Left Navigation

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

NOVEMBER 10, 1997

1. Welcome and Opening Remarks
The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by Chancellor Larry K. Monteith.

Chancellor Monteith welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Chancellor Monteith introduced Dr. Jim Oblinger as the new Dean of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. He said it is a privilege to present new leaders on campus who hold Senior Administrative positions.

Dr Oblinger will be Dean and Executive Director for Agricultural Programs in the College. He will continue to hold the title of Professor of Food Science at NC State. The programs that will be administered by him are the Agricultural Research Service, the N.C. Cooperative Extension Service, and the division of Academic Programs with undergraduate and graduate programs and the only college on campus that has Associate Degrees at NC State. Dean Oblinger holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Bacteriology from DePauw University and a M.S. and Ph.D. in Food Technology from Iowa State University. He came to NC State from the University at Missouri- Columbia and before that he was at the University of Florida. He served as Associate Dean in the College of Agriculture at the University of Missouri-Columbia and as Professor of Food Science and Human Nutrition at the University of Florida.

Chancellor Monteith observed that Dr. Oblinger earned his recognition and respect for all that we would like for our Deans to be. He was named Teacher of the Year at the University of Florida, recipient of the Institute of Food Science Technologist's Award and more recently the Distinguished Educator Award from the National Association of Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture. He is a leader both inside and outside the classroom and has created programs that focus on mentoring and leadership development. Dean Oblinger created the Graduate Student Professional Development Workshop, led the National Leadership Development Program for Research and Academic Programs and has been a component of expanding opportunities with information technology by investing funds in computer clusters for students as early as 1986. Dean Oblinger holds a number of Honorary Memberships. The Chancellor and Provost have confidence in the leadership Dean Oblinger will provide the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

2. Report from the Legislature
June Brotherton, Executive Assistant to the Chancellor, reported that the university did well with salary and benefits in the Legislative Session with a 4% increase overall for SPA and EPA. For people who have retired or that are contemplating retirement, 6.2% benefit increase for retirees and an increase in the retirement formula from 1.75% to 1.80%, which will make a significant difference in those people who are planning to retire. She stated that under tuition and enrollment there was a 3% in-state tuition increase and 5% out-of-state increase, and there is an additional 2% that may be given in 1998-99. There was a $1.4M cut because the institution did not meet its enrollment in past years.

Ms. Brotherton observed that this year, the Legislature seemed more interested in giving nonrecurring funding as opposed to recurring monies.

NC State received $900,000 for the manufacturing extension partnership in the College of Engineering, $400,000 for Pfisteria Research in CALS, $400,000 for the isotope study for the Cape Fear and Neuse Rivers in PAMS, $150,000 for the Administrative Officer Management programs in CHASS, $250,000 for Cunningham Farms Environmental Research for CALS, and $200,000 for Fish Research, Flounder and Red Drum, for a total of approximately $2.3M in non- recurring dollars. She reported that the institution was allowed to take from the 1% reversion received back from the Legislature, $125,000 for Natural Resources Leadership Institute which is a joint project between CHASS and CALS, $500,000 maximum for agricultural enhancement funds, and approximately $2.2 M for some technology related activities.

Ms. Brotherton reported that $500,000 was received in recurring funding for agricultural research and funding was received for six capital improvement programs. She stated that $6.9M was received for the Nelson Hall renovation which will give the College of Management a completed building within the next two years. Toxicology Planning on Centennial Campus received $760,000, $2.6M to construct the Research and Teaching Feed Mill, Planning money for the Arboretum, $87,000, and an additional two stories for the Sea Mast Facility that is going to be located on Carteret Community College Campus in Morehead, North Carolina, and $5.5M for Tyrrell County 4H Environmental Education Facility.

Ms. Brotherton stated that one thing people will be able to hear is that we had a 10% mandated transfer of overhead receipts to the General Fund of the Legislature, effective 1998-99 unless they change their mind. They are reverting the money back to the institution. We will no longer have to revert that money to them, which will allow us to make some investment in research infrastructure on campus. There was a lot of discussion in the Legislature about people calling Universities and State Offices, getting voice mail and not getting returned calls. They passed Senate Bill 531 that requires State Government and University voice mail to have the option of reaching an attendant or operator from the first menu.

Ms. Brotherton reported that there is a span of control study mandated. The Legislature has determined that every supervisor should be supervising at least seven employees. She stated that this is an average across the universities and we have to reach an average of one to seven. That study will be occurring this session.

Chancellor Monteith thanked Ms. Brotherton for her report.

Chancellor Monteith reported that the nonrecurring technology related activities was a part of the decision to return 1% of the reversion funds to the campus. They can only be invested into technologies. If we would like to keep those for laboratories and other needs of the campus, we are going to have to demonstrate at the next short session what was done with them. Clearly the highest priority should be something that faculty and students would say that this investment is just what we need.

He stated that with the 10% expected from indirect cost, we would begin immediately developing a strategy where you, the faculty, will be able to write proposals and ask for assistance from that fund either in equivalent matching or facility development that will help you be more successful in capturing your funds in the research agenda. He stated that this needs to be done in advance. It should be taken at face value that it is going to come and commitments should be made against the cash flow that will be here in that next year.

3. Diversity Initiative Progress Report
Hank Fiumara, Director, University Improvement Program, reported that as a result of the Strategic Plan dated back to 1994, there was a statement on goal number seven that addressed having a diverse faculty, staff and student body. Some of the other strategic goals offer success to faculty, staff and students and encourage enhancing that opportunity for success. There are also other goals that address having a large group of people that can foster that success and opportunity type of environment. As a result of the Strategic Plan and some follow-up discussions, this summer, the Chancellor took the Senior Administrators, including students, staff and faculty, on a two-day retreat that addressed the subject of diversity. They came away with the common understanding and the commitment to move forward with the theme. The plan that is now under development is in draft and has been distributed for comments. He encouraged looking at the Provost's Home Page for more details on the document.

Mr. Fiumara stated that our goal here is not only to have a plan that will take us into the future, but show some tangible results in short term. When one looks at diversity one initially may have the impression that we are looking at some of those physical attributes and making sure that we have appropriate representation. In fact, it goes beyond that in really looking for that theme of what it takes to encourage people to be successful and have the opportunity to be successful.

Mr. Fiumara stated that they have created a draft plan. There are four goals that are embedded into it. The area that the faculty are probably most interested in is the Curricular and Pedagogical Transformation.

The Steering Committee is assisting the Administrative Council in helping to formulate not only the plan, but also to tie together a lot of the efforts that currently exist. The Committee is chaired by Dean Anderson. The Diversity Statement was headed by Dean Lewis. He stated that they are looking for people who are willing and interested in participating and in fact helping to resolve and refine the charter into something that will be meaningful to the entire population of the university. He stated that the theme he is leaving is that the diversity initiative has the administrative council support. It will be a topic on each agenda over the next ten months of the academic year. He noted that there are great opportunities here to help shape that agenda. So we are looking for community wide participation. They are looking for heavy faculty involvement on the climate as well as in the Curricular and Pedagogical Transformation. He encouraged anyone interested to contact him or one of the Deans.

Chancellor Monteith stated that he would like to see NC State in the very near future be the place of thought, ideas, backgrounds and cultures, gender, race and ethnicity. He feels that we want diversity to be here because this is the place that has demonstrated that coming here you can be successful. You can develop physically, intellectually, personally and professionally and leave here well prepared to look back on your life and credit your experiences at NC State as part of your success. We have always prided ourselves in saying that we are the people's university. It would seem to him as a public institution that relies heavily on taxes that we have to decide whether we are the people's university or just some of the people's university. He thinks that decision needs to be made. Chancellor Monteith does not believe that you can live out any sense of reality until you decide on that fundamental issue.

Chancellor Monteith stated that the plans that are being developed are consistent with all he plans to do the remainder of his tenure as Chancellor. He does not plan to set bold new strategic directions. He does not plan to sit for the next eight months and not act where it is clearly in the best interest of the university that action is required. He stated that we are looking at a number of issues that are very important to our future. One is enrollment planning. We are having a new funding model debated about NC State's future that we do not know what the effect is going to be in terms of the number of positions we have for enrollment but will be differentially funded for the first time. Chancellor Monteith stated that he would like to lay the ground work so that when the new Chancellor comes, we have given the new administration all the information and the good thinking of the campus that they can began to consider as part of their early planning for success. We all want this next Chancellor to be absolutely successful. He feels that everyone has to help and not wait for a full year to discuss diversity, enrollment, centennial campus, the need for us to look at our extension program, and planning and completing our fund raising for undergraduate students.

Chancellor Monteith stated that he will be leaving during the discussion on the new Chancellor. He wishes he was young enough and qualified enough to be a candidate. What he sees available for the next Chancellor is an extraordinary opportunity and especially if you agree on and are willing to put a little of your effort into the strategic direction that the new Chancellor sets for you, we can move to a much higher level.

4. Phased Retirement
Provost Stiles reported that President Spangler thought that it would be wise to see if there needed to be an early retirement system within the University of North Carolina. A committee was set up with representatives from all campuses to review that issue. Bob Clark was N C State's representative on that committee. They came to the conclusion that it was not needed, but did recommend consideration of the Phased Retirement Program. That was then studied and presented to the campus for review to determine how, in a trial period of five years, to implement the Phased Retirement Program. He stated that this is for tenured track faculty only. If you are fifty, you need to have at least twenty years in the system. If you are over sixty, then five years in the system is enough to be eligible to apply.

What is the Plan?
Provost Stiles reported that the plan is, at some point an agreement can be reached between a faculty member and the university that the faculty member will voluntarily give up tenure for a contract. The contract will be half time responsibility or half time pay for a period of one to five years, depending on what the institution chooses for the number of years for any faculty member who is eligible. One thing that the individual campuses had to choose was the number of years on that campus that would be their characteristic in that transaction. What the faculty member was to do in that time needed to be negotiated, but it would depend upon the needs of the department. A contract would be arranged in which there was a scope of work.

Did the university want to have caps as to how many of the eligible faculty could take part in the program? This institution decided that it did need some caps, but that the caps should be something that fit individual departments.

How will emeriti faculty be handled?
The plan that was supposed to be sent in mid October was sent in later because General Administration kept changing a few of the characteristics of what was to be done. The plan was considered by not only the committee, but by the University Council on Academic Policies and Procedures and by the Faculty Senate. Provost Stiles made the recommendation to the Chancellor for the following characteristics and it was sent forth on October 31, 1997. The plan is that the number of years in this relationship between the faculty member and the university is three years and that the caps would be departmental. He stated that all the institutions that we know about in the UNC System have chosen three years.

When will we be able to use this system?
Once they are submitted to General Administration, they have to take them to the Board of Governors. The Board of Governors must approve all sixteen plans before any institution can implement their plan. Their original intention was to implement the plan in February. Planning for what needs to be done in February on plans that have not been approved makes it, in his view, unlikely that anyone would make that arrangement to start on it by the second semester. Provost Stiles said it is a trial plan for five years and, at that point or any point between, if the data indicate that it is a good plan, then the Board of Governors can just say that it is official, we will keep this in as one of the important things that is useful.

In responding to how reversion money is going to be spent, Provost Stiles stated that one thing one would like to do as a leader on this campus is to declare some success. One of the successes we do not have yet is the connectivity. The funds that can be spent have to be spent on technology, and not people. One of the main things that we have done is to devise, because we plan to have at least that 1% each year to spend.

Senator Richard Gilbert stated that he objects to the phase retirement decision by the Provost, being limited to three years when the committee and the Faculty Senate voted for five years. He thinks three years is too limited in time to test the phase retirement.

Provost Stiles stated that the Committee and Faculty Senate recommended five years by majority vote, but not unanimous. The University Committee and Academic Policies and Procedures approved three years by unanimous vote.

Provost Stiles thinks it is important to have a five year scale on a five year trial. Otherwise, the effects of what might be a bad policy could go out to the ninth year. He thinks that is inappropriate.

Senator Gilbert asked Chancellor Monteith to stay during the discussion of the Search Committee, for his replacement.

Chancellor Monteith stated that he was the Chancellor for the time that he was here. Whether he is the Chancellor for the future is an entirely different question. The Chancellor said "It would not bother me at all for those of you to say, but we need this and the current Chancellor cannot do that. In principle it does not bother me. In practice I am in that rare point in my life where I do not have to be bothered. So I can excuse myself and let you have a really full ranging conversation and I personally feel that you should say those things. It really is what you are about, trying to find the person that will lead this university for what is ahead of us, not someone who has been here with a great privilege to have served as Chancellor for nine years. I really feel like I have had a rare, unique pleasure in my life to be able to do this. There is nothing I want more than for you to choose a Chancellor who will be so successful that we all celebrate the career of that Chancellor, and that we look at what has happened at NC State and say this has been our finest hour. That ought to be what we are committed to."

Chancellor Monteith excused himself from the meeting..

5. Approval of the Minutes, April 8, 1997, General Faculty Meeting
The minutes were approved without dissent.

6. Remarks from George H. Wahl Jr., Chair of the Faculty
Chair Wahl stated that he is very happy to see that some of the connectivity money is going to be put toward trying to get more faculty connected. He thanked Past Chair Charles Carlton for his work on the Commission on Faculty Opportunities and Responsibilities. Chair Wahl asked John Kanipe, Secretary of the University to introduce the Search Committee.

Chair Wahl stated that there will be another open meeting on November 20 that will be open to everyone and at that stage there is five minutes per presentation. Chair Wahl asked for a show of hands for people who would like to make a presentation. Only one person responded.

Chair Wahl reported that the Chancellor announced his retirement in September. There are three Faculty members on the Search Committee for a new Chancellor. One of whom was chosen at large. Everyone was chosen by the Board of Trustees. There is also Greg Holden, Chair of the Staff Senate, Chad Meyers, President of the Student Body, and representation from the Graduate Student Association. The Chancellor's Search Committee has come with an advertisement that will appear in this week's Chronicle for Higher Education. He stated that, through the University Home Page, there is more than one could ever read about what is happening. The procedure is such that as much input as possible is being sought. Everyone is encouraged to make nominations.

A member of the Search Committee asked if the individual to become Chancellor should come from within the university or outside the University? Does the individual have to be an educator?

One person responded that he thinks it should be an educator. Chair Wahl stated that it is hard to choose whether the individual should come from within or outside the university.

Dr. Rebecca Leonard, Assistant Provost, asked about the characteristics in an educator that individuals find more attractive than one who does not have a higher education background.

Senator John Monahan wanted to know what the Committee sees as its timetable, and when should we see certain levels of progress in the search.

Chair Wahl responded that the date announced by the Chancellor was his birthday which is August, 1998 at which time he will be turning sixty five. That is the target that the committee is looking at. The hope is that between Thanksgiving and Christmas there will be numerous applications or nominations so that there will be enough materials for the Search Committee to start reviewing in January. He stated that it is hard to predict after that point. The hope is to have a replacement by the start-up of the next academic year.

Senator Monahan wanted to know if any other major institutions are in search for a Chancellor or similar position.

Chair Wahl responded that Ohio State is in a similar position. He thinks they are in their final stages.

Remarks from Ellis Cowling
Dr. Ellis Cowling stated that he thinks it is extraordinary if there is only one of the faculty who wants to express an opinion about what kind of leadership we want at this institution or what kind of institution we would like for this place to be so we can find it exciting to be here to make it what it could be.

Dr. Cowling urged the Faculty to think hard about what they would like for this place to become, what part we would like to play, and what kind of leadership we want to be able to respond to when we carry on with our roles as faculty. He stated that Professor John Wall was the leader of an effort in 1994 to lead us in a self study. If you read the recommendations in the self study you will find that we as a faculty committed ourselves to a series of recommendations for improvement in the performance of this institution. So I think it is very clear from what John Wall has helped us create that very few people believe that North Carolina State University has fulfilled its full potential as an institution.

Dr. Cowling stated that he does not know a single faculty member at this institution that believes that we are fulfilling our full potential as an institution. We have an opportunity on November 20 in a public meeting where everyone is welcome. If you look at the plan that was outlined for the continuing improvement of this university generated in 1994 by all of us, I think we have a lot of room for aspiring to be more than we have become so far. We have an opportunity on November 20. We will have an opportunity early January. This is the only opportunity that he is aware of where the faculty alone will have an opportunity to express their views about what this place might become if we were to get the kind of leadership and where to fulfill all the dreams that many of us have invested ourselves in and found that they did not get implemented. Dr. Cowling thinks that is a good reason to get up on November 20 and speak about what you thought then about what we should become as an institution.

Dr. Cowling urged the faculty to think seriously about what they think the potential of this institution could be. To take some of those documents that ended up in what we call the black hole of this institution and speak out about achieving the next decade or so, what this institution could become if we would have the will to make it happen. He urged the faculty to think about this and to put their minds through the test. We could do better at this institution if we would invest ourselves fully in achieving the potential that this place has.

Dr. Cowling stated that Tom Malone is one of the eminent scholars at this institution. He wrote an editorial in the News and Observer a few weeks ago. He has an idea that he calls a knowledge based society. Dr. Cowling read two paragraphs from the editorial. He stated that one of the things that he would hope to introduce the faculty to is to hear Tom Malone describe what he believes this institution and State could do to help America be all that it is capable of becoming.
Dr. Cowling hopes that he and Jim Clark will hear from the faculty. They will arrange further opportunities for the development of a possible consensus among what we think we would like for this institution to become.

Chair Wahl noted that at every meeting of the Faculty Senate there is a session that addresses issues of concern. There will be two more meetings this semester, Tuesday November 18 and Tuesday December 2. Anyone is free to attend. We will recognize any faculty member during the meetings with an issue of concern. If it happens to pertain to the Chancellor Search, we will hear you on that.

Senator Dennis Daley stated that the Trustees have not been very faculty friendly. Since they selected the Search Party, how do we know that this Search Committee is nothing more than window dressing?

Dr. Winser Alexander responded that when he accepted the responsibility to be on the Search Committee, he accepted that responsibility with full intentions of exercising his prerogative and making himself known along with representing the faculty with regard to what the Chancellor should be. He thinks it is good to have input from the Search Firm because it makes their job easier in terms of identifying candidates. In terms of screening the candidates and bringing the final candidates before the university, it is up to the Committee to do that and not the Search Firm.

Dr. Susan Osborne stated that she would like to see the new Chancellor address issues of diversity on campus. With the diversity initiative at the university now, she thinks the final candidates should be asked to respond in writing to address some of those issues.

The committee was asked to share the vision for the process, and if there is any opportunity for faculty input into the process.

Chair Wahl responded, yes. A faculty member who would like to make a nomination is encouraged to do so.

Chair Wahl stated that we will get a list of finalists, by the Search Committee doing their job assisted by the Search Firm. At that time, when there are a group of finalists, they will be brought to campus.

Provost Stiles commented that in order to get someone, you have to search for them. You get a Search Firm that goes out with a long list of people to see if any of them fit. Secondly you need a screening process. This committee is also a screening committee and a nominating committee.

Alex Miller stated that he hopes that members of the Search Committee will understand the essential role that the arts must play on a campus like NC State. The description calls for a Chancellor who understands the comprehensive nature of this university. He hopes that is really well valued. He hopes that NC State will find a Chancellor to lead us into the twenty first century emphasizing all of the historical strengths of this institution, who also understands that people will be better citizens, and lead more deeply fulfilled lives if they have that understanding.

Comments from Past Chair, Charles Carlton
Dr. Carlton stated that he was asked to Chair a Commission known as COFOR in April of this year. It was to answer two questions. The first one was to look at post tenure review. That became more significant when in June of this year President Spangler issued Memorandum 371 which asked the various campuses to do two things to devise structure to recognize excellence. The first is to devise structure to recognize unsatisfactory performance, and to develop procedures by which faculty can move from an unsatisfactory to a satisfactory status. The committee has been looking at this and is still working on it. They welcome any input.

The second is a Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. The first paragraph ties this statement in with the university code, particularly section 600 (1-3). The second paragraph delineates what we call faculty rights. He stated that one thing he would like to make clear is that the faculty in section five of the second paragraph make a claim to determine pedagogy and evaluation procedures for student performance and learning. In other words, the committee was unanimous in recommending that the faculty determine grades. The second paragraph deals with faculty responsibilities. This was adopted by the Commission. It was passed to the Faculty Senate, and Chair Wahl and Provost Stiles set up this Commission in April. We will report it back to the Faculty Senate, and they will look at our reports and if they see fit will pass them to the Administration.

Chair Wahl stated that the Commission will come up with something, and we will all be judged against, so it will be important for us to pay close attention.

The question was asked concerning who will be responsible for conducting post tenure review.

Dr. Carlton responded that basically the idea is that each department will establish acceptable standards of performance as part of the annual activity report, or of the three or five-year cumulative evaluations. If an individual receives an unsatisfactory, or maybe two in a row, it will trigger a post tenure review and that review will be conducted by the senior members of the faculty in that department who will set goals and after a reasonable period of time will access whether those goals have been met and make the recommendation to the administration.

Chair Wahl thanked everyone for coming and adjourned the meeting at 4:30 p.m.

Footer Nav