Faculty Affairs had its first meeting of AY 2005-2006 on September 8, followed by meetings on October 13, November 10, December 8, February 8, March 8, April 12, May 17, and June 7. There were no meetings in January or July. At the September 8 meeting, Patrick Plumlee was elected as chairperson of the committee for the upcoming year.
The committee discussed and acted on a number of items throughout the year.
The committee received and acted on the nomination of Bishop Desmond Tutu for an honorary degree to be awarded in fall 2006 when the Bishop was in this country. The nomination was unanimously accepted. As Faculty Association president, notified the UNF President of the committee’s action. In the spring, the committee has received two nominations for honorary degrees; one from the College of Health for Dr. Edith A. Perez, noted breast cancer researcher; and one from the College of Education and Human Services, Dr. Colville N. Young, Governor General of Belize. Both candidates were approved unanimously by the committee. These individuals received honorary degrees at the spring and summer commencement exercises, respectively.
The committee considered a number of proposed policies from university administration during the year. These included the university ethics statement, an intellectual property statement, and a statement on amorous sexual relationships. The ethics statement was considered over several meetings, and the committee proposed several changes to this document. It was then returned to the administration for further action, including open hearings before final adoption. Another document, “Consensual Amorous Sexual Relationships,” was received for review from the General Counsel’s office. This was intended to part of the general UNF Sexual Harassment Policy. One committee member strongly objected to the use of the word consensual when used with unequal power relationships. Research indicates that in unequal power relationships (teacher/student, supervisor/employee), consensuality is impossible. Judy Solano sent a letter to General Counsel’s office indicating that the word consensual must be removed from the policy’s text.
Dr. Imeh Ebong, Assistant Vice President for Research, asked the committee to look at a draft of the university’s new “Policy on Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks and other Intellectual Property.” The members had a copy of Article 25, Intellectual Property, of the UFF contract to compare with this draft. Chris Rasche volunteered to compose a response to Dr. Ebong expressing our concerns about the relationship between this draft and the UFF contract. The committee chair, with the consent of members on email, sent Dr. Ebong a letter conveying concerns about the draft Intellectual Property Policy, and requesting a meeting for Fall 2006. This letter was sent to Dr. Ebong, who responded that he would be happy to meet with the committee to discuss this draft document.
The committee also dealt with a number of other issues brought to its attention during the course of the year.
The committee discussed concerns about faculty scheduling exams during the week before final exam week, which is contrary to university policy. The committee discussed ways to better inform faculty about and to better enforce this policy. The group also discussed ways to improve information sharing for new faculty orientation. The committee agreed to ask the Faculty Association President to publicize the no exam policy, and to approach Academic Affairs about working together on new faculty orientation. There was agreement that the Faculty Association should be involved with the annual New Faculty Orientation. The committee discussed various ways in which to get involved. Chip Klostermeyer and Chris Rasche volunteered to work together to gather ideas; the committee chair contacted Academic Affairs to request Faculty Association representation on the upcoming year’s planning committee. Academic Affairs concurred with this request and included the FA representatives in the planning.
At the request of a faculty member concerned about confidentiality issues in faculty evaluations of administrators, the committee discussed the difference between survey anonymity and confidentiality, and the possibility of multiple responses, in electronic surveys. There was a lot of concern expressed about separating the survey from the respondents, not only as individuals, but as a group. Committee chairman, Plumlee, wrote a letter to presidential assistant Tom Serwatka on these issues, emphasizing faculty concerns about this process.
The committee also discussed a complaint from a faculty member about the kinds of publishers that other faculty are using to publish materials; he requests that the Faculty Association make a statement about what kinds of publishers can be used. This committee decided that the it will not evaluate the reputation of publishers; faculty have the expertise to determine appropriate texts, and it will not abridge this academic freedom. As far as faculty selling materials, the bookstore handles such transactions. A letter was prepared by the committee chairperson to the faculty member concerned.
The committee discussed how to deal with a complaint regarding the timing of submission of Outstanding Teaching Award materials during finals week. Since the union considers this kind of an award within its purview, the committee decided to delay discussion until after ratification of the contract.
The committee discussed revisiting postponed old business about the Promotion and Tenure Committee. Under the new UFF contract, P&T is a contractual issue, but there are some things that need to be examined, such as the tenure time line. This group decided to look at all P&T issues at one time, and the chair recommended that committee members acquaint themselves with the new P&T section of the contract. This committee will revisit this topic in the fall semester.
Following the annual process of awarding the Outstanding Undergraduate Teaching Awards, the committee looked into a number of issues raised this year: Should the number of nominations be prorated by to reflect college size? Should the application paperwork be standardized?
Should the number of awards be increased because there are more faculty? Should the number of awards be prorated by college? Should there be advice to faculty on how to construct the application packet? Should the application timeframe be changed?
The question also came up if the Scholarship award could be increased to three rather than the current two. Judy commented that the Outstanding Teaching Awards and the other faculty awards came from two different pots of money: the OTA was from E&G through Academic Affairs, while the other award money came from the Foundation.
To deal with the issues raised regarding the awards process, Judy Solano collected and distributed data on the 2005-06 Outstanding Undergraduate Teaching Awards by college: nominees, those eligible, applicants, finalists, and recipients; 9 month, undergraduate teaching faculty headcount by college for 1996 and 2005; and a list of all winners since 1984.
There was an extensive discussion about increasing the total number of awards, and about the fact that there was no award to recognize graduate teaching. The committee agreed to an agenda item that recommends that the number of Outstanding Undergraduate Teaching awards be increased to 9, in recognition that the number of faculty had greatly increased, and to establish a separate award for outstanding graduate teaching. If approved, the Faculty Affairs committee would convene a subcommittee to draft guidelines for the new award.
The next topic was discussion about whether or not the number of finalists should be prorated by college, to allow the College of Arts and Sciences faculty to put forward more finalists. Now it is restricted to the same number as the other 4 colleges, but it is much larger. This committee decided to await the decision on whether or not the total number of awards will be increased.
A faculty member had inquired if the dossiers of faculty who had won awards could be made available for examination. The committee discussed how best to accomplish this. The committee agreed to recommend that the Faculty Enhancement Center offer a workshop/panel presentation by several of the award winners to discuss how to put together a winning dossier, etc. The committee agreed, and Judy Solano, as FA President, contacted Jace Hargis to implement this.
Following approval of the action item to establish the award, the committee debated how to proceed with the development of the policies and procedures for the new Graduate Teaching Award. After much discussion, the committee charged Ellie Scheirer and Jeanne Patterson with drafting the document, using the Undergraduate Teaching Award process as a template. After review by this committee, the new Graduate Dean, David Fenner, will look at the document for input. The goal was to have a document ready to present to the Faculty Association for the September 7 meeting, in order to award the money in 2006/07.
This group reviewed, amended, and approved the procedures for the new Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award. Only those faculty with approved graduate status would be eligible for the award, that summer courses could be included, that all courses listed would include enrollment, and that a minimum of 3 graduate courses must be taught over a two year period. This document was submitted as an Action Item for the July 2006 Faculty Association meeting and was approved.
Action Items
FA 06-12 Increasing the Number of Outstanding Undergraduate Teaching Awards
FA 06-13 New Award: Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award
FA 06-24 Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award: Procedures and Guidelines
