Back to: Senate |  UNCW. || Comments to Senate Secretary.

Faculty Senate Minutes

University of North Carolina at Wilmington

President Richard Veit called the meeting to order at 2:30 p.m.

Roll Call

Absent were: Adams (Dean, Nursing), Ainsley (Stud. Aff. Cmte.) Appleton (A&BL), Baker (Budget Cmte.), Buttino (Comm. Stud.), Earney (A&BL), Hadley (Dean, Grad. School), Howell (E&F), Hobbs (FLL), Moore (Nursing),  Moore (Pub. Service Ctme.), Rack (Music), Robinson (E&F), Rockness (Dean, BA), Seaton (Chem.), Snowden (S&A), Tyndall (Dean, Ed.), Walker (Admiss. Ctme.), and Wray (P&DS).

Approval of Minutes

The February minutes were approved.

Special Order of the Day

Executive session: Senators considered a nomination for an honorary degree.

Individual Reports:

1. Chancellor James Leutze gave the following report:
     
   1. The Senate requested clarification of the name "Global Virtual University."  The designation "Virtual University" is a commonly applied term denoting a means of delivery and marketing of certain types of courses.   UNCW uses the term  to designate our current distance learning exchange of courses with Japan.  Two types of courses are delivered: for-credit and not-for-credit. The for-credit courses were approved by the departments concerned in the same manner as courses offered on campus. Oversight of the GVU is handled by a steering committee which has a faculty chairperson. The terminology is being used at the request of the Japanese.  It does not designate a separate entity within the university.
        
   2. Student Government wants to play a role in the selection of a graduation speaker. The traditional selection of speakers involved identification of prominent members of the community who volunteered their time to give the commencement address. The only compensation came in the form of an honorary degree, if nominated and approved by the Faculty Senate. This year the students have voted $10,000 to hire a speaker. They have requested that Student Government have a role in the selection of commencement speakers in the future. Student Government also requests that in the future the administration provide some matching funds The Chancellor is happy to have the students play a role in the selection of a commencement speaker, but there are some logistical problems on future procedures yet to be worked out. If the students are involved the faculty should also be involved.
        
   3. Three strong candidates for the provost position have been on campus and we have one more scheduled. The faculty are encouraged to attend the public lectures and other meetings. The Provost Search Committee plans to move quickly after the campus visits are concluded.
        
2. President of the Faculty Senate Richard Veit gave the following report:
    
   1. Robert Tyndall, the Vice Chancellor designate for Information Technology, was unable to address the Senate today about his new division. He will address the April 20 Senate meeting.
       
   2. President Veit expressed concerns about how financial rewards are allocated for teaching.  Governor Hunt’s budget proposes that a portion of the next faculty salary increase be earmarked to reward teaching excellence.  Should the legislature concur, Veit urges Academic Affairs to give chairs maximum leeway in distributing these increases.  High morale occurs when faculty are rewarded in proportion to their desserts, and it is the chair's job to take all factors into account in determining an equitable salary distribution among faculty.  Factors that tie chairs' hands lead to salary imbalances and impaired morale.  The last time such a mandate occurred, our university raised the base salaries of 60 faculty by $2000 per year. No other UNC institution allocated the merit in this manner, which neither rewarded all excellent teachers (our faculty is notable for teaching excellence) nor rewarded faculty in proportion to their contributions nor took into account its effect upon carefully worked out salary balances among faculty.  A decision now that might further increase the continuing rewards for those 60 faculty while giving no rewards to other deserving faculty would be a mistake.
       
      A similar concern relates to UNCW's teaching awards, which have a pyramidal structure. Those who win the higher awards are generally those who have already won other teaching awards. This practice creates a small group of awardees and is no incentive for most faculty, who feel alienated from the possibility of becoming award winners. He recommends redistributing available award money so that awards may be offered to a larger number of faculty.  He recommends that, insofar as possible, all awards have the same monetary value and that, except for the very highest awards, winners come from those who have not yet been rewarded.
        
      Response from Chancellor Leutze: He is open to input in the process of determining a merit policy should the situation occur. As to the faculty teaching awards, there is no requirement that awardees have to have obtained previous awards. The awards are based on nominations from faculty.
          
   3. Question from floor: Senate Motion 99-1-1 called for additional awards for excellence in faculty research. Where does that motion stand now?  Response from Provost Moss: He would like to meet with a faculty committee to discuss the issue.

3. Faculty Assembly Delegate Dan Noland reported that our delegates expressed concern in the recent meeting with President Broad about the legislative decision to restrict all graduate tuition remissions to Chapel Hill and NCSU. Both Vice President for Planning Roy Carrol and President Broad were concerned by what occurred. UNCW is not alone in its outrage about the unfairness of the situation. There is a new proposal to rectify the situation in next year’s budget.

Committee Reports:

1. The following motion from University Curriculum Committee carried :
     
        That the following course designators be approved:
               CRW for Creative Writing
               FST for Film Studies         (Motion 99-7-20, carried without dissent)  

Old Business:

1. The following motion from Lee Schweninger of the English Department was withdrawn:

    Whereas, the current drop/add policy allows a student to enroll in a class a full week after classes have begun (in some cases, after missing as many as four class meetings); and Whereas, such a student may start a course already having missed more classes than an instructor might permit under the class attendance policy; and
    Whereas, the first classes may be so essential to the course that a student who has missed them has a deficit that cannot be overcome; therefore,
    Be it resolved that the drop/add policy be changed so that enrollment after a class has had its first meeting shall require the consent of the instructor.   (Motion 99-6-19, withdrawn)

Discussion: The current policy implies that the first week of class doesn’t matter. Additionally, students not yet enrolled often attend the first meeting in hopes of entering the class. If non-attending students wait before dropping, then the faculty member would then have to over-enroll the class in order to allow the interested students into the course.  Response from Associate Provost for Enrollment Affairs Denis Carter: Last spring an average of 4,591 add cards were processed per day during enrollment period. Currently departments can restrict enrollment in classes at registration. Thus there is a system to achieve the results desired by the motion. The enrollment could be frozen with no additional adds allowed, even if some drop. Additional adds could be allowed when signed by the faculty member.  Professor Schweninger found this satisfactory and withdrew the motion.

New Business:

1. In response to a question from the floor, Joanne Nottingham gave an update on the recommendations of the Parking and Traffic Improvement Committee.

Announcements: none

The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m.
Submitted by:  Raymond L. Burt