rental textbook.

7. The University Bookstore Committee will work with the bookstore manager to edit statements about the textbook rental program in all public documents, so that the statements are consistent and clear. In particular, the brochure distributed to all faculty will be revised, made clearer, and redistributed. The statement of policy will appear in the University Resource Manual, Faculty Handbook, the General Bulletin, and the University Bookstore’s Web page.

8. If the Administration’s decision is to keep the textbook rental system, The University Bookstore Committee, in cooperation with the University Bookstore, will conduct an annual survey of faculty and students to determine their satisfaction with the University Bookstore, with the understanding that the textbook rental system will be assessed every five years.

9. The University Bookstore will assist the faculty in negotiating with publishers to allow use of online supplements included with rental textbooks for the full rental cycle of the book.

10. If a student feels a rental book is overly highlighted or in poor condition, the student should inform the professor. The professor will then ask the bookstore to replace the book if a copy in better condition is available.

11. Make it clear that faculty are not required to use a textbook, whether rental, purchase, or supplemental. They may, instead, use reserved readings and/or full text journal articles from Library databases or Web sites. No approval from chairs or deans is required.

12. The University Bookstore Committee may write guidelines for exceptions to the textbook rental policy. These guidelines will be regularly promoted and available on the University Bookstore Web page.

13. Faculty are encouraged to use the Library’s reserved readings system for printed books, its e-reserve system for articles and book chapters, and its full-text journals and other electronic sources as alternatives to materials that students must purchase.

14. The University’s Chief of Staff should urge the Board of Governors to use the UNC System’s combined purchasing power for negotiating lower prices with textbook publishers.

15. The University’s Chief of Staff should urge support for U. S. Representative Timothy J. Ryan’s bill, H.R. 495, “College Textbook Tax Credit Act,” which would allow up to $1,000 per year in textbook expenditures to be tax deductible. Other bills pending in Congress that would help defray textbook costs should also be supported.

16. Each department should review with its faculty the textbook selection process used in the department, including mechanics, time limits, criteria, cost, utility, and faculty autonomy.

17. If the University administration’s decision is to eliminate the rental system, we recommend that it be phased out gradually in accordance with the educational mission of the University.

Discussion related to the University Bookstore Committee’s recommendations included issues and concerns related to the physical condition of textbooks (on the one hand, excessive highlighting of text and, on the other hand, active reading that encourages highlighting text), aversion to placing the burden on professors to be involved in the process of allowing students to return textbooks in poor condition, whether supplemental books are allowed, whether data from annual surveys of faculty and students will be retained for the five year reassessment of the textbook rental system, the financial disparity in the textbook rental system wherein textbooks for particular academic disciplines are more expensive than others, faculty members having individual choice in selecting textbooks is crucial to academic freedom, and the inherent benefits of utilizing the same textbook for foundational courses, particularly those with many sections, provides reassurance to professors teaching upper-level classes that students have been exposed to the same foundational subject matter. 

Senator Rardin moved to support the University Bookstore Committee’s recommendations.  Senator Marland seconded.  Senator Ehnenn moved to amend recommendation number 11 to include wording that would ensure that faculty “may instead select another book(s) or no book at all”.  Senator Smith seconded.  Amended motion failed.  (See Vote #16).  Chair Moore called for a vote on the main motion to support the bookstore committee’s recommendations.  Motion failed.  (See Vote # 17).

Chair Moore asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #18).  The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 pm.

Appalachian State University

FACULTY PRESENT AND VOTING SHEET for April 24, 2006 (First Session)

Y = Yes             N = No               A = Abstain