February 23, 2016

Meeting Agenda


1. Call to Order - Jeannette Moore, Chair of the Faculty

2. Introductory remarks

a.Guests introduce themselves

3. Announcements

a.Topics the committees are addressing are listed on the 2nd page of the agenda. Minutes from each meeting will be posted on the Faculty Senate website.

b.See the 2nd page of the agenda each week for announcements of interest to faculty.

4. Approval of the Minutes, Regular Meeting No. 8 of the 62nd Session, January 12, 2016

Darby Orcutt, Secretary of the Faculty

5. Provost Remarks and Q/A

Duane Larick, Senior Vice Provost, for Warwick Arden, Provost

6. Vice Chancellor for Finance & Administration Comments

Scott Douglass is the new Vice Chancellor for Finance & Administration

7. Old and New Business

a.Vote to determine the two Chair-Elect candidates to be on the ballot from the pool of nominees; Note: both selected candidates will have a few minutes on the March 1 General Faculty Meeting agenda to introduce themselves. (See Appendix A)

b.Update on Executive Committee discussion of University College and Faculty Senate representation; Full Senate to discuss at the March 22 Senate meeting (please be at the March 1 General Faculty meeting for more information on University College)

c.Executive Committee discussion of Secretary name change: after considerable discussion, the recommendation is "Associate Chair" (see Appendix B) - vote will be taken

Women faculty have stated on more than one occasion that they would not run for "Secretary" because of the title. Secretaries for this century have all been either men or librarians (or both). The concern is that we may be missing out on providing leadership opportunities for women in the senate if they are not comfortable with the current title.

8. Issues of concern

a.All ongoing Issues of Concern are listed on the Faculty Senate Website at:

http://www.ncsu.edu/faculty_senate/

b.New Issues of Concern (if any)

9. Adjourn

Calendar & Appendices

Executive Summary


1. Call to Order

Chair Moore, called the eleventh meeting of the sixty-second session of the NC State Faculty Senate to order at 3 p.m.

2. Introductory Remarks

Chair Moore asked visitors to introduce themselves.

3. Announcements

Chair Moore announced that the General Faculty meeting is Tuesday, March 1, 2016 at 3 p.m. in the Coastal Ballroom. The speaker will be Dr. Mike Mullen, Vice Chancellor and Dean of Academic Student Affairs.

The Association of Retired Faculty is soliciting nominations for its William C. Friday Award for Distinguished Service in Retirement. Nominations should include a one page write-up of the nominee’s background and accomplishments and up to ten pages of supported materials such as news articles, supporting letters, testimonies or recent resume. Nominations will be accepted through Monday, March 7, 2016.

4. Approval of the Minutes

Secretary Orcutt called for approval of the minutes for the tenth meeting of the NC State Faculty Senate.

The minutes were approved as submitted.

5. Remarks from Mike Mullen

On behalf of Provost Arden, Dr. Mike Mullen reported that there are two dean searches and a Vice Provost search in progress. The second interview for the College of Education Dean is nearing completion. The committee will interview one last candidate next week and it should be making recommendations to the Provost within the next week or ten days.

The nomination committee for the Dean of the College of Design is scheduled to meet next week to recommend finalists for campus interviews to occur at the end of March and the first week of April.

The nomination committee for Vice Provost for the Office of Institutional Equity and Diversity is scheduled to recommend finalist for campus interviews to occur in mid-March.

Vice Chancellor Mullen reported that there are three five-year comprehensive leadership reviews occurring this semester. The reviews include Vice Provost Alice Warren, Senior Vice Provost Louis Hunt, and Dean Martin-Vega from the College of Engineering.

Vice Chancellor Mullen reported that they are looking to fill the position for the Associate Vice Provost for Accreditation and Assessment to try to stay on top of SACS, and that position will report to Duane Larick and will also be the SACS liaison.

6. Remarks from Scott Douglass, Vice Chancellor for Finance & Administration

Scott Douglass, Vice Chancellor for Finance & Administration stated that he has been on campus for six weeks and it has been a great start. He is very optimistic about what he sees and he also thinks NC State is

a great institution. Douglas said the mission as the Chancellor has talked about it here is one that really excites him because it is about access to students and giving students a chance that they might not have.

7. Old/New Business

a. Vote to determine the two Chair Elect candidates to be on the ballot

Chair Moore stated that three nominations were submitted for the Chair-Elect of the Faculty position. Each nominee was given an opportunity to give brief comments. The senators voted and the two names that will appear on the ballot are Dr. Carolyn Bird and Dr. Sheila Smith McKoy.

Chair Moore thanked the candidates for running.

Past Chair Zonderman updated the Senate on the status of elections and urged the senators to submit candidates for their colleges.

b. Update on Executive Committee discussion of University College and Faculty Senate representation

Chair Moore stated that the University College will be discussed at the March 22nd meeting.

C. Executive Committee discussion of Secretary’s name change: after considerable discussion, the recommendation is "Associate Chair"

A motion was made and seconded to change the name of Secretary of the Faculty to Associate Chair.

After much discussion the motion passed with 22 in favor and one opposed.

8. Issues of concern

Senator Bykova proposed that the Faculty Senate discuss post tenure review. She said faculty are getting worried because the post tenure review procedure is entering into a different level and everyone is talking about it. The question that is being asked is what is going to happen with tenure, because it appears that everyone has different interpretations. Senator Bykova noted that some faculty are feeling very insecure.

Chair Moore asked how many have seen the training module and noted that it is required for everyone who is up for post tenure review or who is on the committee.

Chair Moore stated that when you go through the post tenure review training module they do cite NC State as being a leader in having good policies in place.

9. Adjournment

A motion passed to adjourn the meeting at 4:31 p.m.

Meeting Minutes


Present: Chair Moore, Immediate Past Chair Zonderman, Secretary Orcutt, Parliamentarian Lubischer, Provost Arden; Senators Ange-van Heugten, Argyropoulos, Auerbach, Banks, Bernhard, Bird, Bullock, Bykova, Byrnes, Cubbage, Fath, Fleisher, Gunter, Hergeth, Huffman, Laffitte, Porter, Sannes, Silverberg, Smith McKoy, Williams Excused: Provost Arden; Senators Ash, Bartlett, Kathariou, Sotillo Absent: Senators Davidian, Devetsikiotis, Moore, Pearce, Perros, Scearce, Smith, Spontak, Steer Guests: Roy Baroff, Faculty Ombuds Office; Scott Douglass, Vice Chancellor, Finance and Administration; Marc Hoit, Vice Chancellor, Information Technology; Michael Mullen, Vice Chancellor and Dean, Academic Student Affairs

1. Call to Order

Chair Moore, called the eleventh meeting of the sixty-second session of the NC State Faculty Senate to order at 3 p.m.

2. Introductory Remarks

Chair Moore asked visitors to introduce themselves.

3. Announcements

Chair Moore announced that the General Faculty meeting is Tuesday, March 1, 2016 at 3 p.m. in the Coastal Ballroom. The speaker will be Mike Mullen, Vice Chancellor and Dean of Academic Student Affairs. He will give an update on Academic and Student Affairs and he will also discuss University College. The Association of Retired Faculty is soliciting nominations for its William C. Friday Award for Distinguished Service in Retirement. Chair Moore noted that the award is for service and retirement activities that go beyond the continuation of ones prior professional career. Nominations should include a one page write-up of their background and accomplishments and up to ten pages of supported materials such as news articles, supporting letters, testimonies, or recent resume. Nominations will be accepted through Monday, March 7th .

4. Approval of the Minutes

Secretary Orcutt called for approval of the minutes for the tenth meeting of the NC State Faculty Senate. The minutes were approved as submitted.

5. Remarks from Mike Mullen

On behalf of Provost Arden, Dr. Mike Mullen reported that there are two dean searches and a Vice Provost search in progress. The second interview for the College of Education Dean is nearing completion. There were four candidates and one dropped out. The committee will interview one last candidate next week and it should be making recommendations to the Provost within the next week or ten days. The Nomination Committee for the Dean of the College of Design is scheduled to meet next week to recommend finalists for campus interviews to occur at the end of March and the first week of April. The Nomination Committee for the Vice Provost for the Office of Institutional Equity and Diversity position is scheduled to recommend finalist for campus interviews to occur in mid-March. Vice Chancellor Mullen reported that there are three five-year comprehensive leadership reviews occurring this semester. They include Vice Provost Alice Warren, Senior Vice Provost Louis Hunt, and Dean Martin-Vega from the College of Engineering. Vice Chancellor Mullen reported that they are now looking to fill the position for the Associate Vice Provost for Accreditation and Assessment to try to stay on top of SACS, and that position will report to Duane Larick and will also be the SACS liaison.

6. Remarks from Scott Douglass, Vice Chancellor for Finance & Administration

Vice Chancellor Scott Douglass stated that he has been here for six weeks and it has been a great start. Prior to coming to NC State he spent eight and a half years at the University of Delaware where he was the Executive Vice President/Treasurer of the University and CFO. Prior to that he was the VP of Finance at the University of Pennsylvania. Vice Chancellor Douglass stated that when he arrived here he came thinking about North Carolina more in the form of what he had heard about it throughout the decades, about the incredible support from the state. When he arrived he found North Carolina to be a little different from what he had heard. He said it is going to be a challenging time. The thing that might give you some comfort is that many states when they are backing down on operating support have already backed down on capital support. One thing here that makes him very optimistic is that the state has a bond bill coming out on March 15th that includes two buildings for NC State. The other thing that makes him optimistic about NC State is that last year the university raised $200 million in philanthropy from its donors. Douglas stated that for a state institution that is use to receiving a lot of funding from the state it is rare that you can convert that to getting private donors and alumni to step up. He said that is going to be crucial to our success going forward. Vice Chancellor Douglass stated that he is very optimistic about what he sees. He thinks NC State is a great institution. The mission as the Chancellor has talked about it here is one that really excites him because it is about access to students and giving students a chance that they might not have. Questions and Comments Senator Fleisher asked what the differential is for students here versus the University of Delaware. Vice Chancellor Douglass stated that the stated tuition for in-state students is $12,000 and the actual tuition is $4500. The tuition for out of state students is almost $30,000; it is a very expensive institution for out of state students. If you look at the flagship institutions that it competes with, typically Maryland, Penn State, UCONN, that is about where the prices are at most of those places. When you hire, what weight do you give to experience in university finance and business administration and in private sector. Douglas stated that he thinks it is important for people to understand that universities are not corporations. At the Warden School, I was recruiting for people on both sides of that equation, some that came from businesses and some that came from universities. My comment always to both sets of folks was you may think this is a corporation but we are a university, and to the others it was you may think this is a university but we have to run like a business and it’s the melding of those two things that I think is critical. I will say one thing, I’m sure there will be difference of opinions, but the issue that I have always thought was, in some discussions I had at Penn State with the Trustees. I always wanted Penn to be an A+ academic institution and a B financial institution as opposed to an A+ financial institution and a B academic institution. We have got to figure out ways to do things that are different. It doesn’t mean that we are going to benchmark to corporations, it doesn’t mean we are going to break the law either. Having said all that I think we have got to be clever about what we do. I think we have to understand that universities, while they have to run at one level like a business, that doesn’t mean that we have the values of a business. Senator Cubbage stated that he has had some experience in trying to hire people. “I understand the need that it is kind of a balance to making sure that you have descriptions for the individual or position that is narrow enough to hire someone who is not so broad that you are hiring someone unqualified. It’s kind of at the point where you almost have to write a description for someone that you already know and if anyone is outside that specific description, you can no longer hire them, so I think we need to sort of rethink how rigidly we define every word in job descriptions as to how that would allow you to hire anyone, because we have gotten to the point where everything is rejected unless we preset all of the contents of the job description and this doesn’t seem like the way a business or university should be run.” Vice Chancellor Douglas stated that we are trying to attract and retain talent whether it is faculty or staff and he thinks that is the important thing to think about going forward. Senator Cubbage stated that we get lots of applicants but it’s very hard to get one that actually qualifies for any particular job you might have, at least according to HR. We may think they are qualified but HR doesn’t. Chair Moore stated that in her department they have the opposite problem. Senator Auerbach suggested that Vice Chancellor Douglass talk to a random selection of department heads at the point of the HR problem. He said we get a lot of useless back and forth work from HR and it’s a waste of time and sometimes the delay aspect of it is harmful. Vice Chancellor Douglass stated that when he interviewed here it was clear that people were unhappy with HR. You mentioned a couple of things about when you were in Pennsylvania and how you wanted to see it or be recognized. You also mentioned uniqueness and I would like to see how you bring those things together. Did you see something in this position where you thought that bringing your talents to NC State would really bring something unique or different? Vice Chancellor Douglass said he doesn’t know if it’s different, but he saw a place that he thought was wildly exciting. “It’s a place where when I was at the University of Delaware we had tried to mimic some of the things you had done with Centennial Campus and begun to have some success with that and that created some real opportunities, not only with our engineering school, but with our health science school and a lot of other schools at the university. I also saw a chancellor and a provost that I thought were very closely aligned who I could work for and would be excited about working with and I thought it was a place that had a mission that I could embrace. I felt like I could make a difference and I’m very excited about that. “

7. Old/New Business

a. Vote to determine the two Chair Elect candidates to be on the ballot
Chair Moore stated that three nominations were submitted for the Chair-Elect of the Faculty position. Each nominee will be given an opportunity to give brief comments. After which the senators will vote and the two highest vote getters will appear on the ballot. Comments from Senator Carolyn Bird I have seen the Faculty Senate do great work in collaboration with the administration and we have addressed some tough questions in an environment where senators could ask those questions and play devil’s advocate. As chair I would like to see us continue that collaborative relationship with the administration and that open environment where people can ask those difficult questions and we can openly, amiably have thoughtful discussions about that. We don’t know what issues we are going to face us in the coming years but I think if we have that kind of working relationship and that kind of environment that we have the best possibility for arriving at good solutions for faculty, students, and staff. We have also talked about making our work more widely known among the general faculty and I would like to be a part of continuing that effort to broadly engage the general faculty across campus. Comments from Beth Wright Fath I have mostly been teaching faculty at NC State. In the past couple of years I have had a lot more exposure with different committees and being here in the Faculty Senate. To echo some of what Senator Bird said, I think we have a really good relationship with the Provost and Chancellor, which is exciting. I like to be with smart innovative people who can make things happen. One thing I have learned about myself and my career is that I need to be somewhere where I can get good people together, make change happen, which I know it doesn’t happen overnight. I think if we can just keep discussing and disagreeing respectfully and I think keeping our relationship with the Chancellor and Provost is going to be very important since we do have the unknown of Margaret Spellings. Thank you. Comments from Sheila Smith McKoy Both of these potential chair elects had great things to say about the work that we do here. I think we do good work as a sort of collaboratively contentious group of people who are really invested in seeing the university go in good directions. I’m probably more invested than most of you here since this is my alma mater and Raleigh is my home, so I know firsthand the great impact NC State University can have on our local community, what we can do nationally and internationally, which is also an interest of mine, and I think moving forward into this unknown terrain of a new president of the system, with the movement to really diversify across this country, with the movements like at the University of Missouri where students are really engaged in seeing transformation happen on campuses, we are really poised to do wonderful work here in the Faculty Senate. I’m new to this body and so I will have to tell you how impressed I have been with the personal commitment of the senators who are here on a regular basis, of the seriousness with which we have undertaken our work, and I appreciate that and I think moving forward with the next Chair-Elect I think we will be moving in a great direction because we do have people who are committed to being in the forefront of change at this university. Thank you very much. Chair Moore thanked the candidates for running. Immediate Past Chair Zonderman updated the Senate on the status of elections and urged the senators to submit candidates for their colleges.
b. Update on Executive Committee discussion of University College and Faculty Senate representation
Chair Moore stated that the University College will be discussed at the March 22nd meeting.
C. Executive Committee discussion of Secretary’s name change: after considerable discussion, the recommendation is "Associate Chair" (see Appendix B)
Women faculty have stated on more than one occasion that they would not run for "Secretary" because of the title. Secretaries for this century have all been either men or librarians (or both). The concern is that we may be missing out on providing leadership opportunities for women in the senate if they are not comfortable with the current title A motion was made and seconded to change the name of Secretary of the Faculty to Associate Chair. There was much discussion on the issue and the motion was made to change the title from Secretary of the Faculty to Associate Chair. The motion passed with 22 in favor and one opposed.

8. Issues of concern

Senator Bykova proposed that the Faculty Senate discuss post tenure review. She said faculty are getting worried because the post tenure review procedure is entering into a different level and everyone is talking about it. She noted that four faculty have raised the same question. The question was, what is going to happen with tenure because it seems that everyone has different interpretations. She stated that we should probably work something out and go out and tell faculty what it is about. She stated that faculty are feeling very insecure now. Chair Moore asked how many have seen the training module. It is required for everyone who is up for post tenure review or who is on the committee. Chair Moore stated that the module came out and was sent to all the Faculty Senate Executive Committees in the system. The committees reviewed it and no one was happy with the module in its current form. Comments heard from the Faculty Senates in the entire system were: 1. It is way too long; it takes about 60 minutes when it should not take more than 15 or 20 minutes. 2. It is not aimed at the level that respects faculty who are at the level where they are involved in the post tenure review process. What was sent by GA was that they didn’t have time to change it so everyone is going to watch that module and then they are going to have a version 2.0 for next year. Chair Moore said in regards to the training module, eventually everyone will have to do that. Senator Argyropoulos stated that this is a good discussion. He said one thing he wants to express is, is it possible that we keep in our minds that we become vigilant about the PTR process and sometime next year at this time we collect some data and not simply be complacent. We simply need to be vigilant and for future chairs, in a year from now, let us ask that question. Senator Bykova stated that one of the faculty’s interpretations here is that we are forgetting about tenure and moving toward five-year contracts. Chair Moore stated that that is part of a very lengthy discussion that the Senate had last year on post tenure review, so it is important to focus now on where we are and what could we change by having further discussions rather than having discussions for the sake of discussions. Past Chair Zonderman agreed with Senator Argyropoulos’ comments and suggested that this year, picking up on what Senator Bykova said, if other faculty are hearing specific questions or concerns I think it would be good if they send them to the Chair of the Faculty to be discussed in the Executive Committee, because if there are 20 people asking the same question, either they are misinformed, or what is going up from the Provost’s Office is unclear, or maybe both. We need to know, and maybe then the Senate can respond. I very much agree that by the end of next year, I would like to see the data because if the data shows that deans are aligning with department heads and faculty committees that is great. If we are seeing huge fights and particularly in some colleges, then this is a real problem, but we will not know until we have data, because to predict without data doesn’t make a lot of sense. Senator Cubbage asked, what do we do that is sort of proactive to address this? I think data is one and I think formalizing that request for data, making sure that the Senate gets the data just like we got the data for the RPT and maybe we should consider having a PTR university committee just like the PTR committee which reviews the process and right now RPT is only a process, but there at least should be someone with some oversight of this new PTR process. I would propose that we ought to suggest that. Senator Bird stated that it is possible that the deviations will not occur when the policy is new, that if there are any kind of misdeeds that they will occur further down the road, so that would suggest a long term commitment to the monitoring process. Chair Moore stated that when you go through the post tenure review training module they do cite NC State as being a leader in having good policies in place. The reason we will all be exposed to this systemwide is because some of the universities were not doing a good job with post tenure review.

9. Adjournment

A motion passed to adjourn the meeting at 4:31 p.m.
Office of the Faculty Senate
Copyright © 2021 · NC State University · Accessibility · Privacy · University Policies · Log in