APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

November 15, 2004 (Approved)

At 3:18 p.m. on November 15, 2004, Chair Moore convened the special Faculty Senate meeting with Chancellor Peacock to discuss the Provost Search in the University Conference Room (224 I. G. Greer Hall).

Faculty Senate members present: Michael Moore, Margaret Yaukey, Mark Malloy, Elizabeth Cramer, Tim Huelsman, Rick McGarry, Eric Marland, Brian Felkel, Steve Smith, Chuck Pier, Gayle Weitz, Allan Scherlen, Martha Marking, Jill Ehnenn, Colin Ramsey.

Guests- Miriam Makhyoun (SGA President), Dave Robertson (Director, Student Programs), Lorin Baumhover (Graduate School), Neal Lineback (CAS), Beverly Moser (FLL), Pam Schram (C and I), Bobby Sharp (Institutional Research), Reba Moretz (Board of Trustees), Ray Russell (CS), Paul Gates (CMU).

Chancellor Peacock informed the group that he has appointed the same Provost Search Committee that served two years ago, with a few additions/substitutions. (Michael Moore joined the Committee as new Chair of Faculty Senate, Paul Gates, past Senate chair, was retained, Miriam Makyhoun now serving as SGA President). Peacock said that he had received a recommendation from the Search Committee to appoint Aeschleman as Provost, but he wanted to discuss this recommendation with Faculty Senate and Council of Chairs before deciding how to proceed. He noted that the Office of the President had indicated it would support his appointment of Aeschleman as Provost; but he was concerned to explain why in this one instance the usual search process seemed unnecessary.

Peacock reasoned that an external, nation-wide search would require an outside search firm at considerable cost. He is very content working with Stan, that he respects his values and leadership, and that he has developed a good working relationship with President Broad and others in the Office of the President. Peacock noted there has been a lot of change on campus, including searches for deans, and that it was important to find stability of leadership. Peacock said he was aware that faculty would perceive this as contrary to faculty governance processes, but that he felt it important to be open and honest about his reasoning and explain as fully as possible his thinking. Peacock then took questions from senators.

Senator Marking said she appreciated his candor, and thinks Stan is the right person for the job.

Senator McGarry thought it was a great idea, and appreciated that Stan and Ken were open to discussion with no secrets.

Senator Ehnenn thought Stan has done a great job but voiced concern about the legality as it pertained to Affirmative Action and ASU's commitment to diversity. She believed a glass ceiling does exist at ASU in top-level administration and suggested an alternative of casting out a national search net to bring in the best candidates, which would prove that Stan is the best choice.

Chancellor Peacock responded that when the Provost search was held two years ago, two women applied and only one of these was qualified. When he investigated whether there were other female or persons of color who might be applicants from within the UNC system, he discovered with the advice of system leaders that there were none equal to Stan's qualifications.

Senator Pier appreciated the comments about the previous Provost search, as they help him understand Peacock's decision in this search process.

Senator Yaukey asked if there were legal precedence for this? Peacock answered that yes, it has been done before within the UNC system, for instance earlier this year at UNCW. Yaukey thought Stan has done a great job so far but asked if this is really mostly about time, money, and effort? Peacock replied it did not seem fair to give others false hope, when he

already knew whom he believed was the right person for the position.

Senator Malloy asked if this would handicap Aeshleman in his job? Would this sour others from applying to Appalachian in the future by not going through a national search? Peacock replied that he doesn't think this will happen, but if it does, it will be a short-term handicap that he believed Stan would quickly overcome.

Senator Smith saw a benefit in this process. By being up front about this search, other searches will clearly be understood as not being a "done deal."

Senator Marland expressed that it might have been better to do an open search, but it looks as if it is a done deal now.

Senator Weitz expressed her opinion that process is extremely important. She shared Senator Ehnenn's concern about Affirmative Action. Why was the committee charged to do an internal search? She said it looks as if the process has been "fudged." Weitz also questioned Peacock's comment that "Stan supports me the most," and wondered what would happen when Stan doesn't support the Chancellor?

Peacock replied that he was not suggesting that Stan was a "yes-man." Perhaps the comment was taken out of context. The Chancellor meant that Stan supports him in presenting details of many different positions, and that he thought if Stan disagreed, he would say so.

Senator Ramsey echoed Senator Pier's comment about appreciating knowledge of outcomes in the previous Provost search two years ago.

Senator Marking says she has not heard one negative thing about Aeschleman.

Senator Ehnenn echoes that she has not heard a negative thing about Aeschleman, but she has heard negative things about this process. She believes you can not put a limit on time, effort or cost when it comes to the quest for diversity.

Senator Weitz asked what homework had been done to find out if the Faculty thinks favorably of Aeschleman? Peacock replied that this meeting with the Faculty Senate, a meeting scheduled with the Council of Chairs immediately following and perhaps a general meeting with the ASU Faculty. Weitz believed that a public forum after the fact would not amount to input.

There was a motion to adjourn, which was seconded.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:55 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Beth Cramer

Faculty Senate Secretary