Left Navigation

Faculty Senate Home Agenda Faculty Senate Bylaws Committees General Faculty Items of Interest Mediation, Grievances & Hearings Meetings & Minutes Resolutions Senators
JANUARY 11, 2005

Present:  Chair Daley, Secretary Weiner, Interim Provost Nielsen; Senators Batra, Baynes, Bernhard, Blair, Blank, Branson, Brownie, Bruck, Clark, Fahmy, Fauntleroy,  Fikry, Hanley-Bowdoin, Johnson, Kasal, Khosla, Krotee, Martin, Matthews, Middleton, Miller, Moore, Robarge, R. Smith, Tetro, Warren, Wessels, Young       

Excused: Chair-Elect Allen; Parliamentarian Corbin; Senators Estes, McRae,

Absent:  Senators Bitting, Hooper, Johnson, Kellner, Smith, Stein

Visitors:   Charles Leffler, Vice Chancellor Finance & Business; P J Teal, Secretary of the  University; Dan Solomon, Dean, PAMS; Ray Fornes, Associate Dean, PAMS; Laura Massengil, Chair, Staff Senate; Kevin MacNaughton, Associate Vice Chancellor of Facilities; Bob Fraser, Director, Faculty Planning & Design; Donn Ward, Professor & Interim Head of Food Science; Lee Fowler, Athletic Director; Thomas Conway, Vice Provost, EMAS; John Gilligan, Vice Chancellor, Research & Graduate Studies; Benny Benton, Editor, Bulletin; James Oblinger, Chancellor

1.  Call to Order
Chair Dennis Daley called the ninth meeting of the fifty-first session of the North Carolina State University Faculty Senate to order at 3:00 p.m.

2. Welcome and Announcements
Chair Daley welcomed Senators and Guests.

Chair Daley announced that there would be a memorial for the Tsunami Relief on Thursday at 3 p.m. in the brickyard.

Chair Daley called for Faculty elections to the Faculty Senate and to the Grievance and Hearing Panels.

Chair Daley announced a proposed change to regulations on the Holladay Medal.  He noted that anyone with concerns should voice them otherwise the regulation will go into effect.

Chair Daley announced that the General Faculty Meeting would be on February 1, 2005 at 3 p.m. followed by a reception to welcome our new Chancellor.

The Emerging Issues Forum is February 7-8, 2005.  There will be a Faculty Senate Meeting on the afternoon of the eighth.   The Office of the Provost is again underwriting the scholarships for some faculty to attend.   Those interested in attending should send an email to vernice_stevenson@ncsu.edu.

There is a library exhibit “Viet Nam A Journey of the Heart” that will be on display from January 8 - March 6, 2005. 

Donna Brazile, Chair of the Democratic National Committee’s Voting Rights Institute, will be the featured speaker for North Carolina State University’s annual Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. commemoration on Thursday, January 13 at 11 a.m. in the Stewart Theatre.

The event is free and open to the public.

3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 8, November 30, 2004
The motion to approve the minutes passed unanimously.

4. Remarks from Chancellor Oblinger
“Let me join the Chair of the Faculty in welcoming you back.  Let me extend to you as long as it is not too far into the New Year, a very happy new year and a healthy prosperous 2005 for all of us.

I was reflecting when I knew that I would be speaking to you this afternoon that the last time that I appeared before you as your Provost was November 16 and I gave the same Senate remarks that I gave the afternoon of October 8 when I was announced as your thirteenth Chancellor.  I have opted not to give you a speech this afternoon.  On February 1, 2005 you will have a speech from me at the General Faculty Meeting so I hope that you will allow me to do something that has occasionally served me well and it is a little like a set of announcements but it is an update on eight or nine things that I think that you will be interested in.  I will lead with the Tsunami.  I hope that you have seen the collection of things that are appearing on the web that reflect on this devastating tragedy.  Dennis has already alluded to the response of our students who were working long before they returned to organize a response from this campus.  I would share with you that I have received emails and notes from faculty, certainly from students, our staff, alumni, and friends of the university and people that I am sure don’t really know the university the way that we would like them to but are impressed with the outpouring and feeling of sentiment in support of what has happened to hundreds of thousands of people half way across the world.  I would call your attention to what Chair Daley has already mentioned and that is this Thursday’s event at 3 p.m. on the brickyard.  If you are available and willing I think that would be a wonderful showing on the part of NC State’s family, our community as it relates to that tragic event. 

On November 30, 2004 you heard from Interim Provost Nielsen before he actually carried that title.  I read those remarks and I could relate to how a dean with three years of experience would have, even before he in this case had become the Interim Provost, encountered things that he had never encountered anywhere he had been before either as a member of the faculty or in administration or at NC State as a dean.  I would share with you that I have spent, along with Interim Provost Nielsen and Charles Leffler our Vice Chancellor for Finance and Business, the last couple of days in meetings with bond raiders, people visiting our campus from the great state of New York and the city of New York City.  I am going to say that I was very impressed with how much they knew about us and that is “us” as it relates to our mission, “us” as it relates to our faculty, and the faculty’s record of achievement, and our student admission data.  They walked into my office with that information in hand and wanted to know about the future of NC State and as you might suspect I represented, I think not too aggressively but rather assertively the bright future that lies ahead of NC State because of its people, broadly defined.  They particularly are aware of the state’s economic condition and the history associated with reversions, one-time reversions and permanent cuts.  They were particularly impressed with our development and gifting record, the record of the faculty as it relates to achievement and scholarly pursuits particularly the variety of sources of grant contract foundation dollars that are attracted and I just have to tell you I was a little bit surprised at the level of detail that these individuals knew about us, but I was reassured at the same time that they were looking at many of the right earmarks if you will of what their business is about.  They were aware of our cooperative issuance of paper, which is an expression that I learned more about from our College of Management colleagues where we jointly issued with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, which gave us the opportunity to talk about the many cooperative efforts that our faculty have with faculty.  We talked about biomedical engineering.  They knew about that program.  I just share with you that I too as your relatively new Chancellor am experiencing things that I have not experienced before but they are reassuring me and I hope us about our reputation and what is valued and what will always be. 

I would shift gears a little bit but still using the word Provost and hope that you are up on where we are relative to the search for the new Provost.  As you know Charles Leffler is chairing that Nominating Committee.  That committee has already posted the job description and the committee membership on the website.  They will use that website to communicate widely on the campus and beyond because after all it is the Internet.  We are hosting tomorrow the search firm that has been retained.  I will be talking with them this evening about my expectations, my desires, and my aspirations for that person who is very important for me to work comfortably with.  I hope those of you on the Faculty Senate Executive Committee that are available will be willing to meet and talk with these two individuals representing the Search Firm about what you value and what you are looking for in your next Provost.   Our goal is to have this process completed by the time many of you depart for summer.  We hope to be at that point by the end of this spring.

I would encourage our chair as well as our senators to get to know the Vice Chancellors and the Executive Officers in many different ways.  You know that Andy Willis represents us downtown.  I would share with you that since October 8, I have been actively meeting with Legislators in full view of the Office of the President and I think very appropriately so, not so much to introduce myself because I think you recognize that I know many of these people, but to talk about NC State’s Program, to talk about NC State’s ask if you will for the next Legislative session.  I thought this afternoon I would share just a little bit of that with you and ducktail this please with the understanding that we will obviously be fully supportive of the Office of the President’s priorities, and her priorities are enrollment increase funding which even the toughest of times as we told the bond people today, the Legislature has come through.  That is one of the few sources of new money that we have to grow and replenish existing programs of excellence and that is the number one priority coming out of the system.  The number two priority is faculty salaries, which we submit for two years and they have submitted for 7.5% increase for each of those two years.  Beyond that I have talked about some items of special interest to North Carolina State University and among those would be the William and Ida Friday Institute for Education.  You recognize I hope that the facility being built as we speak is entirely funded by gift donations to the tune of approximately $8.0M.  We are asking very definitively our General Assembly to fund the operational budget for that facility as well as programmatic money for that facility.  It is truly a statewide regional and national institute.  It will provide research and training not just for teachers to be, but I think very importantly and very uniquely retention of teachers.  The average teacher in North Carolina is in service about three and a half to four years and we must do something about not just the supply, but also the retention of that supply in the ranks of our teaching profession.  We are also talking about the Bio-manufacturing Training and Education Center, a facility that was funded to the tune of $33.5M from the Golden Leaf Foundation.  That facility is in corporation with the Community College System of North Carolina.  It again impacts the state in a very important area for the future economic development of this state ranging from work force preparation to working with industry in the biopharmaceutical and bio-manufacturing industries.  Again we have asked them for operational budgets so that we can operate a one of a kind facility as well as programmatic funding for that facility.

 I have also had some conversations relative to a program that I think many of you are familiar with and that is elementary education.  Do you recognize that we are the only institution in the system that does not have a program in elementary education?  Yet we are the expertise base of math and science education in the middle grades, higher grades as well as post graduate training in education. The Office of the President as well as the Wake County Delegation, the Johnston County Delegation, and the contingent counties are very interested in having this happen.  I have been talking about elementary education because I think all of you would recognize that there are two severe shortages in North Carolina that are talked about quite openly now and one is teachers across all the grades the other is nurses.  There is a significant nursing shortage.  There is not a whole lot NC State can do about that other than provide a sound biology background to someone that might want to do post graduate work or transfer to an institution that they finish off as a junior and a senior in a nursing program.  Those are the types of things that I am talking about along with equity adjustment for the Cooperative Extension Service and the Agricultural Research Service.  These two entities of our budget do not experience funding from enrollment growth aspects or campus initiated tuition increases.  Additionally through the years, as the state has whittled away at our budgets, they have certainly disproportionately whittled away at those two budgets.  While we want to restore competitive faculty salaries both on the campus and in the field, we particularly want to address the needs in the Cooperative Extension field faculty.    Last year in the last forty-eight hours of legislature you recognized that there were fourteen of the sixteen institutions who benefited significantly in that last forty-eight hours relative to bricks and mortar or capital projects.  We are very interested in having capital projects come to NC State University.  We have done some extensive Bond II planning, but we are not sure when that referendum will take place and we still have needs on this campus both on the Centennial Campus and the North Campus that we are addressing at this point rather diffusely with our legislative visits.  Tomorrow and the next day I will be attending a retreat at the Office of the President along with the other Chancellors in the system.  I have been asked to make a presentation.  That two-day retreat deals with topics ranging from the economic forecast for North Carolina, government relations, and lobbying.  The topic’s title is “Getting What You Want.”  We are going to meet with members of the General Assembly then there is a presentation on business and cooperate funding opportunities and I am participating with James Measer in that regard.  I hope you recognize that this is the twentieth anniversary of Centennial Campus, a real model, as it relates to a lot of things, not the least of which would be economic development.  I will be talking about the history and what we believe we have learned from Centennial Campus.  It is an amazing story over twenty years.  

Friday there is a Board of Governors Meeting and I anticipate at that meeting that we will see whether or not we will have an option to have a campus initiated tuition increase. You know that our Board of Trustees voted to reaffirm what they recommended last year and that was a three-year increase.  We will see how that plays out and I would share with you that if you have not seen that Chairman Wilson wrote to his board members encouraging them to vote against any type of a tuition increase, you would see that there is an uphill battle as it relates to that.  I have no way to predict how that will turn out. 

I hope you have seen the coverage in the press about Pell Grants.  I told our administrative groups yesterday that I am very concerned about that.  I think you are concerned about that and I can tell that our students are concerned.  If you are aware of the tax change that took place in December it will impact our students with financial need on this campus anywhere as little as $50,000 total to as much as $700,000 total.  There will be fewer people to qualify and the reason we have this range is we are not sure if and how the college fund of North Carolina can respond to that particular cut in Pell, if there is an offset that is fine for our in-state students who are eligible.  It will not help our out of state students who are Pell eligible and who are going to be cut in that regard. That is something I am going to be speaking to many people about locally but particularly federally because that is where you will impact the Pell loans.

Capital Campaign
Terry Wood yesterday shared some great news with the administrative team and I want to share it with the Faculty Senate.  You know as we have shared with the bond people who were on campus yesterday and today we are in the midst of a billion dollar capital campaign.  I don’t know of another land grant that does not have a medical school that is in a capital campaign of that magnitude.  We are at $670M with six months to go as it relates to the so call silent phase of that campaign and will go very public in September.  I am very proud of that, recognize the role that many of our faculty and staff have played in making contacts or in fact, having people be so impressed with the work that they are doing that they step forward and say I want to contribute to this program or I would like to endow this type of a chair for professorship.  You don’t do that through administrative activity.  You close those deals but it is the faculty that bring the intention to the institution and the program and I thank you for that. 

I will be traveling the state February, March, April, and May.  This is NC State University and not a tour to introduce Jim Oblinger as your Chancellor.  This is the impact of our people and our programs whether they are students or faculty or staff or alumni.  It will be regionalized intentionally and we will probably ask more than one or two of you in this room to accompany me on that trip so that real people in North Carolina will see real people from NC State.  It will already be equated to what is happening in their area or what has happened, the positive impact we have on students from those areas, business and industry in those areas, the environment in those areas, but it is not a tour to introduce Jim Oblinger.  It is a tour to reinforce the contribution that NC State University through its people and its program have had, have had, or having and will have on this great state and I am looking forward to it and hope that if you are invited that you will participate.  It means everything to those people that we call citizens of North Carolina and we can do what we do better than anyone else.  I would be happy to entertain any questions you might have.  Thank you for letting me speak to you on a variety of topics.  I like to do that from time to time.  If that is not appropriate in this body and you always want some type of set remarks I can accommodate that also. Thank you very much.”  

5. Issues of Concern
Former Chair Thomas Honeycutt sent an issue of concern regarding NC State’s position in the National Premium Table for Health Insurance.

Chair Daley assigned the issue to the Academic Policy Committee.

Senator Bruck:  “I raise this issue with a bit of a heavy heart.  I am compelled to do so due to the fact of the number of people that I have spoken to over the past month and a half.  The topic is undergraduate cheating.  I am going to refrain from talking about people, faculty, even departments or colleges because I have that information, but what I have become aware of which was brought to me as the chair of the Academic Policy Committee is the incidents not of sneaking a peek as we probably all did on the guy’s paper next door.  Formal organized group premeditated test substitution, text messaging exams, papers that are bought on campus for money, seniors who are writing term papers for lower classmen and of course one of the biggest ones is Internet plagiarism of term papers that are written and that is perhaps one of the areas that I am very naïve about because I require a lot of term papers.  I don’t want to raise a specter about this university.  Anybody who reads the Chronicle of Higher Education even the past six months has seen at least a half of dozen front-page articles about this.  I guess the only questions that I wish to raise is the “message” that we might be sending to our students if we ignore this particular topic.  If possible, I would like to have some sort of consensus of this body before venturing into this area.  Thomas Conway and I had a brief discussion about this and what I am telling you is that we have incidents on this campus right now by faculty that you all know that have received distinguished teaching awards where upward of twenty percent of their class have been forwarded to the judicial council this past semester for unmitigated really unchallengeable cases of premeditated fraud in those classes.   I don’t know what to say.  My job is to represent my constituency.  As I said I do not perceive this in my classes as being a problem and perhaps I am very naïve.  I would like to ask the chair to ask perhaps whether or not we plan or care to indulge in some sort of a formal non-antidotal investigation of where we stand as a university.  Is there a crisis?  I am not prepared to tell you that, some faculty would be able to and ultimately, what the long term implications are to a great university like this where indeed we pride ourselves on our integrity and the work that we do.”

Senator Young commented that the Office of Student Conduct, run by Paul Cousins told him that he is one of his best customers in the university for bringing students to his attention for violations of academic integrity.  “From my prospective the system is broken if a faculty member has to react to an incident of cheating because each student incident is approximately three days of faculty time.  One semester I brought approximately thirty-five students in my Introduction to Business class to the attention of the Office of Student Conduct for plagiarism.  That was it for me for the semester in terms of nothing else can get done except dealing with that.  The system is not set up for faculty to bring students to the attention of the Office of Student Conduct.  There are a lot of penalties for faculty who do that in terms of what is important, in terms of a faculty’s career who is interested in research and teaching who is not interested in being called a war criminal by parents, etc., who is not interested in being a problem on the Dean’s desk.  However, the learning take away from that is that the Office of Student Conduct is very helpful with faculty who can be proactive in training students to be sensitive to and avoiding that kind of behavior.  In my last semester, teaching that same class where one year ago thirty-five out of two hundred and fifty were brought to the attention of student conduct this semester approximately two were brought to the attention of the Office of Student Conduct and in the feedback that I get from students on their evaluations of each others performance in the class they are exquisitely sensitive to and teaching each other to avoid violations of academic integrity because it is something that I am very proactive about training them about in the class.  If we had to react the system is broken but the system at the Office of Student Conduct is very helpful for faculty wanting to be proactive in this regard.”

Senator Bruck stated, “Some of us, myself for instance, maybe I am not proactive, maybe I am not keeping my eye on the ball because I simply assume that this kind of behavior does not occur at this level.  A person who I will not mention, told me that they read a scholarly article several months ago where they did a national survey of undergraduates and interestingly the higher you got on that scale, the more “acceptable”.  I guess the question really is, “What is this message?”  Are kids going to get through a university education thinking that they can short cut for the rest of their life not having to take the test?  This is what concerns me. “

Chair Daley stated that he would take this issue to the Executive Committee and check with some of the administrators about what is happening and will report back to the Senate.

6. Resolution of Commendation
Senator Warren presented a Resolution of Commendation to former Interim Chancellor Barnhardt for its first reading.

Hearing no discussion on the resolution, Chair Daley called for a vote to adopt it.

The motion passed unanimously to adopt the resolution.

7. New Business
Facilities Forum
The motion was made and seconded to go into committee as a whole to discuss facilities. 

The motion passed unanimously.

Comments from Senator James Martin from PAMS
“I am a Chemistry Professor who has been here eleven years.  I do have experience in building; I have built lots of homes.  I don’t deal with big facilities like the infrastructure that we have here although I am quite fascinated by the relationship between the sociology of what gets done and the architecture that supports it and so my  context here is thinking about is our architecture telling us who we are and how to speak to that.  In that regard in 2001 I was quite intrigued when the plan of neighborhoods came out that we have all seen.  Again being a member of PAMS I was specifically curious where PAMS was.  I found out that PAMS, for the most part at the time we were localized here in Dabney, Cox,  did not even fall into a neighborhood.  I asked where we are in the Master Plan?  A college from my understanding was supposed to be an organization where people start to work together.  There are reasons to be together to cross our ideas but as we are increasingly scattered I wonder where in the Master Plan are ideas of collaboration versus no collaboration.  I look at the geography after Bond I and it does not help.  We may get Broughton Hall and so now we are beginning to see a corridor.  As we understand it we just recently heard that maybe there actually are some plans for a physical sciences corridor. So to some degree what I am raising here is a communication issue.  To some degree I am asking 'as we do our planning are we doing facilities organization in such a sense that we can look at this and say it makes sense why these people are together? That is something in the neighborhood concept could do. But like I show you here in PAMS where is the neighborhood?  It is not there.

The second issue of course is Centennial Campus. Particularly as a Research I University where allegedly we are to integrate teaching and research there is the whole transportation issue.  We have got a number of faculty who are going to be moving over to Partners III.  When it comes to teaching their class we are talking approximately forty-five minutes until they leave their building, get ready to teach, another forty-five minutes until they get back, that is an extra hour and one half for every one hour they are in class.  Students wanting to go to office hours?…It  will not happen.  It becomes difficult to nearly impossible until we solve the transportation issue. 

Rent is another issue.  We are paying so much in rent that we could fund the basic budget of probably two more departments.  I am talking the operating budget and not salaries.  We have got to find a way to develop a sustainable infrastructure.  This is an issue that needs to come to our attention in facilities planning.  How can we develop a sustainable funding situation so that overhead can actually be used for what overhead is suppose to be used for?  This is not unique to PAMS.  I believe this is true for a number of colleges. 

A further issue is Centennial Campus’s vision of the future.  This is off of the website for the Centennial Campus.  "Centennial Campus is NCSU's vision for the future."  I could not agree more. But a problem that we really do have is where does North Campus fit into this vision.  Do we have a connection between the academic departments and the Centennial Campus?  Are we creating a two-campus situation or are we creating a comprehensive university for the twenty-first century?    In the N&O we are frequently told that the future is Centennial Campus, as a person whose research is probably going to stay on the main campus for a long time because of my teaching responsibilities it is rather frustrating to hear that what is happening at NC State is happening on Centennial Campus.  I believe there are some very significant things happening in my laboratory on North Campus.  We have got to get a comprehensive vision if we want to move forward like Chancellor Oblinger stated. 

The Fox Teaching Labs - I would argue this has been a success in many respects.  One of the big successes was we planned ahead of time.  The planning was done before the bond money came and because of that we were able to hit the ground running.  We got construction done ahead of schedule and under budget.  The labs are fantastic.  The Fox Undergraduate Science Teaching lab however also gives us several problems.  One is if you saw the map, the Fox lab is about one quarter mile away from where most of the chemistry faculty reside.  That is what I would argue is the antithesis of what the mission of a Research I university is.  Our undergraduates taking courses over there do not see what is going on in research.  But exposure to research  is what we need to be doing if we are a Research I university.  Furthermore we have beautiful laboratories now that support our service courses.  This is a 2004 picture of where our majors get to take their courses.  We built new facilities for our service courses but we left our major courses back where they were in 1968; not in the twenty-first century.  We have to make sure we address this.  We have to make sure that our facilities reflect our mission of a land-grant university and a Research I university. 

Jordan Hall is supposed to be getting an addition.  Planning issues actually unlike the USTL are snagged here, with issues of parking hindering construction.  Parking should not hinder the construction of a facility where we need to be doing teaching and research.  It is a planning issue that I think is in contrast to what we had before with the Fox USTL building. 

The Harrelson problem: If anyone has ever taught in Harrelson you know that we really should have had more of a consultation with  faculty as to what needed to be done.  We would have seen right away that we needed replacement, not renovation.  It has taken us more planning and more time to get to that very conclusion, than if users were involved in the planning process.  Are we doing the same thing today to Broughton Hall?  We have been said that Broughton Hall is to be renovated for chemistry and research space.  Broughton Hall is not a conducive building for twenty-first century research as I have been told  by some of you who reside in Broughton .  It seems like we are repeating the Harrelson problem.  Not getting user input and thus trying to renovate  an impossible to renovate facility. This is an issue that I think good planning can avoid, and as a result save money, expense, and get better quality.

Finally let me mention the Dabney/Cox situation. Chemistry is largely in Dabney.  Cox will be vacated as Physics moves to Riddick Hall.  There has been $21M recommended for the renovation of Dabney in the Bond II. But what we don’t know as a participant, as a member of the chemistry faculty, is what goes into that.  Have we really addressed HVAC, etc.  We don’t know what went into that $21M because again we did not have user input.  From the outside of the building it looks great. But inside, there is more than a 10 degree C shift during a five-day period of time in my lab. .  As a chemist let me tell you that the rate of reaction approximately doubles every 10 degree C.  It is very difficult to do chemistry under these conditions.  You don’t see it on the outside and I would like to know if there is a way that this user input went into our planning and facilities design.  I don’t see that happening frequently.

Recommendations:

Develop a public and comprehensive vision and publicly communicate that.  We don’t just want to hear that it is happening on Centennial Campus.  We want to hear that it is happening at NCSU. 

We would like to create mechanisms where users have significant input into facilities planning and design, specifically with respect to safety and function. 

We would like to ensure as a principle of design that the architecture reflects our mission as a Research I Land-Grant University where teaching and research are integrated. 

We would like to develop policies that are sustainable for both facilities acquisition and renovation.

We clearly recognize that we must work within budget constraints, but never must be satisfied by them.“

Senator Baynes from the College of Veterinary Medicine noted that everything Senator Martin said about PAMS applies to the College of Veterinary Medicine.

Donn Ward, Interim Head of the Department of Food Science
“When you ever undergo a building renovation it is an all-encompassing experience that you live with for seemingly three or four years planning phase.  We are right in the midst of the renovation phase right now.  There have been some very positive things and very frustrating things.  You have to keep the bigger picture in mind and that is that we will be moving back some time this summer in a much enhanced, improved, more reliable facility.  I do feel that we had ample opportunity to have input into the design process.  The only fault I have with the process is I do not know how or who set the limits for what has been allocated to my facility versus someone else’s.  Our facility is a very complex facility.  We have laboratories.  We have classrooms, offices, a pilot processing facilities and we have an abundance of coolers and freezers and we have an operational dairy.  I would argue that there are few buildings on this campus that are as complex as Schaub Hall.  The boundaries were set and we had to live with them.  In the process of doing so we set up a series of meetings at the suggestion of the architect, the design firm that was hired, and Facilities Planning and Design in which we were encouraged to think big.  Our building was built in 1968.  What do we need now in the year 2003, 2004, 2005 which is as long as this goes on?  We then subdivided our faculty and staff into various groups and got their suggestions.   Everyone had input and everything was submitted.  The realities of the budget started to become very evident and then things had to be taken out.  The Building Committee was comprised of faculty and individuals from other departments.  The biggest problem we had was that we got caught at the wrong end of an economic cycle.  We bought our stocks high and we sold them low.  During the time that bids came in for our building the construction and fuel prices skyrocketed and things that we even thought that we were going to get we will not have when we return.   Frustrating, yes but I keep my mind and eye on the goal.  Infrastructure, temperature, and variations hopefully will be a lot more reliable.   I have worked well with facilities planning and design and Bob Fraser.  I cannot say enough good things about him and would not have his job for anything but he has helped us where he could and has told us where the line was drawn when he had to and we lived with it.  Thank you. “

Senator Blank stated that he supports both people’s comments.  The problems of the process based on his experience since 1976 on this campus is the sustainable culture of not doing a good job renovating buildings and building new buildings.  “I think that changing that culture is a real challenge and I hope that we can do that and I fully support all the recommendations to do that.   I was moved out of Thompkins Hall when it was renovated into the 1911 building and when I moved back into Thompkins my office was what’s now the mail room.  I had colleagues who could not stand in my office and talk with me because the ceiling was so low.  I survived the renovation of Page Hall.  They moved the Writing Assistance Program office four times while they renovated that building.  My point here folks is to hold on to your hats because they might not be there when you go back to pick them up.  I sincerely hope that we can change the culture and that the Bond II deals more effectively with what we want.”

Senator Bruck asked Vice Chancellor Leffler to comment about their attitudes regarding this matter. 

Vice Chancellor Leffler introduced Kevin McNaughton as the new Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities. 

Vice Chancellor Leffler stated that a number of issues have been discussed.  “If there is anything about facilities and facilities instruction that we all know is that there is no sure thing, nothing works out the way you think.  I think in a larger sense of the planning issues that were brought up concerning PAMS, we have moved a great deal from where we were twenty years ago to where we are today.  We have come a long way.  We update that master plan approximately every five years.  If you compare that version to the one five years prior to that you will see an enormous amount of difference in terms of the prospective that the campus brought to it.  Approximately 250 people from this campus had a hand in crafting that so it was very much a campus groomed thing.  Mike Harwood is going to start the next update of that plan and it will be an opportunity to refine a lot of these things.  We are going to work to do that and Kevin is going to work with Mike in that regard.  Do we learn something from every building that we build?  Yes we do our moves quite differently today, each time that we have done a building we have learned a lesson that we try to apply to the next building.  We are going to keep doing that.

It is important to say that the Building Committees that we establish for each project are appointed by the Chancellor but they are recommended by the Dean and the dean usually gets those names from the Department Head and that is how we structure that and most every Building Committee is dominated by faculty.  The key is to make sure that if you have an interest in a project to voice that to your department head so that they can voice it to the dean and you can be considered for one of those building committees because we want the people who are interested because they are the ones who will invest the time and try to get the right decisions made for us because we don’t know what you need in every case.”

Senator Martin stated that we need something prior to the Building Committee.  One of the things I am suggesting is that we need to make sure there is some user input at an earlier stage than just the Building Committee.

Vice Chancellor Leffler stated that we need to look at the master plan this time as opposed to what we did five years ago.

John Gilligan, Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Studies stated that the Centennial Campus Office has always maintained that concept of the neighborhood approach on Centennial Campus and also promoting the fact that partnerships on Centennial Campus are the primary ingredients to make things work.  There are different neighborhoods that have developed for one reason or another related to materials, modern technology, information technology so what you see are those types of areas developing over a period of time scattered with other developments where outside folks are coming in to put in office buildings for instance.  I think you are going to see a continuation of that.  Also everything that has gone out there has been built with resources associated with research dollars in one form or the other.  There is state money that goes out there as well.  Now with Engineering there will be more classrooms out there.  You will see a more combined approach to research and teaching in those buildings that have those services. “

Senator Martin stated that we also need the research quality buildings on main campus as classroom quality buildings go to Centennial Campus.  “We don’t just need classrooms going out we need the quality research on the main campus.”

Vice Chancellor Gilligan stated that one half of the money coming from the bond issue is going toward North Campus.  It is not all going to Centennial Campus.

Senator Warren stated that she has served on one of these committees and her experience from talking with other people is that there are very well run committees and very poorly run committees and that it is certainly a function of faculty but it is also a function of the people in planning who are working with those faculty members.  I appreciate the concept that the faculty are the experts but the faculty are certainly not experts in providing five years out for the number of students that will be coming into colleges and at what point those students are going to be moving in, and it was disturbingly ad hoc to guess how many officers, to guess how many classrooms, to have a conversation with computer lab, not computer lab and to have five faculty sitting there saying yea or nay on these things and some of that happened very much after the fact.  Those numbers should have been a check list up front with Planning and Analysis before faculty even sat down in that room to provide their sense of what their office needed to look like or what a seminar classroom needed to look like, that we can do but it was not an experience with another CHASS building which was beautifully run.  The Architecture Committee that was involved with that was great but I would say that our experience was not good.

Senator Tetro stated that when new students come to this campus, and when graduate students come they might be tapping what are you doing for research, where is the money being spent, how many millions of dollars you have in X, Y, and Z, but when our undergraduates comes they don’t take the bus to Centennial Campus.  I am sorry to have to say I am actually glad they don’t because otherwise they had planned to go to a city school.  The Centennial Campus is gorgeous, it is technical and it is structured.  It is also very cold right now.  It may grow trees and get warmer but at the moment it is very cold.  It doesn’t draw an eighteen year old to the campus.  My understanding is that there is never going to be a plan to have undergrads residing at Centennial.  The campus that I hope to focus on with more than half the money is the campus where those students will be living, 7,000 of them.  The dining halls where they will be living, the classrooms where they will be taking classes, the faculty offices where they will be visiting because most of them except for the College of Textiles students will be on this side of campus and this side of campus feels better to me because of what it looks like, how we design it, how we move it around, who gets to go where and how they get to go there.  To me those students do their walking tour of this side of campus.

Chair Daley and Secretary Weiner plan to take this information to the Executive Committee and have a discussion and follow-up on what the next step should be with the Resources and Environment Committee.

Senator Bernhard stated that the committee has already planned their next step.  He has invited Kevin McNaughton, Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities and Michael Harwood, University Architect to attend their meeting next week. 

8. Diversity
Senator Stephen Middleton
I am not representing any organized constituency at NC State.  I am not representing the Office of the Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs.  I am here as a private citizen of the university. 

As someone who has been at this university for sixteen years I do have a few concerns that I would like to put out into this body.  As I look at my college, my department, and other colleges at this university it seems clear to me that there are very few African Americans who are tenure track professors.  In some colleges there is only one African American who holds a position as a full professor.  In other colleges the African Americans who have been brought into the university, given a tenure track job, after serving for six years or more for whatever reason are not given tenure for reasons that are suspicious according to some of those professors who have been terminated.  I think that we have a problem.  In addition to this I think that we are missing a wonderful opportunity as a university in the south, a university in North Carolina.  NC State has the opportunity I would think to become a leading institution in this region, an institution where parents from around this country would say I want my children to attend NC State because NC State is a place where my children would learn to work with people who are different from them.  I think that we are missing a wonderful opportunity for employers when they seem to hire people to work for them they think of NC State not because our students are smart but also because our students have had experience in working with other people.  I want us to engage the subject of race and diversity.  Whenever I have brought the subject up in recent days a number of people seem to be uncomfortable with it, some are more comfortable with the subject diversity than they are with the subject race and I am not certain as to why that is.  To engage this subject I am proposing that we bring to campus a workshop for January 22, 2005.  I will bring to campus an outside consultant, not at the university’s expense by the way.  I would like to see if an outside consultant would help us engage this subject as a small group and we can determine where we want to go next with the subject of race and diversity here at NC State.  My request for you is a simple one.  I would like for some of you to attend this workshop.  It is scheduled for Saturday, January 22, 2005 at 12:30 p.m. and it will end at approximately 3 p.m.  The location for the meeting has not been determined.  I have identified the consultant.  Her name is Joel Martin. I will circulate a flyer as soon as I get a list of individuals who are interested in attending.  I would like to have representation from the Faculty Senate and would ask for your help in identifying your colleagues i.e., Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, other groups.  I would like for this group to be as diverse as possible.  In fact, I would like to have it as a multicultural meeting and would like your help identifying some of these groups who would be willing to attend. 

I want to share with you why this is important to me.  I know that slavery was a long time ago and for some people segregation was a long time.  I grew up in rural South Carolina during the era of segregation.  Like my mother and father on my birth certificate the word “colored” appears and as you look at me I am not ancient.  As I was growing up as a boy many of us got jobs clearing Rocks Pond Camp Ground.  The person who was building the campground at the time did not refer to us by names.  He referred to all of us as dillies.  As I matured into my early teens, a shopkeeper hired my brother and me to work.  He decided that we should not take a lunch break so he went to the store to get sweet rolls for us so we could eat and continue working.  My brother and I protested that we wanted to take at least a lunch break and he told my brother and me, you all don’t know who you are.  He said that you are African Chinches.  I have come to determine that what he meant was that I was an African Monkey and therefore we did not deserve a break.  The subject of race is one that still haunts me.  I am not angry or bitter, that is not what I am trying to say here but the experience of living in a society that is segregated is still with me and whenever I look at university management teams and I see very few individuals who look like me I just have to wonder what’s wrong.  Does it mean that there is something wrong with people who look like me whenever I look at various colleges and I can’t find any teens who look like me I am wondering what that means and I am wondering if our students have the same impression. 

The meeting once again is January 22.  I am bringing in an outside consultant.  My request to you is to let me know if you are willing to attend and also to help identify individuals who might be interested.  We simply want to engage the subject of race and diversity.  Maybe there is nothing there.  If there is nothing there we will find out but I think an outside consultant will help us determine this.

Senator Young stated that they have a business ethics society in the College of Management and they are hosting the NCSU Equal Opportunity workshop on diversity Thursday, February 17 from 6-9 p.m.  I am curious, over the years I have been exposed to many ACSU Diversity activities and I am curious if you have experienced NCSU diversity activities and found them deficient in some way, which leads you to want to bring in, an outside consultant rather than take advantage of the institutional programs offered here at NC State.

Senator Middleton stated that he has not taken the advantage of those programs that have been sponsored here at the university.  I have talked with some individuals who have attended some of them.  My aim is not to simply have a discussion of race but to actually find a way for people to talk about the subject in a productive way.  From my experience if you simply have a discussion of race without a skilled facilitator to help manage the discussion it is quite possible that such a discussion could become disruptive, to answer your question no.  The reason why I think Joel Martin will be able to help you is because she has extensive experience in engaging an audience in controversial issues and helping them find ways to interact with each other in a way that is productive. I think we can do that in a way that will make our conversations more fruitful.

Senator Bruck stated that we have Vice Provost for Diversity on campus.  I have read in the Technician and elsewhere about a number of programs that are going on.  Is there and inference here that somehow those are ineffective?  I hate to see a dichotomy start where you have different organizations trying to create the same thing.

Senator Miller stated that he is not representing any constituency whatsoever.  I have had conversations with Dr. Picart about my interest.  He will attend this workshop.  I don’t know what will go beyond this workshop but once again I have had some experience with Joel.  I think the university will benefit from her and who knows what the outcome is going to be.  I have no agenda whatsoever and I am not trying to predict the outcome.  I just believe having an outsider might be beneficial.   I am not making a judgment about Dr. Picart.   I think he is a wonderful man doing a wonderful job with a very difficult subject.  Once again when we deal with difficult subject I think sometime it is worth while to bring someone in from the outside who could help facilitate and management the discussion.

Vice Provost Thomas Conway stated that he chaired the committee that brought Dr. Picart to campus.  I think one of the messages that he has been consistent with is that he does not want to be the diversity Tzar that if it is not his effort nothing is happening.  In my ongoing dialog with him as an individual, with him in his professional capacity I don’t think he is going to have a problem with any other faculty member bringing to the table some prospective on this that maybe useful to the university.  I don’t think we are looking at an issue of conflict here, I think we are looking at one of hey it is a good idea for someone else to be willing to step up and offer some willingness to take responsibility.

9.  Reports
Senator Bruck, Chair of the Academic Policy Committee reported that he met with the Staff Senate to discuss the tuition remission resolution.  They in turn passed unanimously the same resolution.  He has met with Provost Nielsen to discuss the next steps. Provost Neilsen and Senior Provost Perry is going to be moving through the next investigative stages to figure out how they can make such a thing happen.

The Committee received a reply from Dean Sowell regarding the TOEFL situation.  It was determined at the last meeting that the response was unsatisfactory.  He has invited Dean Sowell to the next committee meeting.

He received a preliminary reply from Dean Sowell regarding the issue of PhD Exam attendance.  This will be a subject of additional discussion at the Academic Policy Committee’s meeting.

10.  Adjournment
Chair Daley adjourned the meeting 5 p.m.

Footer Nav