MARCH 21, 2006
Regular Meeting No. 13 of the 52nd Session
Present: Chair Allen, Secretary Bruck, Past Chair Daley, Parliamentarian Corbin; Senators Baynes, Blair, Branoff, Brownie, Clark, Culbreth, Dawes, Fahmy, Gustke, Hanley-Bowdoin, Hooper, Hudson, Kellner, Khosla, Kinsella, Lindbo, Martin, Moore, Overton, Robarge, Schultheis, Scotford, B. Smith, R. Smith, Tetro, Williams, Wessels
Excused: Senator Banks-Lee, Blank, Clark, Yencho
Absent: Senators Fauntleroy, Fikry, Johnson, Krotee, Young
Visitors: Katie Perry, Senior Vice Provost; Mary Elizabeth Kurz, Vice Chancellor & General Counsel; Terrence O’Brien, Professor; Balian Li, Interim Vice Provost for International Affairs; Barbara Carroll, Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources; Joanne Woodard, Vice Provost for Equal Opportunity & Equity; Thomas Conway, Dean of Undergraduate Academic Program; Lee Fowler, Athletics Director
1. Call to Order
Chair Nina Strömgren Allen called the thirteenth 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
Chair Allen welcomed Senators and Guests.
Brook Edmonds from the Graduate Students Association encouraged the Faculty to attend the First Annual Graduate Research Symposium Thursday, March 30, 2006 at the Talley Student Center. The purpose of this event is threefold, first to showcase the quality and diversity of graduate research on this campus, having students practice their communication skills, and also to demonstrate the importance of graduate research to our state decision makers. Seventy-four students will be presenting posters.
3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 12 February 21, 2006
The motion passed unanimously to approve the minutes.
4. Issues of Concern
The Resources and Environment Committee met with Dr. Mary Bengtson, Medical Director of Student Health Services (SHS), who was extremely responsive to their concerns. Meningococcal meningitis is a dangerous disease, with a fairly large proportion (about 15%) of cases resulting in death, and an additional 10% or more resulting in permanent disability.
After reviewing all the information, the committee concluded that the NCSU Student Health Services meningitis policy in its current form is reasonable and proper. The medical professionals at SHS are constantly aware of changing situations, and they can be relied on without question to update the policy when and if necessary. The committee is not aware of any medical professional organization that takes a position for mandatory meningitis vaccination of incoming college students.
Lead Based Paint in the 1911 Building
Senator Brent Smith, Vice Chair of the Resources and Environment Committee (REC) reported that the committee looked into the question of possible lead-based paint (LBP) peeling in the 1911 building. Overexposure to airborne LBP particles can produce serious health consequences via inhalation. NCSU has 58 facilities (about 4.1 million square feet) that potentially contain LBP, including 1911 Building, which has considerable peeling paint in the exterior stairwells. Inside of the 1911 building, paint is in much better condition, although there is some peeling on woodworks.
Based on information collected by the Resources and Environment Committee the risk to employees in the 1911 Building from lead based paint appears to be very low. This is based on analysis of paint, not analysis of air. Therefore we are not 100% certain of the risk level.
As a result of the Faulty Senate concerns, EH&PS performed an internal review of their procedures, and is improving them with respect to lead based paint.
(1) LBP information will be posted on the EH&PS website for employees
(2) EH&PS will add LBP information to its newsletter
(3) EH&PS has met with Facilities Operations to ensure that EH&PS can make appropriate LBP risk assessments whenever peeling paint is noted, not just when paint is disturbed by painters or contractors
(4) EH&PS plans to review with Facilities Operations the feasibility of over spraying the 1911 Building stairwells with a binder to seal the loose paint chips until the renovation is done
The 1911 Building renovation will begin within 6-12 months. Facilities Operations has not set an exact date.
5. Remarks from Provost Nielsen
Provost Nielsen introduced Dr. Balian Li as the Interim Vice Provost for International Affairs.
I just wanted to review with you my commitment and the university’s commitment to International Programs and International globalization of the university in a big picture way and explain to you how we got to the situation that we are in right now.
You have all been reading our draft strategic plan, which is in the final stages of completion. It is an important point to notice that among our investment priorities one of them says integrated global perspective into our programs and functions and it reads “as North Carolina and the nation becomes more diverse and more intimately connected through global economic, social culture and political networks, NC State has the responsibility to integrate international dimensions into student university experiences to contribute to the international research community.” Global and multicultural awareness is critical for partnerships in knowledge based economic and social development and is necessary to keep the pace with world –wide change. The fact that the statement is in our strategic plan and in our investment priorities is a reflection of the way the Chancellor feels, the way I feel, the way our deans feel and I know it is the way you feel as well that international programming and an international prospective at NC State is certainly essential to our future and to our students’ future.
We are interviewing dean candidates in Natural Resources and pretty soon it will be Engineering, CHASS and then the Graduate School. When they ask me what is important I say fundamentally at the top of my list as Provost are two things which are international programs and diversity.
Katie Perry and I had lunch with Balian Li and while we were eating lunch Balian talked about all the things that I thought was right about NC State and what we needed to be thinking about, what we needed to be considering and where we needed to be going. While sitting there I thought why isn’t that guy our interim manager of this process to do for us what I was going to look outside for, so on that basis I talked with a few people and everyone felt the way I did so I asked Dr. Li to come into this position as Interim Vice Provost for International Affairs for a fifteen month period starting on March 1 through June 30 of next year to get us moving relative to China, India, and Korea. The second was to help us think strategically through the issues that we need to deal with from International Programs.
Dr. Li’s task here is not so much to manage the existing programs in Study Abroad and our Office of International Services but to really begin to add the other element to the program that we need.
Dr. Li is extremely well respected and a quantitative geneticist. He originally came from China but has resided in Raleigh for a number of years. Interestingly most of his international work has been in Europe and South America and not in Asia. He knows Asia very well as well. He is one of the founders of the Chinese language schools in the Raleigh area that helps youngsters from China learn their native language.
I received an email this morning about our alternate spring break trips and several of them are international trips. I particularly got this one from a student who organized the trip on environmental conservation in Belize. He and fifteen of our students went to Belize over spring break and were responsible for doing the work that is going to lead to the conservation of twenty-five acres of endangered monkey habitat in this baboon sanctuary in Belize. It says that in order to preserve land for environmental conservation in Belize property must be used for a demonstrated purpose as approved by the government. This is where our team came into play. In just four days with just sixteen people and limited tools our team was able to clear two 40 x 40 areas of dense jungle for campgrounds, build two camping platforms, two picnic tables, a roof shelter and create signs and trails to the camp sites, all of which is necessary in order to establish that this is an area that is being actively used for conservation purposes.
The Prague Institute is our first international campus in Prague and it was created by the College of Design. We have expanded that program, doubled the space and other colleges are moving in there.
Recently we moved the Japan Center to the Office of the Provost. The Center was facing being shutdown because it was running out of resources. We have now revitalized that situation. There are requests for two hundred thousand dollars in permanent state funding that look very promising, that the governor will have in his budget to restore the operation for that. We created a new advisory board and met for the first time a couple of weeks ago.
Our goal for study abroad is to double the number of students studying in study abroad programs in the next three to five years and we want to continue that doubling rate consistently. In that regard the Study Abroad Office will be initiating their limited service option. It used to be that we had two kinds of programs; ones that were fully run through study abroad and then ones that were handled out of colleges and departments. We got rid of those a couple of years ago because of issues of coordination, emergency control, liability, etc., but we are reintroducing that option more formally so that we can have expanded opportunities and things that colleges want to do they can do with the proper management for security and financial sustainability.
In the International Services we have a new global training initiative where we have put in some start up money to develop courses that will help people in the United States who are going to go abroad understand the circumstances in which they will be studying and working.
We recently announced that we would start a China Center as well. This will be done in collaboration with the newly formed North Carolina China Center, which is a private, business activity devoted to trying to increase business with China. We will be working on the scholarly end of that part.
Dr. Li has begun looking at peer universities, three in China, one in India, one in Korea, and one in Chile where we can establish relationships with those universities that will allow faculty, students, staff, research projects etc., to move back and forth. He is also talking about the formation of some international alumni chapters especially in those places where we know we have lots of people. For example, graduates of NC State fundamentally run the Korean nuclear energy industry and we think we have great opportunities to go to Korea and work with the University of Sol in Korea but also to develop that alumni base in Korea. Dr. Li also wants to look at some joint professional non-thesis MS degrees.
Comments by Dr. Balian Li, Interim Vice Provost for International Affairs
Basically I am very glad to have this opportunity to face this challenge. I think NC State has done a lot for international programs but we can do better. We need to increase the number of students studying abroad. We also need to increase our international students. With the global training initiative we are trying to bring foreign nationals here as well as students from here going abroad to study. We are in the process of hiring one position to process the resource to help and we are trying to set up some degree programs in technology management, some sort of a Master of Engineering Management. This is a training initiative. We are going to explore a few international campuses especially China and India. Before, there were some hurdles that could not be overcome but now General Administration has some clear guidelines for those so we can now work through the system to see what we can now establish for those campuses.
Comments and Questions
Senator Kellner stated that he doesn’t think this is a thought through study abroad program that is doing anything for the students. He noted that you have to build things up with the infrastructure, you have to understand what the campus has, and you have to prepare students before you send them over.
Senator Bruck stated that one of the barriers that he constantly gets from students and also experiences himself that doesn’t seem to be getting any better is that “at other universities when students commit to go to study abroad there is a direct articulation of this university with the university that they are going to so that the student absolutely does not lose time.” It seems that every student that he has had that has taken a study abroad particularly in a foreign language country comes back wanting to know why they cannot trade one course with the other and the answer is almost invariably no. “To me if we are going to get students really interested in doing this and convince them that it is a critical part of their education that going on these semester long trips that they are going to come back in tact from that excursion and not have to lose time on their degree program.”
Provost Nielsen stated that most of our majors have zero pre-electives. The technical majors tend to have zero free electives or three hours of free electives. In CHASS many of the degrees have twenty- nine hours of free electives. “I am hoping that we will get programs with peer institutions so that we do match up and will be able to send Engineering students to a place where either our faculty are teaching some Engineering courses, the essential ones that during that semester you have to take or you will get behind or they are taking comparable courses in English at an institution that we agree that we can trade the courses with.”
Provost Nielsen stated that he thinks we need to look at lots of models for how to get international experience perspectives for our students. “The model of a semester or year abroad I don’t think is sufficient any more to meet the needs of a variety of our students because of technical disciplines. I disagree with Hans a little, the students that I accompanied on a trip to Germany out of Pennsylvania their eyes and minds were open to what the rest of the world was like. I don’t think it is zero unless it is perfect. There is something good that happens for most people no matter how much we get there.”
6. New Business
Nomination of Chair-Elect of the Faculty
Three faculty members were nominated to run for the position of Chair-Elect of the Faculty. They were Senator James Martin from the College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Dr. Terrence O’Brien from the College of Education, and Senator Wayne Robarge from the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
The nominees were given an opportunity to make a statement to the Senators before the election.
Senator James Martin and Senator Wayne Robarge were elected to run for the position of Chair-Elect of the Faculty (2006-2007) and Chair of the Faculty (2007-2009).
Draft Resolution on Fiscal Fitness in GER
Senator Martin stated that Zack Adams from the Student Senate requested that the Faculty Senate consider some effort to include fiscal fitness into the undergraduate curriculum. The Academic Policy Committee discussed the issue and responded with a resolution largely recognizing there is unlikely specific action that can be taken but they are very much supportive of the recommendation and recognize that fiscal matters can be of great importance to the students.
Senator Martin presented the resolution for its first reading. A motion was made and seconded to suspend the rules to vote on the resolution. The motion passed unanimously.
A motion was made and seconded to adopt the resolution. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
A motion was made and seconded to reinstate the rule. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
POL 05.25.01 – Grievance Procedure
Senator Robarge stated that the Personnel Policy has not met and deliberated this policy. Senior Vice Provost Katie Perry is trying to move the policy forward so that it can be placed on the agenda for the Board of Trustees, which is in April. The committee reviewed the policy and has no objections to wording changes. Therefore the committee moved to vote on the document and recommends the current document, as it exists.
Senator Robarge moved approval of the document. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
POL 05.20.1 – Academic Tenure Policy
Senator Martin, Chair of the Academic Policy Committee stated that the committee has not formally met to discuss the document. He read the document and feels that the changes seem to be efficiency changes for the most part and recommended that the Senate pass the document. The three specific changes that have been made are
- Clarifying the issues. If a person is denied tenure they may be reconsidered for tenure in the following year but the new text states that new information in this case must document a significant change in the status of information included in the dossier. It was identified as the basis for denial of promotion and conferral of tenure.
- The second change has to do with permanent tenure: Individuals without permanent US residency basically the clause there simply states that the person must have filed and be working to obtain residency and tenure is contingent with residency status which again I believe is a non issue.
- Finally the third point of revision has to do with language as stated here on a need to know status. Basically stating that the materials prepared in the course of a person’s view will be available to the voting faculty throughout the process to insure that the process is carried out correctly.
Secretary Bruck moved to accept the academic tenure policy. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
Resolution to Create a Legislative Affairs Committee of the Faculty Senate
Senator Martin presented the resolution for its first reading.
Senator Martin stated that a Legislative Affairs Committee would likely be a different kind of committee than the committees that we currently have constituted in that all of our committee meetings are publicly announced and open to anyone who care to attend. This committee particularly can say hosting visits or facilitating conversation with Legislative staff would likely serve as facilitators to bring together appropriate groups of people to have that conversation. Andy Willis’ idea would be to potentially four times a year bring a group of approximately fifteen legislators or legislative staff to campus for a conversation with faculty. We would not recommend that this committee of probably ten would be responsible and the ones to meet with every time but rather this committee would try to set up a program, select good representatives to put together an effective program for communication.
Chair Allen stated that President Bowles has asked for a list of essays from professors. He would like to have some of these to take with him to the Legislators.
Past Chair Daley stated that President Bowles plans to lobby for a 4% increase. He wants real stories about real faculty to show the legislators real people. He would like to have narratives about how the faculty’s days and weeks are spent.
Senator Kinsella wants to know what people are thinking about the nature of the access between the members of the committee and the members of the Legislature. He asked whether committee members would have ongoing access. He wants to know can they initiate conversations or is this mediated in channel and coordinated with the efforts of the administration.
Senator Martin stated that as one who is envisioning this he thinks that it is very important to work together. “If we ever start doing end run kind of activity I think that we actually set ourselves up for catastrophic feelings so that is why Chair Allen and I met with Andy. My sense is that the contact with the legislature would largely be through his set of contacts. He use to be a budget writer for the General Assembly so he knows both staff and legislators there quite well and you don’t want to just target everyone, you want to target the effective Turks and I think he would be the one to help select those targets rather than us trying to have faculty direct access. The other thing that we recognize as even as it stands any legislator can come to us with questions and it would also seem that such a committee could be a clearing house that if the legislator has an issue before them this could be a clearing house and then the committee could sort of fan it out to wherever there would be appropriate contacts. If we ever get into doing sort of end runs then we defeat the very purpose of what we are about.”
Senator Baynes wanted to know if this is unique for the UNC System. Will the other UNC campuses have a similar committee?
Chair Daley stated that he doesn’t think the other campuses have committees. He knows that the Faculty Assembly is beginning to coordinate similar kinds of processes. He believes that UNC and NC State will have this committee.
Secretary Bruck stated that doing end runs is totally inappropriate. On the other hand if this committee is doing its job properly it could be a tremendous resource for the Provost and the Chancellor as well as questions come to the university rather than scrambling around as often is done.
Provost Nielsen stated that one thing he is not sure about is the structure with a member from each college. Some of the colleges only have two Senators and neither of them may be interested in this sort to thing. “I am not sure that the representation, college by college is necessary so much as a set of ex people who care about this and who are interested and would be willing to do it. I think you might have a difficult time trying to drag a Senator out of each college to participate in this when they may or may not want to participate.”
Secretary Bruck stated that there are different size colleges but he came to the conclusion that indeed he does not think anyone would want to deny that there are college agendas as well as university agendas. “I know that if I was a dean and I heard that such a committee existed to not at least have representation on such a committee to at least hear what the agenda is and be able to report back might create more internal dissension than is necessary. To deny a given college representation on a committee that has such a broad charge as this I think potentially you would run into trouble.”
Senator Martin suggested changing the wording to say that faculty Senators from each college would be asked.
Senator Culbreth stated that it is not immediately apparent to him what practical benefit comes from having this committee over having the Senate perform this function. The fact that there is a Staff and a Student Senate is okay but at least as I perceive it there interests are likely to be far more homogenous than the interest of the entire faculty at NC State and I think it is the job of this body to give that sort of advice to the Provost, to the Chancellor, and to the people that work for them rather than a subgroup. Once it goes to a subgroup like this there are all sorts of potential interest and conflicts and at least in my mind this is a small enough group to represent the faculty to provide advice on what the general faculty is rather than an even smaller group.
Chair Allen stated that this whole group is unmanageable to reach out to legislators.
Senator Culbreth: Do you really think that this group is going to initiate contact with legislators? Is that even legal?
Chair Allen responded, yes if we do it the right way.
Senator Martin stated that this committee would not work really independent on the Senate but would report back to the Senate with decisions just like the other Faculty Senate Committees. The reason to make it a part of this body basically says here is something that needs to be done to advance the function of the university and to get something done here is a small committee that is going to take care of the nuts and bolts to bring it back to the full Senate. This committee is not a stand-alone university committee but needs to be a committee of this body just like all the other committees.
Senator Culbreth stated that the point is this is different than writing a regulation and bringing it for a reading and reviewing and discussing it. You have direct contact with the legislators and whatever is said in personal contact with them is the impression they walk away from and there is nothing you can do to alter that by bringing you discussion post fact to the committee and describing it to us and so any very small subset of the faculty that has this contact is really the primary voice for the entire faculty and I don’t know the answer. Is it wise to entrust that to that smaller group or is that literally the job of the Faculty Senate.
Senator Hanley-Bowdoin stated that this committee is not going to be the exclusive contact to the Legislature. This committee’s role is to make suggestions on how we interact with the Legislature but there is no way that committee would necessarily be the best group of people to contact the Legislature but on a Senate that might be part of the contact for a particular issue or it could be faculty outside of the Senate. I don’t think the idea is to limit the participants but rather to make certain that there is some sort of organization and insurance that there is a faculty involved in this process.
Chair Allen suggested that this document be carried over into the next meeting.
Anyone with suggestions or ideas on how they would like to have a committee constituted should forward them to Senator Martin.
REG 04.25.02 – Resolution Procedures for Harassment Complaints
Senator Robarge reported that this document addresses resolution procedures in regard to harassment complaints as associated with protected classes. He pointed out that there are two units on this campus that deal with this. They are the Office of Equal Opportunities (OEO) and Human Resources. The document clearly defines who is covered by this policy. It has definitions in it in terms of who is the complainant and who is the respondent.
There are now clear definitions as to how the remedies can be brought about by both informal resolution and formal resolution. How that happens is defined in the document. The other major item that has now been added is the fact that OEO and Human Resources are not responsible for any administrative actions that come out of this policy. Administrative action that results as the result of a formal resolution is carried out by the administrative units involved and that would be department heads, deans, etc., and that distinction is now clearly made in the document. There is also now section ten dealing with additional rights of complainants and respondents because this gets very complicated since we have SPA’s. We have EPA’s and we have students. This policy as it says applies to anyone, employed or otherwise who comes on to the property of NC State University.
Senator Robarge moved that the Faculty Senate approve Regulation 04.25.02 as it was submitted.
The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
Provost Nielsen commended Senior Vice Provost Perry and the Faculty Senate for being responsive in trying to get regulations and policies in order so that they serve the purposes that they are meant to serve. “We have made great progress during this past year and I commend you all for doing this.”
Secretary Bruck moved that the meeting adjourn.
The motion was seconded and passed to adjourn the meeting at 5 p.m.