Left Navigation

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

 

JANUARY 10, 2006

Regular Meeting No. 9 of the 52nd Session

Present:  Chair Allen, Secretary Bruck, Past Chair Daley, Parliamentarian Corbin; Provost Nielsen; Senators Baynes, Blair, Blank, Branoff, Clark, Culbreth, Dawes, Fahmy, Fauntleroy, Fikry, Hanley-Bowdoin, Hudson, Kellner, Kinsella, Krotee, Lindbo, Moore, Overton, Robarge, Scotford, R. Smith, Tetro, Williams, Wessels, Yencho

Excused: Brownie, Gustke, Hooper, Martin, Schultheis, Smith 

Absent:  Senators Banks-Lee, Khosla, Young

Visitors:   Katie Perry, Senior Vice Provost; P.J. Teal, Secretary of the University, Melissa Watkins, Chair, Staff Senate; Zachary Adams, Student Senate ProTempore; Suzanne Weiner, Library Administration, Peggy Hoon, Scholarly Communications Librarian; Cheryl Davis, TRLN Doctoral Fellow, Libraries; L. George Wilson, Professor, Horticultural Sciences; Ellis Cowling, University Distinguished Professor AT-Large; Barbara Carrol, Associate Vice Chancellor, Human Resources; Luke Bierman, Institute for Emerging Issues; Lee Fowler, Athletics Director; Catherine Warren, Associate Professor, Department of English;  Karen Helm, Director, University Planning and Analysis

1.  Call to Order
Chair Nina Strömgren Allen called the ninth meeting of the fifty-second session of the North Carolina State University Faculty Senate to order at 3:00 p.m.

2. Welcome and Announcements from the Chair
Happy New Year!  I hope you are all ready for another semester. 

Please note that there is a change in the General Faculty meeting.  President Bowles will be here February 23, not February 14 to speak at the General Faculty Meeting.  The meeting is in the Stewart Theatre.   Please come and bring with you other faculty in your colleges.  It should be informative and interesting.

That brings me to a point that has been brought up by several people about communications from senators to faculty.  Be sure that you have effective communication lines in place within each college.  Some of us do it well, others not so well.

I noticed in today’s N&O that UNC Chapel Hill again was ranked first as the best educational value in the land by Kiplinger’s personal finance.  We are also ranked high in that venue.

Announcement from Melissa Watkins, Chair of the Staff Senate
Melissa Watkins, Chair of the Staff Senate stated that when they went to the Gulf Coast in December it went over so well that they are being charged to go again this spring.  They are planning another trip on Friday, March 3 and will return on Tuesday, March 8.  Since they will be traveling during spring break she hopes that possibly some faculty and more students will be able to go.  Melissa noted that fourteen individuals went during the fall and worked with three firemen in helping rebuild their homes that were damaged in the flood.

Emerging Issues Forum
If you would like to attend the Emerging Issues Forum, Vernice Stevenson will be receiving applications for scholarships that have been kindly provided by the Provost’s Office.  You will receive a notice by email.

3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 8, November 29, 2005
The motion passed unanimously to approve the minutes.

4. Remarks from Provost Neilsen
Welcome to 2006 in the start of a new academic term. 

More than a year ago the deans stated that they thought academic units should be driving the institution’s plan and process.  That led to the development of some things we talked to you about over the last year.  At the same time we realized that we didn’t have a strategic plan that was up to date for the institution so we began to talk with the executive officers and others about how we might start to build this strategic plan.  We have produced in a draft document some thoughts about what we are as an institution and that is what Karen is going to talk to you about today, which is just the start of this whole process.  We want to get some conversation going on this 5,000-look level at our institution.  A strategic planning process has to be bottoms up and top down.  It has to be both and not one or the other.  So what we have begun is some of the top down thinking that we hope can inform now some of the bottom up thinking that will subsequently follow where we need to go as an institution generally and specifically.  The intention here is that this is just a start.  I would also add compact planning is the implementation planning process that we have been using for the last five years and will continue to use in a different form over the next four years. 

We had a three-year compact planning period and then we had a year where we suspended all of that and then Provost Oblinger put us on track for another three-year compact planning process.  We have been treating it as a year-by-year thing within a three-year context.   We are now operationally in the second year of that three-year time interval that we define as second cycle of compact planning. The 2006-07 fiscal year will be the third of that three-year block.  Our intention this year is to do a very simple iteration on the compact plans that exists now and ask the deans and unit leaders to think about what they have had in the past two years and what they think they want to accomplish for the 06-07 year, which would complete a three year cycle and then we would use the strategic plan that we have begun to put together as the vision to help guide the formation of the next three-year compact plan for the institution.  The three-year plan would take effect from 2007 to 2010 time period.  We would spend an extended period starting maybe late this spring through probably the end of 2006 getting prepared for doing the compact planning for a three-year cycle that would start in 07 and go on for three years.  The strategic plan that we are talking about is really setting the stage.  The parts of the strategic plan that you have gotten so far and that we are asking feedback on right now will be the beginning of what will be the process at least to the compact planning for the institution for that three year period. 

I just want to get across to you that this is more than just some words to be put on paper and then every body salutes and go off and do our own thing.  It is intended to be the formation of the NC State vision for where we want to go in the future.

The Pack Promise is our commitment to provide the right environment so that our students can succeed well and will know and have the resources they need to stay in school and graduate.  We will be implementing for 06-07 a version of the pack promise, which, will assure 100% financial aid needs, met for the lowest category of income students at the university.  That is people whose family income is no more than 150% of the federal poverty level. 

Unlike Carolina, which through their process assured a debt free meeting of financial need we do not have the resources to do that.  We have to provide for some debt and our target is no more than $2500 in an academic year for these students.  If the program didn’t change and it didn’t get any better over the next four years those students would accumulate a maximum debt load of $10,000, which is well below the average four-year institution right now.

For 07-08 we will add to this program the second level of family income of 220% of the federal poverty level.   The same situation, $2500 maximum loan.  In addition we will institute to provide additional advising services to students that are covered under this pack promise to assure them of the perspective, the knowledge that they need, someone to talk to that can deal with the whole variety of things that affect them relative to their success.

I think we know that a good deal of the students who would be covered by this program will be first generation college students and so they are not necessarily embedded in the culture that your children are who have lived in a college environment, understood what it was about and had the concept that they could succeed. 

We will be sitting aside 25% of the work study money to be put into a program that links students with faculty in a work in their lab, do research context of some kind, but the idea would be just not to provide the money to sit in someone’s office and copy papers or run errands across campus but to actually use those dollars to support our institutional goals as it relates to involving students.  One thing we know is the more involved you get students right in the beginning with some adults the more successful I’m going to be. 

Thursday at noon in Stewart theatre is our Martin Luther King Jr. commemoration lecture and the speaker is Naomi Tutu who is the daughter of Desmond Tutu.  I hope you will come. 

The first of the millennium seminars will be March 15 at 2 p.m. in Nelson auditorium.  The speaker will be Ken Thompson who is the CEO of Wachovia Bank.  I encourage you to attend.  We will be encouraging faculty to see if they can use that lecture as part of their classes.

In the fall the first millennium speaker will be David Gurgin who is a political guy. He has the distinction of having served in both democratic and republican white houses.  We are working on some other very interesting speakers, which includes having Madelyn Albright scheduled also for the fall. 

Senator Krotee wanted to know how many people are we projected for the Pack Promise.

Provost Nielsen responded, a couple hundred.  “We had to juggle our financial aid a little bit to put more resources down there.  We have been covering approximately 88% of the financial need of that lower group and now we are going to 100% but we are also reducing the amount of loan that they had been getting and giving them more grant and aid and more work study.  You will recall that in our tuition recommendations to the Board of Governors which we certainly hope will pass, we required 50% of the increase in tuition to offset the increase in cost for the students that are needy but we are putting another 5% of those revenues into financial aid and that 5% is going to be very useful to close most of the gap that we need to fund these students.”

Zachary Taylor, Student Senate President ProTempore wanted to know if the students would have to maintain a certain GPA.

Provost Nielsen stated that the grant and aid package that any particular student gets will be individualized.  Some of these students may have grant dollars that are associated with a merit-based scholarship out of their colleges or departments.  In that context we would use that money as part of the coverage.  If a student had a scholarship and in the second year he or she didn’t qualify for it anymore the internal program would make that up.

Secretary Bruck stated, “We seem to be reaching a point where we have another layer of people that are no longer considered adults, that they are free to deal with their own problems yet there isn’t enough money for them to get through.  How do we take care of these students financially?”

Provost Nielsen state that there are a lot of rules that govern how you decided how much need a student has and also their family income relative to their need.  “I don’t know what our situation is for that student who is in that predicament who is for whatever reason disaffected from their parents and I’m not sure it’s our responsibility as an institution to deal with that.   There are always going to be cases where the system doesn’t provide for that particular need and it is a concern.  Julie Mallette and her staff hold those sorts of things on a case-by-case basis and I’m sure we don’t get it all done. 

5. Remarks on Strategic Planning
Introduction of Karen Helm, Chair Nina Allen
Karen Helm is Director of University Planning and has agreed to come and interact with us today.  Thank you for doing so.

Today we will look at the Strategic Plan as posted on the NCSU website and sent to you from the Senate office. I hope you had time to think about it and about how NC State best positions itself for the future. I always tell my students that they should have a five-year plan of where they want to go and what they want to be five years hence. It does help you to get there to focus your thinking and we need to do that too with as much knowledge about the world and ourselves as we can muster.

I appreciate very much the comments about the process that the Provost just made and I know that Karen Helm has worked very hard on this plan with the committee.

The committee that wrote this had little faculty input at first. Later Cat Warren, John Ocko and I were put on the committee and met twice with Deans and officers to rewrite the original document.

The Executive Committee was asked to look over the draft plan and we did so hurriedly just before Christmas. We discussed the plan at length and then Cat Warren took our input and revised the plan. Cat Warren was at that point added to the smaller writing committee headed by Karen Helm. We pleasured at a great deal of what the Executive Committee had recommended. 

Some faculty members have asked what the purpose of this document is..how will it be used. Will it be followed by a longer and more carefully researched document? How does it and compact planning interact? The Provost has addressed those issues.

At your place is a thoughtful reflection on the plan by Jim Martin, who could not be here today.

So Karen, we thank you for coming today and we will listen to what you have to say and then I hope we can have fruitful dialogue.

Remarks from Karen Helm, Director of University Planning & Analysis
Why a Strategic Plan Now?  I think the Provost did a good job of discussing that but I would like to also mention that Chancellor Oblinger recognized the need for a consistent message that he could deliver to external consistencies like President Bowles as well as the General Assembly, a consistent message externally as well as internally. In addition, Vice Chancellor Terry Wood coincidentally embarked on a new marketing plan for the university and immediately everyone saw that there was a need to develop a marketing plan that was consistent with the strategy the university would adopt.  Internally the Provost has talked about the need for a strategic plan to help him manage resources so that we can invest strategically consistent with the vision of the institution. Vice Chancellors Gilligan and Leffler have also talked about the need to make investments consistent with the academic direction of the university so it was time for a strategic plan to provide some common direction for all of these reasons. 

As the Provost mentioned, there were several pieces in place when we started this discussion last summer.  We have an existing mission statement that almost everyone agreed was satisfactory as is, we didn’t need to go back to square one.  The deans had been working on an academic vision and trying to identify academic priorities and so the task seemed to be more of a matter of knitting together various pieces that already existed and clarifying and focusing the vision behind the strategic plan. 

There was a small group including the Provost, a couple Vice Chancellors and deans who started knitting these pieces together.  I was very happy to have Cat Warren join the drafting group at the end of the last semester.  That group took on the task of putting together something that a larger planning group could consider and that group has met twice.  That group consists of the Executive Officers, the Deans, Chair of the Faculty, Cat Warren, and John Ocko representing the faculty viewpoint and now we are at a point where we are looking for campus input.  Any input that we receive by January 17 we will be able to use to develop the next draft of this strategic plan for consideration by the university council on January 23 but I am sure we will take all comments until this document is finally laid to rest no matter when it happens, but do keep in mind that the further we go down this path the more the draft will incorporate negotiated language and it will become harder and harder to change.  Our goal is to complete this strategic plan by spring.  The plan would be used by the Chancellor to interact with external audiences including the President, General Assembly.  Others can use it on campus to encourage the development of programs and services that are consistent with the vision that is incorporated in this plan.  It can be used to identify priorities for investments.

The current draft has four parts to it.  These are the key points in the vision statement.  “It is a vision of NC State as an innovative institution. Culture innovation is the hallmark of NC State.  From my point of view an essential dimension of our land-grant mission.  The reason or fundamental purpose is to transform lives, to give young people a chance to change their lives so that they have a better future and it’s a land grant institution.  Our mission is also to make a difference in the life of communities in North Carolina and other places that share the kinds of problems that we have in our state.  Engagement sometimes thought of as a buds word or the current buds word for extension or the current leading edge of extension is something that our group felt was characteristic of all three missions; teaching, research, and extension that we are engaged with the people that we serve, the communities that we have served.  We don’t simply do research in a vacuum.  We relate to real issues facing real people.  Our vision is to be a leader among institutions. 

Maybe one hundred years ago or more it was Chapel Hill’s time, it was time for a liberal arts, traditional liberal arts institution to train ministers and lawyers and such but now the world needs an institution that is fully engaged with communities and people and actively involved in making the world a better place.  Division also includes a commitment to looking at North Carolina in the global context.  North Carolina’s problems are the world’s problems.  The world’s problems are North Carolina’s problems.  We cannot separate ourselves from the rest of the world. 

The next portion of the strategic plan is these investment priorities.  We have tossed around different labels for this section clearly the most important goal is to develop an outstanding and diverse faculty.  My view is that the university emerges from the faculty.  The faculty are the ones who develop new research programs so in a very real way the leading edge of the university comes directly from the faculty.  It is not something you can decide at a central point.  The quality of the university depends on the quality for the faculty. 

Another investment priority is to grow aggressively in strategically chosen areas where our strengths are well match with opportunity.  It is important to build excellence in the liberal arts.  All great universities have developed a more comprehensive collection of academic programs than NC State has and we have a growing recognition that the liberals are essential to being an engaged university.  Many of the problems that we are trying to address through extension and research cannot be fully solved unless we take into consideration ethical issues, social issues and so forth.  Strong liberal arts programs are essential to our fundamental mission as a land grant research university.

An Enriched Undergraduate Experience
An emerging role in public policy as a land grant we begin our extension effort by developing direct and local service in communities across North Carolina.  The Centennial Campus boosted our opportunity to develop partnerships by bringing our partners on to campus and this vision includes yet another role for NC State in coming to the public policy table and bringing our expertise and knowledge to critical public policy issues facing the state. 

Another investment priority is K-12 science and mathematics education in recognition of a dire need faced by the state of North Carolina, finally recognition that the physical infrastructure, the very place where we do our work is an essential component of developing a strong academic community. 

In addition to these investment opportunities we recognize that there are a number of important characteristics that make NC State what it is.  Certainly multiple perspective, broader perspective, global perspective, perspectives of multiple kinds, cultures, and races coming together to enrich the intellectual discourse at NC State. 

Access
We provide many unique programs in the state of North Carolina.  It is important that we maintain access for students who don’t have another university to go to if they have an academic interest that is unique here.  We also want to make sure that we provide access to underrepresented groups and the notion of access also applies to research and extension.  We want to make the knowledge that we create accessible to our external constituencies.  We wanted to recognize that NC State plays a flagship role in science, engineering and math.  It is our focus that defines our role within the UNC system and it is also central to the success of our graduates.  A core strategy, something that we do because of our fundamental nature, we are focused on making subsidence contributions to real problems in the state of North Carolina and elsewhere and we are committed to basic research.  We recognize that some faculty and students are drawn to fundamental questions of science and other disciplines and it is necessary to support those disciplines in order to support the development of solutions to tomorrow’s practical questions. 

External partnerships have always been a very important characteristic of NC State and unlike many other institutions we remain committed to interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary activities.  We want to encourage and innovative administrative environment. 

The Provost described quite well the up coming planning process.  I would like to describe planning not as a lineal process where we decide what our long-range goals are and then build in additional specificity.  I prefer to think of it as a circular process.  In my view it doesn’t really matter which part of the circle we jump in.  We could start at the top down or we could start at the bottom up but if we keep the circle going eventually we will have all parts to our strategic plan as well as the kind of details that are necessary to make it work. 

Questions and Comments
Past Chair Daley:  Are there plans to have college and departmental forums to discuss the strategic plan.

Helm responded not at this time. She thinks it is a good idea either now or as compact plans come up and we revise the strategic plan with the details that come from colleges.  She noted that one or both would be a good idea.

Chair Allen:  If there were some way to better incorporate better faculty input into compact planning that would be important.

Helm:  That is something we have always put into the instructions.  Please involve your faculty and tell us how you have involved your faculty.  My observation is that it is hard to legislate from my office and it is something that does or doesn’t take place and how it takes place varies by department and college but I would love to have your advice about how to make that happen because I think it is essential.

Senator Robarge:  How would we as Senators respond to a question from the ordinary faculty member that says, “Why should I even bother this?  How is this going to directly impact my day to day assistance at this university?”

Helm:  My view is there should be plans at the department level that would have perhaps the greatest impact on your day-to-day existence as you and your colleague decide where your department is going and that feeds into your college and that feeds into the university.  Coming back down the non-lineal circle if you will, the Provost, Vice Chancellor for Research, and others at the university level and at the college level are making decisions every day to have an impact.  I think it is important that we find ways to solicit and pull faculty viewpoints into a collective discussion about where we are headed as an institution.  It is hard to do with 30,000 people in our community but I think it is worth your time even if your planning went no further than your department.  I think your collective department would benefit from a well-founded understanding and agreement consensus around where you are headed as a group.

The strategic plan has already been having an effect on the task force that is planning to make recommendations about the general education requirements, some of the principles in the strategic plan about a better-integrated undergraduate experience that bridges academics and student affairs active learning and international component.  Those because they are in the strategic plan have filtered to that task force and have affected the discussion about what the future general education program will be like. 

Senator Moore:  As this plan evolves at some point and time will there be measurable outcomes associated with each goal so that we can measure our progress.

Helms responded that that would be her goal.

Provost Nielsen commented that two sure things that we are going to do a little differently than was done before are 1) There is usually a step in the strategic planning process for an environmental scan.  We will be developing a set of information to inform the platitude.  There are a lot of things about that, for instance strategically where should we increase enrollment.  Where is the need, where is the payback, where are the students?  2) The need for the executive officers to think about this place as a university and not as a set of functions that they oversee.  This is particular for a subset of the executive officers that would include me, Gilligan and research and graduate studies, Jim Zuiches, incoming Vice Chancellor for Extension and Engagement and Economic Development and Tom Stafford in Student Affairs.  The others are also important but that group of four dealing with the admission elements of the institution and the student elements of the institution.  We are going to be operating the compact planning process this spring on a trial basis and the next iteration where all of this stuff is coming together for review by all of the executive officers.  As we do that we hope that we will see themes that come out that say this is where all of us should be investing our programs, the dollars that we invest, the time and the accountability. 

Helm stated that there is always a tension between the level of generality between being too general and too specific in these processes.  “I am observing it in the process that is going on now in favor of a general 5,000 feet view kind of strategic plan the way it is now.  Who would want to discourage a faculty member with a good idea but whose idea doesn’t really fit in this strategic plan?  That might be just the thing that we should do as an institution and it is really hard to know that from this vantage point.

Another good reason to have a general plan is so that we can adapt to changing circumstances.  On the other hand, a plan that never gets specific is not very useful providing guidance to the decisions that are made.  I think that is an issue where the larger planning group has not really wrestled with that and different purposes push us in one end of the spectrum or another. 

Provost Nielsen stated that it is also important for us to remember that staff and students are very important parts of our university constituency.  It is not just executive officers.  There are things that relate to this plan that will deal with staff and student issues. 

Secretary Bruck stated that he thinks this is good but one thing that is missing is communication with the faculty that this is a framework for the strategic plan.  Perhaps this should be put on the web page. If people knew that in a more clear sense it would put them more at ease that this is a process. 

Chair Allen:  You state under core strategies that NC State is distinguished not only by its achievements and contributions but also by the way you do business.”  What is that all about?  The word “business” rubs me the wrong way. 

Karen Helm stated that she would not get hung up on the word “business” because what is special about NC State has to do with how we do what we do.  “I apologize if I grabbed a word like “business”, which is not popular.  Our land grant mission is not just doing agriculture and doing engineering.  It is about serving people and communities and relating to real problems which is something that can be done in any discipline so it was an attempt to say that our mission and our vision is not prescribed by a single discipline or by a single group of students.  It has something to do with the way we do things. 

Cat Warren:  I think that the concept of entrepreneurial in business actually has pervaded some of the conversation that I have heard in the large meetings.  I think that as faculty a number of us don’t particularly enjoy that framework or think that it is a great way to frame this university. I think my general feedback that I got is that this remains for too many faculty members a kind of public relations document that indeed describes a certain kind of aspiration, that we are flexible, nimble, innovative, over these things that ultimately getting down to the strategy of we’ve got problems, we have things that we need to deal with.  I have a lot of people who actually aren’t willing to give feedback because they see this as more of a marketing press release at this point than a strategic vision.  I am giving you a global sense that I have gotten in conversation since this came out.

Helm:  I too and I think the Provost as well are both uncomfortable with developing a strategic plan that is purely out of our minds and dreams without much fact behind it but I really feel that it is very important to take this to the next step based on what we hear from departments and colleges about their aspirations rather than trying to refine it from the top.

Barbara Carroll, Vice Chancellor for Human Resources:  To the Provost’s point I think that you are explicit in the draft developed, having a very strong engaged faculty, having a very strong engaged student group you should not be implicit about having a very strong engaged staff against probably something we should be explicit about.  I think it should be part of our strategic vision and it represents a huge chunk of the institutions annual resources so it shouldn’t just be assumed.

Senator Clark:  When we are looking at some of the areas we want to work in a question is, “Why just math and science when there is a shortage of all areas of education, and the other question is, it is very much teacher focused and I’m not so sure that making more teachers is going to actually improve math and science, but we need to look at more of a community aspect, working with communities and educating communities not just particularly toward just teachers.  I think there is a broader appeal to this than just math and science. There is nothing wrong with focusing on science and math because it is a need.”

Senator Kellner:  This document seems to be overlaid with a very rosy picture of the situation of NC State which is not what in several years here in the Senate I have been hearing, which is challenge after challenge and issue after issue.  It seems to me that with this sort of language which is good for marketing the university and good for rallying the faculty from time to time, the question is, why do you need a strategic plan if essentially this is the university that North Carolina needs and it needs more of what we provide which is what was laid down in 1862.  It seems to me that getting from here to here which is what a strategic plan might be about is only possible if you have a good description of the first here and then you will know where you want the second here to be and whether you can get there and how you can get there. 

Helm:  I tend to agree.   What you say makes me think a bit about different versions for different audiences.  When I look at this from the Chancellor’s perspective he is thinking I want to talk to the General Assembly.  He wants to say all the great things that we are doing and be careful how he couches the need. 

Senator Baynes:  How can this document separate itself from a similar document from UNC, UC Davis, or Penn State?  What makes us unique as NC State?

Senator Yencho:  When I look in the dictionary there are a number of definitions for engaged so could you please tell me what engaged is in this context?  Perhaps you might want to explicitly define NC State’s definition of engaged.

Helm:  The discussion has been about one notion is being actively involved outside the institution working with communities, individuals, clients, constituencies, etc., on real problems to make a contribution and improve the human condition or individual lives.  Another important concept that we discussed was that it is not just extension and public service and it involves teaching and research as well so that teaching pulls in active learning and service learning.  Research focuses in many areas on the real problem.

Senator Dawes:  Looking at this document, I have been here sixteen years and it doesn’t look a whole lot different from the documents that we have had in the past.  You talk about liberal arts and humanities but in the undergraduate context.  I wonder in our program if we are going to indeed increase the number of graduate programs in CHASS or not.

Helm:  I think that is a very important part that the planning group has not wrestled with.

Tetro:  I’m curious and I have asked someone from education to verify this with me.  When we are strengthening the K-12 science and math and we talk about engagement it’s my understanding that when we added this to NC State we divorced ourselves from our engagement with Meredith College where we had students completing their elementary education degrees in conjunction with NC State so that when we had students coming to state whose desires were to become elementary teachers they chose a curriculum outside of education most often in CHASS and then completed their certification and they were certified as elementary and instructors although their focus was in science and math.  When we bought into this way we constructed this and  we completely deconstructed that other so that we can now no longer say to interested undeclared undergraduates that you could stay here and finish that degree.  Some clarification about what we are not going to do needs to be out there too.

Senior Vice Provost Perry stated that that was not put off from anyone who was already here.

Tetro:  I am saying that we have disengaged from the process that has been place for the last twenty plus years.

Senior Vice Provost Perry stated that anybody who was here at the point that that was still in place is able to utilize it.  

Senator Tetro:  We need to be very clear that it is not available. 

Professor Ellis Cowling:  With respect to the question of what we mean by engagement I suggest that active listening by faculty and staff is a very important part of engagement and that means listening to the people of North Carolina and so I hope that we can more often get out and listen to what the people of North Carolina wants to do. 

Today is the tenth of January.  Karen is asking for things by the seventh.  We have seven days to meet her initial deadline.  She said that she would listen to us if we send them to her next year but she would be glad if it comes in on the seventeenth.  In the seven days remaining I suggest three sources of information that senators could use that would be valuable in suggesting input into this strategic planning process.  Those three sources are as Chair Allen has already suggested; the reports of the emerging issues forums.  The chairman is here today and he is the leader of the Institute of Emerging Issues.  There are twenty reports already in existence of emerging issues that I think many of us would find valuable in thinking about what the people of North Carolina want and need. 

The other thing I would like to commend for your awareness is the recent report, the 2005 scorecard report of the North Carolina Progress Board.  This report defines eighty-four different quality of life indicators for North Carolina.  It also shows our national and regional rankings in fifty-one of those eighty-four different categories of quality of life for the state of North Carolina.  If you approach the Progress Board Report (ncprogress.org) and look for their 2005 report you can see those assessments and you can see where we rank.  It is amazing how many of the areas they define as critical needs. 

The last thing I would like to suggest that we be aware of is the report entitled University Program Partnerships for Economic Development:  Strategic Issues White Paper written in 1997 by Eva Klein.  When Marye Anne Fox was appointed as Chancellor we visited with her about this report and she dismissed it as a job shot product.  I do not consider this to be a job shot product.  I would be very happy to share this copy and if we can make at least the executive summary of this remarkable analysis of the distinctive characteristics of North Carolina state university in what she thought then it would take to develop more effective partnerships for economic development which has now been added to our principle goals of our university and when we talk about strategic planning we are going economic development to our strategic plan; we are going to make some adjustments in how we invest our resources in this university, our faculty times and our faculty energies. 

6. Issues of Concern
Secretary Bruck stated that three of the past five years all SPA employees and all twelve-month EPA employees have as part of their compensation received 10 days of “bonus” leave.  “Why are nine-month EPA employees who do not get vacation leave not included in this bonus leave package if this is part of the overall compensation of faculty, staff, and employees throughout the state?”  That is an issue of concern that was brought to me and I am bringing it to the senate.

Chair Allen assigned the issue of concern to the Personnel Policy Committee. 

Senator Tetro stated an issue of concern about LA (late) grades this year.  She noted that this year we had 4,000 late grades. 

Chair Allen assigned the issue of concern to the Academic Policy Committee.

Senator Blank stated that an issue of concern came to him about REG 05.20.8 concerning evaluation of faculty outreach in the scholarship of extension and engagement.  A number of extension faculty members made him aware that they are very much concerned about the change in the wording. 

Chair Allen assigned the concern to the Personnel Policy Committee.

Zachery Adams, Student Senate President ProTempore stated that the Student Senate is concerned with the recurring money problems with students and wonders why the university doesn’t incorporate financial management issues into E101 or First Year College introductory courses teaching students how to manage their money so that it is not such a concern later on. 

Chair Allen assigned the issue of concern to the Academic Policy Committee.

7.   Old Business
REG 01.25.03 - Copyright Regulation

Suzanne Weiner presented the regulation on copyright to the Senate for approval.

Provost Nielsen stated that he believes they have done in this copyright revision exactly what the faculty wanted done. 

A motion was made and seconded to approve the regulation.  The motion passed unanimously.

8. Reports
Governance Committee
Senator Aaron Clark, Chair of the Governance Committee updated the Senate on the review of the undergraduate and graduate deans.

Senator Clark stated that the committee interviewed both deans extensively and has also worked with Senior Vice Provost Perry.  A draft regulation has been developed and the committee is hoping to have the issue completed this month.

Personnel Policy Committee
Senator Robarge, Chair of the Personnel Policy Committee stated that at the beginning of last semester there was a request regarding the rescheduling of times that benefit sessions are held.  The committee consulted with Human Resources and their response is that they are willing to arrange the benefits sessions any time that would be agreeable to the faculty on campus.  They are seeking input as to what those times would be. 

Human Resources tried to accommodate the request with the outcome being they were there but no one showed up so they are waiting for the senators to suggest what times would be convenient so they can communicate it back to the faculty.  This schedule would include evening and weekend hours.

Senator Robarge stated that the Provost and Senior Vice Provost Perry initiated discussions, which initiated several months ago about the question of an ombuds position for service on the campus.  There is now an ombuds office at UNC.  We asked and were entertained by the two ombuds people giving us an idea of what they have been doing and the level of investment that was made to set up that office.  It has only been in existence for a few months and we are going to see how they evolve and what life is like for them one year from now.  We are not letting that matter rest, however the Provost has committed to following this through.  There are resources that we have had at NCSU that were not in place at UNC and given our resource limited issues and other issues like child care on this campus we do not want to expend resources.  UNC expended almost three hundred and fifty thousand dollars to establish those ombuds offices.  Do we need to do that on this campus? Is what we already have serving the needs and we simply don’t know it?   The Provost requested that a group of us continue to meet on a regular basis.  I have agreed to take the leadership in that to try to interact between the faculty, administration, and our representative in Human Resources. 

We are moving forward to evaluate very seriously whether we eventually want to evolve an ombuds office on this campus or whether we want to somehow take what is here and see that in a better way.  In addition I believe it is becoming evident that we need to do more planning about making our campus aware of what resources are already here. 

Senator Robarge stated that there are things being done in HR at both the SPA and the EPA levels and new services that are being brought on line that I think will be a great benefit to all of us. This Thursday I am meeting with one of the Assistant Directors from Human Resources to be tutored in that and I will be sharing that information with the committee and eventually back to the faculty senate through our report.

Comments from Barbara Carroll, Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources
Let me make one quick announcement because I think it is related to this and will be of interest in general and that is that at NC State’s initiation we approached the state of North Carolina and asked if they would work at the state level to create capacity for what are commonly known as an employee assistance program.  Such programs provide confidential, counseling intervention referral when people are struggling with issues that may impact their ability to perform effectively in the work place.  They are very good programs and we took a leadership role and I am pleased to announce that we will have a new employee assistance program.  We will be doing a program of marketing to faculty and staff and supervisors and we are looking forward to being able to provide this service. 

Secretary Bruck wanted to know if it is an NC State Program or a downtown program. 

Associate Vice Chancellor Carroll stated that a statewide contract was negotiated so the provider will be providing a service to all state agencies in the university system.

Associate Vice Chancellor Carroll stated that the other issue is about on campus services for faculty and other EPA.  It has probably been three years ago that EPA related activities moved from living in the Provost’s office to Human Resources.  One thing that I recognized when I came here was we probably needed to be building some capacity to work with faculty and other EPA professionals on issues of complexity and sensitivity.  One of the things that we have done is build some new support within our relation function to try to do that.   We now have what we call an EPA coordinator who is attempting to work with some logistical aspects of complexities of the employment relationships with EPA types but also to try to build some consulting capacity so that if you are a department head and you are dealing with an issue that we can provide some support or consulting.  We have not been very aggressive about talking about that and that will be part of the dialogue on this issue of ombuds and who can access that and what services are available and what we do with information and how we will work through concerns. 

Chair Allen thanked Associate Vice Chancellor Carroll for her comments.

9. Adjournment
A motion was made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.

The motion passed to adjourn the meeting at 4:50 p.m.

Footer Nav