Skip to Content

March 21, 2001 Minutes

Call to order: 4:00 pm

Senators present: Blanda, Blevens, Brennan, Gillis, Hays, McKinney, Peeler, Renick, Reese, Sawey, Skerpan-Wheeler,
Stone and Stutzman

Announcement: Scheduled PAAG meeting has been rescheduled for March 28, 2001

        1. Electronic Mailing List PPS Draft
        2. Nominees for Tenure Promotion PPS Review Committee
        3. Resolution from Liberal Arts Council
        4. Old Business

Item 1. Electronic Mailing List PPS Draft

An electronic mailing list PPS draft presented to the President's Council was provided to the Faculty Senate by Dr. Van Wyatt. After reviewing the PPS draft, a lively discussion of the document ensued.  Essentially, the issue is having Information Technology provide requested electronic mailing lists to faculty and administrators.  That is, quite often, group mailing lists of selected students, faculty, Chairs, Deans and Administrators which are needed by various campus users of electronic communications.

The current draft proposal, which is supposed to be effective by the end of the 2001 spring break, indicates that any "conscribbed list" of the above must be requested through the proper bureaucratic channels. That is, faculty requests would have to go through the Chairs, Deans, and VPAA before being provided by the VP Technology. An "elective list" of the above would not be available.

Needless to say, Senators were miffed at (1) not being able to obtain a list for any selected group, combinations of groups or members within groups and (2) being hamstrung by having to obtain permission through the bureaucratic maze. Further, there was serious concern that personal lists already created and being used through-out the campus community would violate the proposed policy.

As the proposal appears to be addressing problems of security, control or other that the Senate does not believe exist, the    Senate requested that Chair Hays invite Dr. Van Wyatt to future meeting for an explanation and elaboration of the proposal.

Item 2. Nominees for the Tenure Promotion PPS Review Committee

Two nominations of faculty were provided by the Senate to serve on the Tenure Promotion PPS Review Committee. Names will be provided upon their agreeing to serve.

Item 3. Resolution from Liberal Arts Council

The Liberal Arts Council unanimously approved a resolution calling for the restriction of the noise levels in the Quad to ensure the classroom learning environment.

After much discussion, the Senate concluded that the problem is the result of an administrative malfunction by the Vice President for Student Affairs (whom we have already contacted directly this semester) and the Dean of Students who are responsible for enforcing policies already in place to handle such events.

The Senate decided to directly forward the resolution to President Supple in order that he might respond (solve?) to the

Item 4. "State of the Senate" Report

A draft of the "Report to the SWTSU Faculty from the Faculty Senate 1999-2001" was provided for Senate review and comments. The final version should soon be available to SWT faculty via the Senate web site.

Old Business

Item 1. EDU 1350 class follow-up

Chair Hays reports that Dr. Ron Brown is reluctant to include specific information publicizing the EDU 1350 class in University promotion materials because (1) other departments would want their courses promoted as well and (2) because of the 131 semester hour legislative refund, he does not want students taking course work that they do not need.

He is aware that the course helps both students who have academic study/learning problems as well as those who do not and wants the course information available to all advising centers for dissemination.

New Business

Item 1. UNC Governance Model

Chair Hays has been invited to visit with President Supple and Vice President Gratz to review and consider a more global University governance model developed by UNC. Do we want a more universal approach versus what we already have in place?

Item 2. Research Enhancement Grant Procedure Reform

Currently, the Research Enhancement Grant proposals go through two cycles: Fall and Spring. The ORSP has suggested that, due to the volume of proposal paperwork, the proposals be submitted only once each year. Dr. Sawey will send out an e-mail to faculty requesting their vote on a one cycle or a two cycle submission process.

Item 3. Firing of Tenured Faculty

A question was raised regarding the status of faculty given terminal contracts. Still in mediation? Do not know. We will
return to attention.

Item 4. University-wide Faculty Evaluation Forms

Are universal faculty evaluation forms to be piloted in the fall? Unclear at the moment. We will return to attention. Chair and Dean universal (IDEA) evaluations are currently being conducted.

Adjourned: 5:22&1/2pm!