APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 17, 2003 (approved as corrected)
At 3:26 p.m. on March 17, 2003, Chair Gates convened the Faculty Senate meeting
in the University Conference Room (224 I. G. Greer Hall).

I. ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. Chair Gates welcomed visitors and asked that they introduce themselves.
(See voting sheet for visitors’ names.)
B. Chair Gates reminded Senators about the upcoming Senate and College/University Elections. He noted that the elections were underway and that the ballots would mailed out on paper this year (not electronic ballots like last year).
C. Chair Gates reminded Chairs of Senate Committees to prepare annual reports for the upcoming April meeting by April 7, 2003.
D. Chair Gates reminded Senators that Senate's Committee on Committee needed nominations to fill faculty vacancies on university committees, including the Administrative Evaluations Committee. Nominations must be approved by the Senate at the April meeting. Send nominations to Senator Butts
E. Chair Gates asked Senators to submit questions and try to attend the Chancellor's Advisory Committee Meeting on Mon., April 7th, 3:00 -5:00 p.m.
Chair Gates reported that the Feb. 24th C.A. C. meeting discussed problems and solutions surrounding increased enrollment.

II. VISITORS
Chair Gates introduced Jenny Ware, ASU Staff Council and Co-Chair of the Scholarship Committee. Ware announced and solicited donations for an upcoming Silent Auction on April 17, 2003 from 10:00 - 4:00 in the Price Lake section of the Blue Ridge Ballroom.

III. MINUTES – February 10, 2003
Senator S. Simon moved and Senator Allen seconded to approve the February 10, 2003 minutes as corrected.
VOTE 1 18 YES 0 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The motion passed.

IV. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Academic Policy Committee (S. SIMON, Muir, Olson)
Senator S. Simon presented the following motion (re-submitted due to extensive revisions at the last meeting) for senators to consider. Senator S. Simon noted that Dr. Petschauer had informed him of a similar resolution that was passed in the early 1990's stating that departments were to have policies and procedures on file and located in the library. Senator S. Simon pointed out that after some investigation at the library, he discovered that a number of departments did not have, or perhaps had pulled, their departmental documents from the library. Considering the proposed motion was similar to the older motion, Senator S. Simon asked if the Senate wanted to pursue voting on the motion. Senator Koch pointed out that the newly proposed motion was an improvement on the previous motion because it involved posting information online, as opposed to cataloging departmental written policies and procedures in the library. Senator S. Simon noted that posting departmental policies and procedures online for faculty to access would be more beneficial than having the information stored in the library.

The original motion was read:
1. FS02-03/03-01- Departmental written policies and procedures-
All departments are to have written policies and procedures. These are to include department's criteria for promotion and tenure, the structure of the DPC, the committee structure, a statement concerning the department's budget, and other information the department might see fit to include. These policies and procedures are to be posted online with the department's home page for all faculty to have access.
Senator Butts and Chair Gates suggested adding the word "departmental" to "the committee structure." Senator Rardin suggested adding the word "bylaws."

Several Senators voiced concerns about how, what and why departmental budgets were to be posted online. Senator Arnold suggested adding the phrase "an overview of the department's budget." Senator Yaukey also raised concerns about adding the word "bylaws" to the motion. Dr. Ward pointed out that departmental budgets from previous years were available through Bobby Sharp's office and Belk Library. Senator Allen suggested that instead of posting the current departmental budget online, it would be more reasonable for departments to post the previous year's budget online because it would cut down on issues of constantly updating budgets posted online yet provide faculty information and access to departmental budgets. Chair Gates suggested removing the phrase about "the department's budget." The Chair also asked Senator Anderson, Chair of the Faculty Senate Budget Committee to take on the task of working out the details and issues of posting budgets online in her committee.

Senator Rardin read the re-worded motion as, "All departments are to have written policies and procedures. These are to include; department's criteria for promotion and tenure, the structure of the DPC, the departmental committees' structure and bylaws and other information the department might see fit to include. These policies and procedures are to be posted online on the department's homepage for all faculty to have access." Senator Hall suggested striking the word "online" because it was redundant and striking "for all faculty to have access."

FS02-03/03-01- Departmental written policies and procedures (as amended) -
All departments are to have written policies and procedures. These are to include; department's criteria for promotion and tenure, the structure of the DPC, the departmental committees' structure and bylaws and other information the department might see fit to include. These policies and procedures are to be posted on the department's homepage.

VOTE 2 17 YES 0 NO 1 ABSTAIN
The motion passed.

2. Information for the Senate - Senator S. Simon explained the procedures and policies in place for student late drops and retakes. Senator S. Simon expressed concern that the policy was too liberal. He pointed out that if a student took advantage of the allowable late drops and retakes, the student could take up to 27 hours of class time. "The State is currently asking us (faculty) to take on more students, plus the State wants students to complete the program in 4 years," noted Senator S. Simon. Senator S. Simon emphasized that increasing the number of students plus having a liberal policy on late drops and retakes would only add to the faculty teaching workload. Senator S. Simon also pointed-out that he was presenting a recommendation on the issue and this was not a policy. Chair Gates suggested asking the AP&P to "re-visit the policy" because it needed some updating. Senator Woodworth suggested that the current ASU Catalog needed to be consulted and quoted.
Information excerpted from the Undergraduate Bulletin on the policy for reference use:
GRADE-POINT AVERAGE AND REPEAT POLICY
The grade-point average (GPA) is a general measure of the student's academic
achievement while at Appalachian. The GPA is determined by dividing the total
number of quality points earned by the total number of quality hours
attempted ("quality points" and "quality hours" are derived from courses
graded A-F or WF). The GPA is computed only on the basis of coursework taken
at Appalachian.
Students may, for a variety of reasons, elect to repeat a course. If a
student so elects, the following policies will govern the awarding of credit
and the computation of her or his GPA:
1) Credit hours earned in a particular course will not be awarded more than
one time; i.e., if a course in which credit hours have been earned is
repeated with a passing grade, additional credit hours will not be
awarded. If, however, a course in which credit hours have been earned is
repeated with a grade of "F", "U", or "WF", the hours earned initially
will be subtracted from the student's total.
2) When a course is repeated, the grade earned in the initial attempt can be
excluded from computation in the student's GPA for a maximum of five (5)
courses. The student must indicate to the Registrar's Office, in writing,
which courses are to be excluded from GPA computation under this policy.
(Note: If a grade is excluded from GPA computation when repeated, it
remains displayed on the academic transcript.)
3) A course may not be repeated if the content has changed substantially, or
if the number of credit hours has been reduced.
4) If neither the number nor the title of a course has changed but the
content has changed substantially, it will be the responsibility of the
chair of the department in which the course is offered to notify the
Registrar that a student who took the course prior to the change in
content may not repeat the course for credit.
5) Whenever a student has received a grade of incomplete ("I") in a course,
the student will be permitted to re-register for the course in which the
incomplete was given without the "I" changing to an "F," provided that it
is within the period of time designated by the initial instructor of
record, not to exceed one year.Senator McKinney dissented because he believed it was vital to allow students an unlimited opportunity to complete and pass a course. Senators shared personal examples and experiences dealing with students who failed and repeated courses. Senator Rardin moved that the Faculty Senate request AP&P to re-visit the policy on course repeats and late drops and Senator S. Simon seconded. Senator McKinney gave examples of why he was not in favor of the motion. Senator Koch was sympathetic to Senator McKinney's stance. Senator Rardin revised the proposed and amended motion from the floor and Senator S. Simon seconded. Senator Rardin read aloud the revised and amended motion. Senators discussed the options of limiting course repeats as well as reducing the current deadline date for dropping courses. Senator Allen called for the question and Senator Rardin seconded.

Called for the question.
VOTE 3 10 YES 6 NO 2 ABSTAIN
The question passed.

Senator Rardin's motion from the floor on course repeats and late drops (as amended & revised )-
Whereas the Faculty Senate believes that the current policy on course repeats and late drops is too liberal, the Faculty Senate requests AP&P to re-visit the current policy on course repeats and late drops.

Senator Rardin moved and Senator S. Simon seconded the amended and revised motion as read.
VOTE 4 11 YES 7 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The motion carried.

B. Committee on Committees (BUTTS, Truett, White)
Senator Butts introduced the motion, FS02-03/03-02- Motion Regarding the Charge of the Teaching Enhancement Committee-

The charge of the Teaching Enhancement Committee shall be as follows:
"a. Members of the Committee: 14 - 11 faculty (3 from A&S, 2 from Bus, 2 from ED, 2 from FAA, 1 from MUS and 1 from LIB), 2 undergraduate students (chosen by SGA) and 1 graduate student (chose by GSAS). The Coordinator of the Faculty and Academic Development program of the Hubbard Center will be an ex-officio (voting) member of the Committee. The faculty will be elected by the faculty in the unit that they represent. Faculty terms will be three years. b. Report to: the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. c. Areas of responsibility: 1.) to work both in cooperation with the Hubbard Center and on its own to consider issues and make recommendations regarding the enhancement, evaluation, and recognition of teaching at Appalachian; and 2.) to share among the faculty ways that teaching is being improved both at Appalachian and elsewhere."

The official charges to the Awards Committee and the Teaching Enhancement Committee have a significant area of overlap which has resulted in confusion regarding which faculty committee has responsibility for selection of nominees for the Board of Governors Award for Excellence in Teaching and other teaching awards.

The current charge to the Awards Committee is:
"Members on Committee: 17 - 13 faculty (3 from A&S, 2 from Bus, 2 from FAA, 2 from Ed, 2 from Music, 2 from Lib), 2 staff, and 2 students (one undergraduate and one graduate). Faculty composition can be any faculty, including adjunct and part-time. In the event a member of the Committee wishes to seek an award, an alternate from his/her area will be recommended to the Faculty Senate by the Committee on Committees to serve for the duration of the awards process. b. Report to: The Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Areas of Responsibility: Selecting and facilitating university and external awards including but not limited to: ASU teaching awards, Board of Governors Awards, O. Max Gardner Award."

The current charge to the Teaching Enhancement Committee is:
"a. Members of the Committee: 14 - 11 faculty (3 from A&S, 2 from Bus, 2 from ED, 2 from FAA, 1 from MUS and 1 from LIB), 2 undergraduate students (chosen by SGA) and 1 graduate student (chose by GSAS). The Coordinator of the Faculty and Academic Development program of the Hubbard Center will be an ex-officio (voting) member of the Committee. The faculty will be elected by the faculty in the unit that they represent. Faculty terms will be three years. b. Report to: the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. c. Areas of responsibility: 1) to work both in cooperation with the Hubbard Center and on its own to consider issues and make recommendations regarding the enhancement, evaluation, and recognition of teaching at Appalachian; 2) to share among the faculty ways that teaching is being improved both at Appalachian and elsewhere; 3) to serve as the selections committee consistent with the guidelines submitted by the Board of Governors for the Board of Governors' Award for Excellence in Teaching."

This overlap in responsibility was discussed with the chairs of the two committees, and they agreed to resolve the overlap by changing the charge to the Teaching Enhancement Committee to eliminate the responsibility for selection of the nominee for the Board of Governors' Award for Excellence in Teaching.

Senator Butts explained that the Teaching Enhancement Committee was producing all of the awards and the Awards Committee was not. He explained that the rationale for the motion was to delegate and separate the charges for both committees. Senator Koch noted that he had served on the committee and noticed that the Awards Committee "rarely met or did anything." Senator K. Simon expressed frustration in her experience in dealing with the Awards Committee. She revealed that the awards process was "an ugly process" and that something was wrong with the process, especially in light of the importance of awards. Senator Muir, who has served on the TEC for three years, agreed with Senator K. Simon that "it was an ugly process" and "the process was broken and something had to be done." Senator S. Simon stated that something had to be done with the committee structure. Chair Gates said to Senator Butts, "I think this motion delineates responsibility, divides the committees up and what they do. Making it work is something entirely different and what's responsible for the failure is a broader question still." Senator Butts replied, "If we are clear with who has responsibility for these things, then we are also clear on which group has responsibility." Senator Rardin called for the question and Senator S. Simon seconded.

Called for the question.
VOTE 5 18 YES 0 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The question passed.

FS02-03/03-02- Motion regarding the charge of the Teaching Enhancement Committee as written-
VOTE 6 18 YES 0 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The motion carried

C. Ad-hoc Committee on Deans Evaluations (WEITZ, Bauldry, Butts, Gates)
Report & Motions
1. Final Report from the Ad-hoc Committee on Deans Evaluations
2. FS02-03/03-03- Recommend the Council of Chairs develop process addressing relationship with the Deans
3. FS02-03/03-04- Recommend demographic information
4. FS02-03/03-05- Recommend quantitative, advocacy & narrative questions for evaluation of the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research
5. Summary of the process as approved by the Faculty Senate in Spring 2002
6. FS02-03/03-06-Recommend quantitative, advocacy & narrative questions for evaluation of the Deans Fall 2003

Senator S. Simon moved and Senator Allen seconded to table the four motions regarding Ad-hoc Committee on Deans Evaluations until the April 14th, 2003 Faculty Senate meeting at which point, excerpts from the minutes from April 2001 and May 2002 would be available for Senators to read.

Motion from the floor to table Ad-hoc Committee on Deans Evaluations Report & Motions until the April 14th, 2003 Faculty Senate meeting with minutes from April 2001 and May 2002 available for Senators:
1. Final Report from the Ad-hoc Committee on Deans Evaluations
2. FS02-03/03-03- Recommend the Council of Chairs develop process addressing relationship with the Deans
3. FS02-03/03-04- Recommend demographic information
4. FS02-03/03-05- Recommend quantitative, advocacy & narrative questions for evaluation of the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research
5. Summary of the process as approved by the Faculty Senate in Spring 2002
6. FS02-03/03-06-Recommend quantitative, advocacy & narrative questions for evaluation of the Deans Fall 2003

VOTE 7 16 YES 2 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The motion carried.

D. Welfare of Students Committee (RARDIN, Lambert, McKinney)
Senator Rardin presented FS02-03/03-07 - Recommendation on Graduate Student Parking.
Senator Rardin read the rationale for the motion:
1. Graduate Assistants are as important to the mission of the university
as part-time faculty and part time faculty are permitted to park in
faculty and staff parking spaces.
2. The current plan to integrate the 150 Graduate Assistants (estimated
to be parking at any one time) into 626 spaces of Stadium lot is far
less feasible than integrating them into the 1145 spaces for faculty

After a short discussion, the majority of Senators agreed that parking was and important issue but did not agree with the recommendation to allow for Graduate Assistants to park in Faculty and Staff parking spaces and that Graduate Assistants already had adequate assigned parking. Senator S. Simon moved and Senator Rardin seconded the call for the question.

Called for the question.
VOTE 8 15 YES 3 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The motion carried.

FS02-03/03-07 Faculty Senate recommends that Appalachian Parking and Traffic
Office integrate Graduate Assistant parking into faculty and staff parking spaces beginning Fall semester 2003-
VOTE 9 4 YES 13 NO 1 ABSTAIN
The motion failed.

Senator Rardin gave a brief report on campus smoking issues and noted that the Welfare of Students Committee did not come forward with a motion related to banning smoking in campus buildings because the motion could not be legally enforced in the North Carolina.
Senator Woodworth mentioned that she had spoken with the ASU attorney about legalities involved with smoker's and non-smoker's rights and smoking policies. She pointed out the fact that there is currently no law stating that outdoor smoking cannot be regulated. As far as regulating indoor smoking, Senator Woodworth informed Senators that there are North Carolina laws in place that designate 20% of a building for smoking and until legislation could be changed there wasn't much Senators could do to modify indoor smoking policies.
Considering the fact that no laws are currently in place to regulate outdoor smoking on North Carolina State-owned property, Senator Muir presented a motion from the floor regarding banning smoking within 25 feet of University entrances and exits. Senator Koch raised questions and concerns about the potential need for the policing of smoking outdoors in close proximity to entrances and exits. Senator Muir explained the health risks involved for non-smokers (especially those with asthma) when smokers gather at campus entryways and exits and non-smokers are forced to inhale toxins from the smoke. Senator S. Simon wanted to see a "cultural change in students" and stated that there was nothing wrong with asking smokers to move 25 feet away from a building to smoke. Senator Rardin suggested that non-smokers simply use other doors where smokers were not gathering in order to avoid second-hand smoke. Senator Woodworth pointed out that no one has the right to provide second-hand smoke. Senator McKinney had concerns about smokers gathering around the outside areas of buildings. He noted that the outdoor cigarette smoke was seeping into ventilation systems. Senator McKinney was especially concerned about the fact that buildings like the music and business building had sealed windows that effectively trapped the smoke coming in from the ventilation system, therefore forcing non-smokers to inhale toxins from smoke. Senator Lambert moved and Senator Rardin seconded the call for the question.

Called for the question.
VOTE 10 17 YES 0 NO 0 ABSTAIN
The question passed.

Motion from the floor presented by Senator Muir - The Faculty Senate calls on the University Administration to ban smoking within a distance of 25' from all entrances & exits of University buildings.

VOTE 11 10 YES 6 NO 1 ABSTAIN
The motion carried.

Senator K. Simon's gave three brief reports on: 1.) The University Parking & Traffic Committee, 2.) The Faculty Senate Campus Planning Committee, 3.) The Strategic Planning Committee Enrollment Enhancement Team.

Senator K. Simon's first report dealt with recent issues involving the availability (or unavailability) of parking spaces, new construction, and the need for additional revenue for parking construction. Several senators talked about personal experiences dealing with campus parking problems. Chair Gates noted that the discussion seemed to be a good preview of what they were going to be talking about on April 14th. Senator K. Simon gave a second report from The Faculty Senate Campus Planning Committee. Senator K. Simon asked Senators if they would be interested in watching a 20-minute Power Point presentation by Jane Helm, Vice Chancellor for Business Affairs about a progress report of the ten major projects going on campus. Senators agreed that it would be a good idea and to include all Faculty at the presentation. Chair Gates suggested that the presentation occur before classes ended. The third and final report by Senator K. Simon dealt with her involvement on the Strategic Planning Committee's Enrollment Enhancement Team. She asked Senators for their input on "why students should come to ASU." Senator K. Simon talked about the dynamics of enrollment, concerns about keeping students coming to ASU, lack of teaching facilities, and part-time faculty issues.

Senator Yaukey reminded and urged Senators to attend the App House Forum to be held on Thursday 3/20 at 4:45 in the Table Rock room of the Student Union. She noted that it was a good opportunity for Faculty to voice their concerns about losing the D.C. App House. Senators decided to send out an email reminder (as written by Mick Krezock) to all Faculty members. Harvey Durham noted that Jane Helm had made the App House issue a "top priority."

The meeting ended at 6:02 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,

Patrick Rardin,
Secretary of the Faculty Senate

APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY - FACULTY PRESENT AND VOTING SHEET
March 17, 2003
Voting Symbols: Y = yes N = no A = abstain - Harvey Durham, Ex-officio

VOTE 1: Motion to approve the February 10, 2003 Minutes.
VOTE 2: FS02-03/03-01- Departmental written policies and procedures as amended -
VOTE 3: Call for the question.
VOTE 4: Senator Rardin's motion from the floor on course repeats and late drops as amended & revised -
VOTE 5: Call for the question.
VOTE 6: FS02-03/03-02- Motion regarding the charge of the Teaching Enhancement Committee as written-
VOTE 7: Motion from the floor to table Ad-hoc Committee on Deans Evaluations Report & Motions until the April 14th, 2003 Faculty Senate meeting with minutes from April 2001 and May 2002 available for Senators-
VOTE 8: Call for the question.
VOTE 9: FS02-03/03-07 Faculty Senate recommends that Appalachian Parking and Traffic Office integrate Graduate Assistant parking into faculty and staff parking spaces beginning Fall semester 2003
VOTE 10: Call for the question.
VOTE 11: Motion from the floor presented by Senator Muir - The Faculty Senate calls on the University Administration to ban smoking within a distance of 25' from all entrances & exits of University buildings

VISITORS: Dr. Bill Ward, Associate Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs; Harry Williams, Associate Vice-Chancellor for Diversity, Academic Affairs; Jenny Ware, ASU Staff Council