FACULTY SENATE MEETING
Minutes
October 9, 2006
Present: Abbott,
Akleman, Arant-Kaspar, Armstrong, Aufderheide, Bangerth, Battle, Bednarz,
Benedik, Boyd, Cagin, Carlson, Carrigan,
Cepeda-Benito, Centinkaya, Cobb, Curry, Estrada, Feldman, Fike, Fink, Geva,
Grant, Gunn, Hall, Harms, Hobbs, Hobson, Kelly, Kenimer, Kirkendall, La-Pastina, Lard, Loudder, Machann, Magill,
Martindale, Meagher, Messina, Pearl, Price, Reese, Riccio, Rich, Schultz,
Slack, Smith, Speed, Stabile, Stadelmann, Stallone, Stein, Stewart, Strawser,
Toby, Vaid, Valasek, Vogel, Walker, Warden, Webb-Johnson, Welsh, Whiteacre
Absent: Aune,
Bazzi, Beskok, Blasingame, Collisson, Darby, Ellis, Gawande, Harris, Heilman,
Hise, Ing, Klein, Linton, Luiselli, Mahapatra, McGeachin, McIntyre, Merrell, Moreira,
Petersen, Reddy, Shandley, Sinova, Thornton, Toliyat, Vedlitz, Volkman, Ward,
Winemiller, Woodman, Woosley
Call to Order
The
meeting was called to order at 3:15 by Speaker Slack
Guest Speaker Comments
Guest speaker Dr. Tito Guererro III, the new Vice President and
Associate Provost for Diversity mentioned that his introduction and commitment
to the value of diversity originated with his undergraduate experiences at
TAMU. Participation in SCONA, serving as
a manager for the first integrated TAMU football team, and sailing on the Texas
Clipper were among events that made him aware of the educational value of
bringing together individuals with different ethnic, economic, social,
political and national perspectives. He
indicated that he is still busy identifying the areas where he can be of most
service to TAMU, and suggested that assisting in active recruiting for
individuals with the talents we are seeking will be one of those areas.
Recognition
The speaker recognized Nick Taunton, Student Body President, as a
visitor to the meeting.
Minutes
Approval
of September 11, 2006 Faculty Senate Meeting
Minutes Attachment A
Motion Passed F.S. 24.27
Minutes of previous meeting:
It was noted that the person speaking on behalf of Modern Languages was
Dr. Konrad, rather than the department head.
(The September minutes have been edited to show this change.)
Consent Agenda
University
Curriculum Committee (Recommended Approval)
Attachment B
Motion
Passed F.S. 24.28
New
Courses
AERO
440 Cockpit Systems and Displays
AGSM
439 Management of Agricultural
Systems I
ANSC
402 Exploring Animal Industries
ENDG
409 Professional Computer
Animation
ENTC
381 Introduction to Micro/Nano
Manufacturing
HORT
332 Horticulture Landscape
Graphics
HORT
442 Horticulture Landscape Design
II
HORT
454 Special Event Design and
Production
RLEM
430 Advanced Restoration Ecology
Changes
in Courses
AGRO
304 Plant Breeding
NUTR
405 Nutritional Treatment of
Disease
HORT
422 Citrus and Subtropical Fruits
Anat Geva (Architecture) requested that HORT 332 and 442 be
removed from the consent agenda.
The remaining items were accepted.
Committee Reports (Passage of each
report in turn was moved by the secretary)
Executive Committee (Recommended
Approval)
12.99.99.M5
Faculty Participation in the Selection, Evaluation, and Retention of Deans Attachment C
Motion Passed F.S. 24.29
Deans rule debate:
Editorial changes were made by Dr. Gunn, one of the authors, to
substitute college for department members in section 2.2.
After some debate on putting more specificity into requirements
for what should be included in feedback to faculty from the search committee
and Provost, either in hiring or retention review situations, several
amendments were offered.
Robin Smith (Liberal Arts) proposed amending section 2.7 by removing
the second sentence, striking “and decisions” from the first sentence and
ending it with “will be considered privileged and confidential to the extent
permitted by
Amendment passed;
The section now reads:
2.7 All deliberations
of the search committee will
be considered privileged and confidential to the extent permitted by
Richard Feldman (Engineering) proposed amending section 3.3 by
adding
“At a minimum a vote of a college’s faculty on whether the dean
should continue in office must be collected.
When the vote is conducted a faculty representative must be present and
the results transmitted to the college faculty and Dean of Faculties.”
After discussion involving mutual trust between faculty and
administration, a substitute amendment was offered by Martyn Gunn (COALS) to change the wording of 3.3 to replace “an
opinion” with “a poll of faculty members of the college”.
The Senate voted to allow the substitute amendment to replace the
original amendment.
The amendment also passed, making section 3.3 now read:
All reviews shall include an opportunity for college faculty
members to present their views to the Provost including, but not limited to, a
faculty poll of whether the Dean should continue in office. Individual expressions of opinion shall be
made in confidence, subject to the limitations of the Public Information Act.
A follow up amendment was offered by Mike Benedik (Science) to
insert “The poll results and written comments received by the provost be made
available to the Faculty.” into section 3.3.
This amendment failed.
However, Tom Vogel (Science) later moved that the section be
amended by including “The results of the poll shall be disseminated to the
faculty”. and this amendment was approved.
Dean of Faculties Watson pointed out that the 2 year preliminary
review described in section 3.2 does not specifically require faculty
involvement. Martyn Gunn proposed
amending section 3.3 to begin “All 4th year reviews” and
A vote to accept the Price substitution to the amendment carried
after a show of hands, but the motion as amended was defeated by voice
vote.
Section 3.3 as amended now reads:
All reviews shall include an opportunity for college faculty
members to present their views to the Provost, including, but not limited to, a
faculty poll of whether the Dean should continue in office. The results of the poll shall be disseminated to
the faculty.
Individual expressions of opinion shall be made in confidence, subject to the
limitations of the Public Information Act.
The “Deans Rule, as amended, then passed without dissent.
12.99.99.M6
Faculty Participation in the Selection, Evaluation and Retention of Department
Heads Attachment D
Motion
Passed F.S. 24.30
Department Heads Rule
(Editorial change: October
2, 2006 should replace November 2006 as the date considered by the EC)
Martyn Gunn moved that section 2.7 and 3.3 be changed to match the
revised wording of the same sections in the Deans Rule, with appropriate
substitutions for the position. This
amendment passed unanimously.
This means the sections will say:
2.7 All deliberations of the search committee will be considered privileged and confidential
to the extent permitted by
3.3 All
reviews shall include an opportunity for department faculty members to present
their views to the Dean, including, but not limited to, a faculty poll of
whether the Department Head should continue in office. The results of the poll shall be disseminated to
the faculty.
Individual expressions of opinion shall be made in confidence, subject to the
limitations of the Public Information Act.
Marty Louder (
This amendment passed, so that section 2.8 now reads:
The dean may take into consideration the entire spectrum of
viewpoints from many stakeholders. The
dean shall make the appointment of a new department head from the list of
finalists.
Rich Feldman (Engineering) proposed amending the document to
include a section 2.10, reading:
“If it is determined that a candidate is appointed to be
department head in violation of this rule (i.e. without faculty being given an
adequate opportunity to vote, or without being acceptable to a majority of the
voting faculty and without the concurrence of the selection committee), then
the Provost shall either nullify the appointment or, if the candidate has
already started, declare the candidate an interim and reopen the department head
search. An allegation that a department
head was appointed in violation of this rule must be made to the Dean of
Faculties within one month of the date at which the department head begins in
office. The Dean of Faculties must
notify the Provost within one month of the allegation whether or not the
appointment was made in violation of this rule.”
Dean of Faculties Watson suggested that it may be more appropriate
to prepare a SAP detailing procedures that should be followed in these types of
searches and reviews. Gunn and Louder
pointed out that the rule already contains a statement for reporting violations
of the “principles or spirit” of the recommended procedures to the Executive
Committee of the Faculty Senate, though no specific penalties are described.
This amendment failed.
The Main motion passed as amended.
W
Courses
Request
for Course Additions to the W Course Graduation Requirement.
Attachment E Motion Passed F.S. 24.31
(August
21 Meeting)
BICH
491 Undergraduate Research
ECON
426 Antitrust Economics
GENE
491 Undergraduate Research
MEEN
360 Materials and Manufacturing
Selection in Design
POLS
209 Introduction to Political Science
Research Methods
(September
18 Meeting)
EPFB
428 Collaboration in School Settings
HLTH
482 Grant Writing in Health
Graduate Council & University
Curriculum Committee (Recommended Approval)
Nonsubstantive
Change: Change in Name of College Attachment F
University
Curriculum Committee (Recommended Approval)
Attachment G
Minor
in Animal Science
Graduate Council
The Graduate Operations Committee
approved the proposed Academic Calendar for 2007-2008. Attachment H
Motion Passed F.S. 24.34
Old Business
Anat Geva (Architecture) stated that her college had no problem
with the HORT courses as listed, but that any programs or courses including the
phrase “Landscape Design” would be
challenged. Dr. Gene Nelson, Executive
Dean of AgriLife Sciences said there are no plans to institute such a degree or
program. The HORT courses were approved.
The
ENTC course which seemed to have 2 numbers was returned to the UCC.
New Business
There
was no new business brought before the Senate.
Committee of the Whole
Bob Strawser (
Tom Vogel (Science) reported that the issue of plus/minus grading
has been put on hold until student government has a chance to survey student
sentiment.
Martyn Gun (COALS) asked that the EC or Academic Affairs committee
mandate that course syllabi include “learning objectives”.
Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 5:15pm
.