Minutes of the Faculty Assembly
109th Session
April 16, 1999

First Plenary Session called to order at 1:08. Thirty three delegates were present.

A. Welcome

B. Announcements:

Due to the death of Gib Smith, the Chair indicated her intention to appoint Henry Ferrell as both Faculty Assembly Parliamentarian and chair of the Governance Committee for this meeting if there were no objections. There were none.

The Chair read a message for Vice Chair Dan Noland who could not be present.

The Chancellor North Carolina State University, Marye Ann Fox, will be inaugurated tomorrow

The chair reminded that delegations must be certified by May 1, and that all the directory information must be submitted.

The next meeting will be September 17, 1999 at a location to be announced.

C. The minutes of the February meeting were approved without change.

D. Chair's report:

The chair wrote President Broad requesting that GA appoint a person to work on the colloquium on technology and teaching that will be held in November.

The Chair wrote the President supporting the resolution from the Student Government Association regarding the 150-day academic calendar.

The Chair reported that the Budget Committee chair had asked her to delay writing a letter regarding reduced operating funds.

The Chair reported that two Faculty Assembly members had won the teaching awards, Walter Gray and George Wilson. An alternate, Michael Brookshaw, also won a teaching award.

The copyright task force has been appointed, chaired by Rich Linton from GA and by Chair Gasaway. The majority of task force members are faculty.

The Chair attended the funeral for Gib Smith and reported to members some of the events.

E.    New Business: The chair distributed a proposed reorganization of Faculty Assembly committee structure from the Executive Committee. She asked that the standing committees examine the proposed new charges for their committees and also to examine the feasibility of a new committee to consider technology. The first plenary session was recessed until 3:30.

The second plenary session was opened at 3:34

A.    Mr. Ben Ruffin, Chair of the Board of Governors was unable to attend the meeting.

B.     Report of President Broad. The President:

1.    Acknowledged the loss of our colleague Gib Smith.

2.    Reported that she met with the faculty council at Chapel Hill to announce that Chancellor Hooker has entered the National Cancer Institute for treatment and reports that he is in good spirits.

3.     Mentioned the inauguration of Marye Ann Fox as Chancellor at NCSU.

4.     Recognized Walter Gray and George Wilson as winners of the teaching awards and talked about the value of the ceremony to revitalize us at the end of the semester.

5.     Talked about the enrollment plan. The President reported that the Board of Governors has adopted a ten-year enrollment plan for the University, divided into two five-year plans for each campus. The plan will accommodate approximately 50,000 new students in the next ten years. Many of the discussions were linked to the issue of facilitating growth on the smaller campuses who have a comprehensive mission but who have not achieved an economy of scale due to their small size. If these smaller underutilized campuses could accommodate this growth it would also benefit them by increasing their size. This does not apply when the campus mission would be harmed, such as at UNC Asheville. The discussion of enrollment growth was campus specific, aligning the capital capacity, the campus mission, and enrollment growth potential. For some, this will represent a major change and will involve other activities, including marketing. The plan was approved with the understanding that it would be examined, and possibly modified, yearly. This adjustment must also be linked to capital adjustments.

6.     With respect to legislative initiatives: Information technology, enrollment, assessment, distance education, public service programs, and capital needs were items discussed at more than ten occasions during the last few weeks with the joint appropriations committees. The overall financial climate of the State, including the financial implications of recent court cases, presents some significant problems in the continuation and expansion budgets. Each of the appropriations committees must contribute to cutbacks amounting to $125 million, including $53 that the education system must suffer. GA has been examining and communicating what is feasible to do, although the university believes that in direct or indirect ways it has already suffered cutbacks and has already targeted its budget request to very narrow, specific strategic issues. The budget request this year is already $30 million less than just a few years ago. The university believes it has already limited its request to the highest priority items and has little left for further cuts. Additionally, this year we are using $29 million in nonrecurring monies to fund current operations. The President hopes that tax revenues will be favorable and that we have made our case as strongly as possible. The budget process appears to be moving very quickly this year, with a budget possibly being ready by early May.

Faculty compensation and staff compensation are important issues, particularly with health care and retirement. The University must contribute to the State's needs for teachers in the next years, and its role in accelerating the pace of our teacher preparation programs will be important. GA will also work very hard to find adequate funding for library resources and information technology.

7    . Highlighted the study by Eva Klein, which highlights the important need for capital improvements. The preliminary conclusion is for a need of $6.9 billion, with $3 billion for renovation of current facilities. GA has documented the magnitude of the need to improve the quality of our academic spaces to keep programs operating at a high level of quality. The cumulative effect of our lack of funding has only escalated the need for funding.

In response to questions:
    1. Although we may get new buildings, we must remember that requests must include the need for equipment, especially in science buildings. The President acknowledged the importance of funding equipment purchases.
    1. Regarding the affirmative action plans, given the current court decisions, what has happened in the last two years? The President responded that she had asked the Chancellors to examine their admission, aid and other programs. Each chancellor has advised the President that, with changes made in aid and admissions programs, we would meet the legal requirements in this changing environment.
B.    Diana Oblinger: A quick update of events:
    1. Planning must be based on the idea that technology supports the goals of the institutions, and not the reverse. The planning must also recognize the missions and needs of each institution and not impose a single program on all.
    1. Probable outcomes might include:
A strategy based on four major issues: campus teaching and learning; distance education; student services (or services for students) including advisement; and finally administrative systems, for example financial accounting and personnel systems.

The strategy will involve collaboration. There will to be a move towards collaboration of the development of web tools.

GA will approach funding by specifying not only how much, but also "how come" so that people will understand what we are trying to achieve. We will also be very clear what expectations are appropriate as a result of funding our efforts.

The discussion on each campus should be energized in each of the areas as people from different parts of each campus begin to address the same issues.

Finally, those outside our campuses often do not understand what is happening on the campuses with technology, and we must explain how technology can help educate our students, increase retention and generally enhance the education of our students. We must clearly explain the benefits of technology to our constituents.

The URL that highlights the work of the task force is www.ga.unc.edu/its/netstudy/

D.    The "space study" Eva Klein The study had three general goals: the process had to be widely participatory, to produce something that is convincing to the General Assembly, that addressed the needs of all sixteen campuses.

Some highlights:
 

$883 million is needed to restore building to their initial state;

The FIC index (degree of deficiency/value of the campus the FCI) shows that only two campuses that are in the "good" range, three are fair, and all the others are poor with the FCI above 5% and10% respectively. At UNCG, the cost to repair buildings amounts to 37% of the value of the campus.

Non-appropriated facilities (e.g., dorms) are generally in better condition than appropriated buildings.

The University devotes about $90 million to maintenance, which is sufficient, but the large backlog of work makes it far less than what is needed.

It is possible that the University may have been getting less money than others because of how the funding calculation is done.

If the University continues with the current funding level, there will be no improvement.

These analyses only consider bringing a facility to its original condition; they do NOT include what it would take to bring a building up to modern standards. Based on working group meetings, an estimate was made of what it would cost to bring buildings up to modern standards (the FCQI). In some cases, buildings are in such bad state that they are not worth renovating and should be replaced. Using these standards, the needs come to $3 billion dollars.

One recommendation is to place a higher priority on renovation in lieu of new facilities; Science and technology facilities deserve particular attention; severe problems with residence halls on most campuses exist, and HBU campuses deserve special treatment.

Although the system has the capacity to meet current enrollment needs, this capacity is often not where the growth is occurring. Ten institutions are somewhat underutilized. Shortages are in libraries and laboratories more than in classroom or offices. By 2008, all campuses will have space needs. At present, some campuses have more needs than others, particularly the research campuses.

Classroom space will not be a problem. A major need will be for residential beds.

 
Major recommendations:
Use existing capacity to the extent reasonable and feasible.

View the underutilized campuses (HBU, UNCP) as assets.

Set growth targets for the smaller institutions.

Fund expansion consistent with institutional targets.

Related to Equity, there seems to be no pattern of systematic underfunding or overfunding, although it appears that the HBUs have suffered from a lack of emphasis on renovation, and their smaller size limits the ability to raise funds, and institutional decisions made in past years. The current level of funding is too low : equity is not achievable with a low level of funding. The State must commit to funding all sixteen universities, setting aggressive growth targets and increase the amount of available funding.

The current capital needs (for the next 10 years) total to 6.9 billion. The University will need to prioritize needs. The order seems to be science and technology facilities; student quality of life, minority/small and underutilized campuses must grow, and we must address immediate capacity strains. While this cannot be done all at once, GA must develop a plan to do so over time. However, the current pace is too slow.

All of us can open a dialogue about this on each campus. One important thing will be to demonstrate that we use current space efficiently. GA cannot sell the need for more space when the University is using existing space for only 15 hours a week. The University can look at calendar changes, summer session, and use conversion, for example converting excess classrooms into more space that meets more pressing needs. In turn, alternative financing systems must be used, including issuing bonds.

The second plenary session was recessed at 5:08

The third plenary session was called to order at 6:56. Thirty-five delegates were present.

Executive Committee: Bill Siegfried for Dan Noland

The executive committee brought two issues for consideration:
The committee felt that faculty often were not included in discussions related to the goals set for enrollment growth on the campuses. In particular, the growth will mean that we will need to plan for faculty recruitment and compensation very soon. The growth may have other effects on faculty life, too, including a greater reliance on part time faculty. Given the competition for part time faculty in this environment, it is possible that the pool will decrease and that we will have to consider other issues such as whether or not to place masters level people on the tenure line. We ask that Chair Gasaway write the President expressing our concerns about consultation and highlighting the need to begin planning for faculty recruitment and replacement as soon as possible.

Related to that, the committee also recommends that a Faculty Assembly task force be formed next year to explore the issues related to the enrollment surge, especially the hiring of faculty, tenure rules for non doctoral faculty and the use of part time faculty.

Second, the committee introduced a motion that: "The current governance committee be charged to develop a recommended committee structure for the Assembly and to present this for discussion at the September assembly meeting." The motion was seconded and passed without dissent.

At this juncture, the floor was open for discussion about the proposed reorganization.

From the Planning and Programs Committee: Several tasks were suggested for reassignment.
 

The committee was also concerned about increasing the number of committees to nine, because it may destroy the efficiency of the executive committee, because campuses would not be represented on a majority of the committees, and because there are not enough representatives to serve on more than a small number of committees. There was also some concern about the Information and Technology committee because the issues it is assigned may only be temporary. In general, the committee suggests that the total number of committees be held to six and that this be done by looking at the tasks to be accomplished and then devise a structure to support that. One specific suggestion was to combine Planning and Budget.
 
From Governance:
  The governance committee believes that governance committee should be assigned grievance issues and representation on governing boards. The members believe that "shared governance issues" should be addressed in the committee charge and that the governance committee should also monitor issues on each campus and developments in the State House and State Senate that pertain to higher education. They suggest that the "benefits" committee be the "salary and benefits" committee. In the area of technology, the committee felt that some of those issues belong to Academic Freedom, and also suggested that teaching assignments be given to Professional Development.   From Budget:   The committee thought about merging budget with planning, but decided that budget is a part of all committees and therefore should be retained as a separate committee with an overall view that can respond to all the issues. The charge would be revised to include only UNC system budgets rather than all education. The committee should review and comment on GA budget proposals, increase awareness of budget matters, enhance faculty input into budgeting. They shared the concerns about a separate Information Technology committee.   From Academic Freedom and Tenure:   The committee believes that the proposed committee duties are appropriate and that the committee could continue as it is. Related to the proposed Technology committee, they suggest that the issue of assistance and support needs be addressed. The lack of technical support and ongoing maintenance are serious problems on many campuses, and there is a need for sophisticated training and support for people who are expected to be computer literate. They suggest that support be incorporated in that charge of the proposed committee.   From Welfare:   Considered the split of the current committee and recommended that the committee be kept together, although possibly renamed. They might create a subcommittee to examine benefit and professional environment issues. Related to Technology, they support it, asking that there be a clear understanding that intellectual property includes not only electronic media but also all other created work.   From Professional Development:   In response to the proposed split of the committee, they recommend that it not be done. They may establish subcommittees but do not believe that a formal split is necessary. They did consider the vagueness of their current committee charge, and suggest that they recast what they do in the context of career development, and view their committee as one that helps faculty at different parts of their career. During the summer, they will try to rewrite the charge of their committee, which will be sent to Governance. A tentative charge might include: "A committee on professional development, whose responsibility shall be to review and make recommendations on matters relating to enhanced effectiveness of teaching, research and service throughout the faculty member's career." They do suggest that Governance take over the role of evaluation of administrators.   The Governance Committee will work on this over the summer and present it in September, so the Assembly may vote on the issue in November.
 
Elections: Dan Caton managed the elections in the absence of Dan Noland. The slate was presented. The Chair clarified that the Bylaws allow nominations at the February meeting only, although it had been announced that nominations would be accepted this evening. Given that announcement, the Chair asked if there were further nominations. Hearing none, the ballots were distributed for only those positions with more than one candidate, with the permission of the Assembly. Unopposed candidates were declared elected. The first ballot was for Vice Chair. As the balloting was conducted for each office, the Assembly moved forward with other business. After the votes for each office were tabulated, the results were announced. The Executive Committee for the 1999 - 2000 Faculty Assembly will be:
  Officers:
Chair: Keith Howell
Vice Chair: Michael Pearson
Secretary: Bill Siegfried  
Committee Chairs:
  Academic Freedom & Tenure: Dick Bernhard
Budget: Nancy Fogarty
Faculty Development: Allan Rosenberg
Governance: Hugh Hindman
Programs and Planning: Linda Nelms
Welfare: Howard Neufeld

Report of the Budget Committee: Nancy Fogarty
 

The committee met with Ken Grogan, who distributed GA's amended budget request. One main point is that the need based financial aid was increased significantly, and that tuition increases are for new initiatives, not to replace current State funding. The second document distributed to the group, was titled "Budget Process" which replaces an edition currently on our website. The committee encourages members to consult the new document when it is placed on the web, soon. The third document was the President's presentation to the Joint Appropriations Subcommittee on Education. The committee has mailed its survey to each campus and asks for a timely response by the May 7 deadline so they can document the budget processes in place on campus with the hope of identifying those that work well. The committee hopes to place a budgeting FAQ on the web this summer.
 
Report of the Governance Committee: Henry Ferrell
Rosalind Fuse-Hall met with the Governance Committee. She described the process by which members of Boards of Trustees are nominated. The committee discussed the possibility of nominating members of our own community for these positions. Recommendations may be sent to Rosalind Fuse-Hall. The process begins in October, when GA considers nominations.

The committee also discussed the problems facing faculty governance, especially the lack of support such as office space and secretarial help. The committee suggests that the Assembly consider establishing what the appropriate level of support should be.
 

Report of the Academic Freedom and Tenure: Claudie Mackey
The committee discussed two items in addition to the committee reorganization. The first was post tenure review, and the committee believes that there is a need to gather information now that the first year has been completed. GA is collecting data from the campuses, but the committee will also collect data from each institution regarding the number of people reviewed, the number considered to be exemplary, satisfactory and deficient. They also want to know if each campus believes post tenure review is meeting its objective and its costs in time versus its benefits. They also want to know if standards are consistent across departments and divisions and if there are efforts in place to insure that standards are being applied uniformly across divisions. They also would like to know about the number of grievances that are being filed by faculty judged to be deficient.

The second item related to part time fixed term faculty. The Academic and Freedom Committee met with the Faculty Welfare Committee and the two groups agreed that there is sufficient need to conduct a fact-finding search. Based on the data they have viewed, the committee believes that this is an issue that the system must address and encourage Keith to address this issue next year.
 

Report of the Planning and Programs Committee: Dan Caton
In addition to discussing reorganization, the committee heard from Myra Cane about foreign language degree program productivity. The concern was about the declining number of majors at a time when we believe foreign languages are increasingly needed. GA is working with campuses to increase productivity and to address the issue by getting more language instruction into K12 programs so students will be more at ease studying languages.

Finally, the committee spent a few minutes discussing the issue of accepting students from "approved" instead of "accredited" high schools. Judith Pulley assured the group that appropriate procedures are in place to assure continuing quality.
 

Report of the Faculty Welfare report: Keith Howell
The innovations in faculty worklife committee, at GA, is looking at post tenure review.

The committee met with Kitty McCollum who reported that the Board of Governors has approved some of the recommendations considered by Faculty Assembly. For example, if the carrier allows it, we will be permitted to withdraw cash at retirement; however, if you chose cashability, you are not eligible for health benefits unless you have a monthly benefit being paid. Faculty members must be informed about this impact of this on their health care.

They have expanded the limit of funds available to faculty for investment. They will offer a Fidelity mutual fund that faculty may invest directly, increasing the variety of funds available to us for our retirement plans.

There is some expectation, although this has not been approved, that the system contribution to the ORPs may be increased, although this is still being discussed. The State health insurance body has recommended to the General Assembly that any increases in health care cost be covered for us. They may also recommend that there be a subsidy for those who cover children in their plan, although there is no provision for people who cover themselves and their spouse only. The General Assembly is considering other proposals, including a prescription plan and dental, hearing and vision coverage for children and preventative dentistry for everyone.

The welfare committee is asking for a campus by campus comparison of benefits.

Related to part time and fixed term faculty, the Welfare Committee and the Academic Freedom and Tenure committees jointly recommend that members from each committee meet and make a recommendation about how this issue could be addressed.

As incoming Chair, Keith Howell then thanked Lolly Gasaway for her service, innovation, and her gentle but firm guidance that let us look at our structure and insure that we always left by 9:00. Keith presented a plaque on the behalf of the Assembly that reads: "Presented to Lolly Gasaway, Chair of the UNC Faculty Assembly 1997-1999".

Members who were completing their sixth year were recognized.

Old Business: none

Lolly Gasaway made some closing comments:

She reiterated the two goals from two years ago: to increase the efficiency of our meetings and to begin to use technology to communicate. She believes we have done well with these, and especially thanked Paul Duvall for his work on our website. She also believes we have become more proactive, although we are not done with this. She specifically mentioned the task forces in GA that included faculty. This year we had three goals: to complete the Bylaws revision, to investigate committee structure, and to try to develop mechanisms to be more proactive. Our colloquium led to a task force, but we must continue to seek mechanisms to increase our effectiveness. The Bylaws were amended this year. On the goal relating to becoming more proactive, substantial progress was made but there is more to be done.
Lolly will have visited all sixteen campuses during her term. She thanked members of committees, GA staff, Roy Carroll and President Broad.
She then recognized Keith Howell.   The meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m.  

Respectfully submitted:

W. D. Siegfried